Machine tools mechatronic analysis

Maj, R;Modica, F;Bianchi, G

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers; Mar 2006; 220, B3; ProQuest Central pg.
345

SPECIAL ISSUE PAPER 345

Machine tools mechatronic analysis

R Maj, F Modica1, and G Bianchi
Institute of Industrial Technologies and Automation, National Research Council, Milan,
Italy
The manuscript was received on 28 December 2004 and was accepted after revision for
publication on 15 July 2005. DOI: 10.1243/095440505X32733

Abstract: High-speed machine tools show close interaction between the

dynamic behaviour of the mechanical structure, drives, and numerical
control. In order to support the designer of high-performance machines, a
new analysis based on an integrated holistic mechatronic optimization
technique is proposed and compared with the traditional approach. The
proposed approach is applied to a three-axis milling machine for dies and
mould production.

Keywords: machine tools, dynamics, mechatronics

1 INTRODUCTION that the complexity of this model can be

The development of faster and faster
machine tools to reduce machining time
and ensure the required precision needs
stiff but light mechanical structures,
coupled with high bandwidth drives.
Classical machine tool design is
composed by separated optimization of the
mechanical structure (optimizing static
stiffness and dynamic behaviour) and
control system (optimizing the
performance modelling the structure as
lumped masses connected by springs).
This approach is becoming less and less
effective because rigid transmissions and
light structures are usually used, therefore
it is necessary to consider also the
distributed compliance of structures while
evaluating the controlled system
performance. Consequently it is essential
to study the behaviour of the structure
with the control system active, using an
integrated mechatronic approach that
considers the dynamic coupling between
them [1].
To evaluate the accuracy of machines
with high acceleration and light machining
(for instance milling machine for finishing
moulds) it is useful to carry out
mechatronic simulations of movements
without cutting forces (to avoid the
complexity associated with the modelling
of the cutting process), for example
carrying out circular trajectories as speci-
fied in the standard ISO 230-4 [2].
In order to simulate the machine during
motion it is necessary to describe in the
model, in addition to the mechanical
structure, components including motors,
sensors, drives, and control systems, that
allow and guide the motion. It is obvious
very high, because it is necessary to
reproduce correctly the characteristics of
all components that can limit the machine
performances. This complexity can be
dealt with by two approaches: either by
constructing a reliable library of models of
components (leaning on universities and
research institutes), or by interacting with
component suppliers in order to construct
models with their support or, even better,
receive models directly from them.
A component for which the last
approach is fundamental is the numerical
control (NC) controller, because it would
be extremely complex to reproduce
correctly the modalities adopted in order
to generate the position references for the
machine axis, starting from the part
program in the ISO format. At this time
some producers of NC controls supply a
software that reproduces the calculation of
this signal on a PC, with some limitation:
NUM e FIDIA.
2 MECHANICAL STRUCTURE
MODELLING
In machine tool design it is necessary to
analyse the mechanical structure, focusing
on its inertia and compliance. The most
appropriate modelling technique is the
finite element analysis (FEA) [3]. For
machines with non-cartesian morphology
(for instance an anthropomorphic or
parallel kinematic manipulator), analysis
demands also the solution of complex
kinematics, using multibody analysis
packages [4].

1 Corresponding author: Institute of Industrial Technologies and Automation, National Research

Council, Via delle Magnolie, 4, Modugno, Bari 70026, Italy, email: f. modica @itia.cnr.it
 JEM235 © IMechE 2006
Engineering
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without
permission.
In
2 order to model realistically the
structure using FEA it is necessary to
describe the frame through elements that
correctly represent the real space dis-
tribution of stiffness, mass, and -
eventually - the presence of different
materials. Using this approach the finite
element modelling (FEM) model has
systematically a very high number of
degrees of freedom (DOF) and it can
potentially describe the deformation
owing to any force system applied to the
nodes and is characterized by resonance
frequencies that can be unimportant and
invalid for the model (for example, greater
than 100 kHz).
To represent a complex structure with
fewer DOF, it is possible to reduce the
DOF based on the modal approach: the
first step of the procedure is to develop a
detailed FE model; the second step is the
reduction that consists of maintaining the
same geometry, inertia, and stiffness of
the complete model, but it constrains the
structure to move only with a linear
combination of predefined deformed
shapes <I>, selected by the analyst. This
approach is very famous in literature and
is also implemented in the best FEM
softwares because it is used to model
flexible bodies in multibody simulation
packages [5].
To model machine tools it is convenient
to use an approach that combines both
deformed static and dynamic analysis (i.e.
the Craig Bampton approach) [6] in order
to represent both the local structure
compliance (important in modelling the
connection between actuators and
mechanical structure) and its dynamic
global behaviour.
It is always critical to model the energy
dissipation within the structure and in the
moving contacts: it is possible to use
viscous friction, hysteretic friction or
static friction types, but often the data are
not very precise. In general, for structures
built with traditional materials, such as
welded steel and cast iron, a uniform
value of modal damping is assumed, for
example around 3-4 per cent.
3 DRIVE MODELLING
The dynamic performances of the machine
depend on the characteristics of the main
components that realize the movement of
the axis (the model depends on the
problem that is to be analysed):
(a) electric motor connected to the drive
power section: saturation owing to
the current limit, non-linearity of
torque/force
Proc. IMechE Vol. in220
function
Part B: J.ofEngineering
position Manufacture
and current;
(b) position sensor: measurement
resolution, interpolation error inside
the grid
Reproduced with step, reversal
permission error;
of the
copyright owner. Further
(c) regulators: architecture of the
current and speed regulators,
sampling time, digital filters;
Proc. IMechEVol.
220 Part B: J.
Manufacture
(d) numerical
R Ma], F Modica,control: generation strategy
and G Bianchi
of position references (limitation of
acceleration and jerk by the look-
ahead function), structure of the
position regulator (and speed
feedforward).
The introduction of these components,
with their limitations, can help to obtain
an understanding of the contribution of
each component on the limitation in
reachable bandwidth.
The resultant regulator model is non-
linear and its stability depends not only on
the tuning parameters, but also on the
specific input signal. It is important that
the simulations can show the effect of the
selection of more or less ‘expensive’
components, to support the designer in
this choice. In the development of these
models the collaboration of the suppliers
is fundamental. Figure 1 shows the model
of the Siemens 61 ID drive realized in the
Matlab/Simulink environment with the
indications supplied by the handbook (i.e.
[7]).
4 SOFTWARE FOR THE
VIRTUAL
PROTOTYPING OF
MACHINE TOOLS
A fully integrated mechatronic simulation
imposes several requirements on the
modelling software. It must be able to:
(a) model distributed compliance of the
mechanical structure (using FEA),
represented with a reduced number of
DOF (‘super elements’);
(b) model structural damping, including
material properties (specific
damping);
(c) join structural modules representing
moving contact on flexible bodies [8];
(d) model static and dynamic friction in
the contacts [9];
(e) create an open system that allows the
users easily to add non-linear models
(for instance sensors and motors,
etc.);
(f) represent continuous and discreet
time model of regulators (current,
speed, and position loops);
(g) emulate the numerical control for the
corrected generation of the position
references of controlled axes.
A fully integrated mechatronic simulation
is often not required, and it is possible to
focus on particular aspects that require
only some of the abovementioned
capabilities.
The mechatronic simulation is currently
technically feasible, alone or in JEM235 © IMechE 2006
combination, by commercial packages for
FEA simulation, multibody systems
simulation or control systems design.
Several
solutionsprohibited
reproduction are possible:
without data or
permission.
linearized models of the structural
components are exchanged between
various softwares; a single software
package
 c
c
Selec
tor
U
U(E)

LowPass
C 1 )— TimeConst:
►
1.59155 ms
Pos Com [m] SumP KProp Position
Kv
Speed LowPass

<Exc)

Goto Tag
Visibility

vritatinn ■ 1
Goto
Intem/extemal F v^cmd Iref
Kp=177000
(DJ tn=5, .
[ActVolt] f0Mod=&0
Vel Com
dMod=0.7 v_ac!
From 1 [m/s]
^ lact
[ActCurrj^>—^

From2 cont. speed controller with

reference model!
[RefCurrj>—►

VelLoopFlag

|EstSpee^>—►

From5 cz
Meas Position [m]
-►<|EstSpeed]
WEstSpeed

>
[ACIPOSF> -

From6
model for: 840D+611D

Fig. 1 Model of industrial drive

that models both mechanical objects and control components; two softwares specialized In this phase of calibration the gains are maximized (in order to maximize the disturbance
respectively in mechanical modelling and in control modelling interacting during simulation. rejection), taking into account that a lightly damped machine will be driven with a more regular
signal, to reduce the jerk and therefore increase the execution times.
5 ANALYSIS METHODS AND EXEMPLIFICATION By means of routines developed by ITLA-CNR it is possible to analyse and visualize the mode
shapes of the machine with controlled axes. This is useful, for example, to estimate if any modes
Mechatronic simulation can perform several analyses, some of which are possible using a can be actively damped by the regulators. In Fig. 4, mode A provokes deformations on the
classical approach (i.e. static deformation, normal modes). Others are possible only with a supports and on the guideways, with a limited axis movement and therefore the resultant damping
mechatronic approach (regulator tuning, complex modes with active control, dynamic response of is low; mode B provokes axes movement that will be strongly dampened by the regulators.
the controlled system, simulation of a part program execution). The dynamics of the machine can also be analysed by examining the steady state oscillations of
To demonstrate the issues previously outlined, the mechatronic analysis is adopted of a milling the structure, caused by the sinusoidal input signal (also called running modes). Typical cases are
machine with three linear motor axes (shown in Fig. 2). This is a common morphology for a the deformation resulting from external forces or from an axis position command.
milling machine, but it is not a real machine in order to avoid incurring incomprehensible A classic stability criterion of the cutting process (see [10]) is used as a machine performance
problems of confidentiality. The goal of the present study is not to achieve particularly high indicator. This criterion estimates the maximum depth of chip [hum (mm)] as a function of the
performances, but to demonstrate how mechatronic analysis can support designers in their work, minimum of the real part of the FRFt00l/t00|(w) of the dynamics compliance at the tool
highlighting the limits of mechanical structures. The effect of friction on the guides is neglected
to avoid a too complex model, as this is not the aim of this article. bhm
~ 2min4realPartFRFt00l/t00l(tt))fccFc ^
The FE model, represented in Fig. 2, has 3272 nodes and 5303 elements. In the reduction seven
static modes are considered: four due to relative displacements between the motors' primary where FRF [displacement(mm)/force(N)] is estimated on the tool, fc CFC(N/mm2) is the cutting
winding and secondary winding (three axes, one of them is gantry) and three related to tool force coefficient, that is a function of the workpiece material, of the geometry of the cutting tool
displacements in three directions (x y z). A further 47 dynamic modes (calculated with locked and of the chip thickness. The formula is a useful qualitative indicator (a more detailed analysis
motors and locked tools) are added to the previous ones: the resultant structural model has 54 must take into account direction of the forces generated by the cutting process and the respective
DOF (starting from a model with approximately 18000 DOF). A uniform modal damping of 2 per dynamic compliance in all three
cent is assigned to the structure (this value is very low and, therefore, precautionary). To study the
behaviour of the machine in various positions of the workspace it is necessary to com pute the
reduced model ([A/B/CfD,-] matrix set i = 1 - k) corresponding to the position P,. To analyse the
mechatronic model with the machine in the P„ workspace position it is sufficient to set the
corresponding [A„B„C„D„] matrix in the assembled model (Fig. 2).
The mechatronic model will be used to analyse:
(a) regulator tuning: analysing the influence of the mechanical structure and regulator
functionalities:
(b) machining capability: estimating the maximum depth of chip based on cutting process
stability:
(c) simulation of part program execution: trajectory errors identifying the contribution of
structure deformation and drive performances.
An important step in the analysis (as with the start-up of a real machine tool) is the tuning of
regulators. For this reason it is attempted to reproduce in simulation the functionalities of the real
system, to define both the parameters and the test modalities (time and frequency responses). The
first step consists of estimating the frequency response functions (FRFs) of the structure (Fig. 3
shows the FRF of the reconstructed velocity from the measure of the position sensor). As in the
real machine, the common procedure for tuning regulators is to apply the Bode stability criterion,
to obtain the regulator parameters shown in Table 1.
directions). This analysis quantifies the machining capability of the machine in various directions movement of the machine during the execution of the trajectory. This option may be used, for
and, moreover, supplies useful information on which modes limit performance. instance, to visualize the movement of the machine with different amplification of the motion
The mechatronic model has also been studied by estimating the dynamic stiffness at the tool. amplitude owing to the rigid component and flexible modes. The analysis of the movie and
Figure 5 shows a Nyquist diagram of the FRF (displacement tool)/(force on tool), in the y associated data, can help the designer to comprehend the dynamic behaviour of the machine under
direction, and the different conditions performed during drive tuning, including a locked motor, operating conditions, from which good indications can be obtained of any required modification
normally considered in the structure design. The maximum cutting depth corresponds to the to the mechanical structure.
minimum of the real part, as indicated by the cross in this figure. The large differ ence between
the b] j m evaluated with locked motors and hum evaluated with controlled axes, highlights the
usefulness of mechatronic analysis. 6 METHODOLOGY EXTENSION AND
APPLICATION: THE MECOMAT PROJECT
The next criterion of evaluation consists of simulating the part program execution. The
simulation allows an estimation of the trajectory error, using both position sensors and effective Analysis methods previously discussed were applied and extended in a European project: the
tool position (which includes deformations of the structure). Figure 6 shows the displacement, MECOMAT (MEchatronic Compiler of MAchine Tool) project, briefly presented here. The
suitably amplified, between the demanded trajectory (see part program) objective of the MECOMAT project was the development of an integrated computer aided
design/computer aided engineering (CAD/CAE) tool for the mechatronic design and the
optimization of machine tool performance,
Table 1 Regulator parameters after tuning
Jer Veloc loo
Kv Position loop
k ity p
A m/ -3
xi [(tn/min)/mm| s3 -3 dB -45° dB -45°
s 20 28 28 13
X 2.5 0 33 Hz Hz Hz Hz
Y 2.5 20 23 Hz 15 18 7.5
Z 4 0
20 33 Hz Hz
24 Hz
21 Hz
8.8
0 Hz Hz Hz
and the reconstruction of the position measured by the sensors. As expected, the larger error is in
the zone of larger curvature.
By means of linearized models of the mechanical structure, the rigid body component of the
motion can be distinguished from the contribution of structural flexibility (this task is not easily
feasible with complete original FEM model simulation). Moreover, an animation can show the

Fig. 4 Modes with different damping owing to controlled axis

 which provided a new integrated design methodology that Nyquist plot FRF ToolDispl/ToolForce Y direction whose main goal is to reach the optimal
took into account a mechatronic analysis close to that layout of the machine, taking into account performances of motion unit, general objectives, and
presented in this paper. user specifications.
The mechatronic optimization methodology is divided into two parts: conceptual analysis and The preliminary analysis is performed using approximated models: parametric and/or homo-
preliminary analysis. The conceptual analysis is performed using a rigid body structure model, geneous materials, structural component library, axes, guideways and sensors model library, and
controls and regulators model library. The main goal is

100
90
X.... act
ual
positi
on

80
Reference/
w (fro
ms
ensor
s)

|
70
^ 60 E
E. 50
i
f
1 40 (0
\
Ampli catio
fi n
N50 G17 factor =50

'bhV
N110 G2 X50 YS0 10 J50 N120 G3
.). L
.:•*«,.-
190 X90 Y10 J50 N130 G2 X90 Y0
190 J5 N140 G1 X0 Y0

Contour error at axes sensors on a 2D trajectory

Fig. 6 Trajectory error from simulation

Layout analysis
General
— MTLD -
►
objectives

USER
SPECIFICATIONS - — * Boss/optlm.e- Axcalc

Scheme
,--" r
builder
...................' Control
configuratio
20 n10 Optimal
0 lay-out
X axis (mm)

Parametric structural model

♦ ABC j_____
Optimal r Mecano / Model ---► D ----►Lin. model +
Axcalc ----------*■ Boss/optl — Dynam / reduction mod controller
m. ► struct, el *— 1-------------
model /
Mechatronic 1
model

Structural General Mecano Control _ Controller

objective dimension parameters ^ tuner
1 x 10 s s
Real part

Fig. 5 Dynamic compliance on tool during a progressive closing of

loops. (A) open loop, (I) locked motor, (H) all loops closed
OPTIMIZED MECHATRONIC
Mechatronic
Controller
objectives
MODEL Boee/optlm. objectives
Optimisatio Objectives
n

Software tool model

Fig. 7 Mechatronic optimization process

to optimize structural dimensions, axes and guideway parameters (such as stiffness, inertia, etc.), 1 Bianchi, G., Paolucci, F., Van den Braembussche, P., and Van Brussel, H. Towards virtual
control design, and tuning. engineering in machine tool design. Annals CIRP, 1996, 45(1).
The MECOMAT modules support the development of a new machine tool, see Fig. 7. Layout 2 International Standards Organization, Acceptance code for machine tools. Part 4: Circular tests for
numerically controlled machine tools; ISO/DIS 230-4; 1994.
design supports the user in the definition of the machine architecture starting from the user
3 Zienkiewicz, O. C. The finite element method, 1979 (McGraw-Hill).
specifications. A motion unit selection is provided according to the machine performance 4 MSC.ADAMS (www.mscsoftware.com/), MECANO/ samtech
requirements, taken into account during the layout optimization process. Once the global (www.samcef.com).
architecture of the machine is defined, using the parametric models library for structural 5 SAMCEF FIELD/SAMTECH (www.samcef.com), I-DEAS/EDS
components, axes sensors, etc, a preliminary analysis is performed in order to optimize (www.ugs.com/products/nx/ideas/), NASTRAN/MSC
(separately but in sequence): (www.mscsoftware.com/), ANSYS ANC (www.ansys.com).
(a) structure (dimensions, thickness and number of ribs), axes (performances requirement, and 6 Craig, R. R. and Bampton, M. C. C. Coupling of substructures for dynamic analysis. A1AA Journal,
1968, 6(7), 1313-1319.
choice), guideway (stiffness and supports) etc.
7 Siemens: SIMODRIVE 611 digital SINUMERIK 840D/810D: Description of functions. Drive
(b) control design and tuning. functions. Code 6SN1 197-0AA80-0BP7.
These two optimization processes are under a global mechatronic optimization process that can 8 Ambrogi, F., Braccesi, C., and Cianetti, F. Simulation of moving parts on flexible bodies using multi-
drive objectives of the inner optimization. body approach. Test case on a reinforced concrete highway bridge. 15th European ADAMS Users’
Conference, Rome, November 2000.
9 Symens, W., Al-Bender, F., Swevers, J., and Van Brussel, H. Dynamic characterization of hysteresis
elements in mechanical systems, American Control Conference 2002; IEEE1192, 2002.
7 CONCLUSIONS 10 AA.W. II Manuale delle Macchine Utensili, 2002, Cap 19. a cura di F. Paolucci (Ed. Tecniche
Nuove).
The use of mechatronic simulation is needed more and more to support the design of high-
performance machine tools. Today it is possible quickly to develop a model that permits the
analysis of the tight connection between the dynamics of the mechanical structure and its control
system. To be able to use this approach in an industrial environment profitably it is necessary to
have some fundamental software (these have been rapidly developed in this direction in the recent
years, because of the generalized diffusion of the mechatronic simulation), appropriate models of
commercial components (particularly if developed with the suppliers’ support), and an improved
mechatronic culture.
Mechatronic analysis can assist the designer to comprehend the dynamic behaviour of the
machine under operating conditions, obtaining a good indication of the modification of the
mechanical structure and the best choice of components.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The authors greatly acknowledge the support from the European Commission Growth project
MECOMAT: ‘Mechatronic Compiler for Machine Tools design’. Contract No. GIRD-2000-
00357. Project funded by the European Community under the ‘Competitive and Sustainable
Growth’ Programme (1998-2002).

REFERENCES