Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

Integrated error compensation method using OMM system for prole milling operation
Myeong-Woo Choa,*, Tae-il Seob,1, Hyuk-Dong Kwonb,1
a

Division of Mechanical Engineering, Inha University, 253 Yonghyun-Dong, Nam-Gu, Inchon 402-750, South Korea b Korea Institute of Industrial Technology, 192 Yakdae-Dong, Wonmi-Gu, Bucheon 420-831, South Korea Received 9 August 2000; received in revised form 4 January 2002; accepted 17 September 2002

Abstract This paper presents a methodology of machined surface error compensation based on an inspection database by using an on-machine measurement system in prole milling. First, we make compensation for the geometric errors of the machining center by using a closed-loop conguration for the improvement of machining and inspection accuracy. The probing errors are also taken into account. We manufacture a specimen workpiece and then inspect machined surface error distribution. In order to efciently analyze the surface errors, two characteristic surface error parameters Werr and Derr are dened. Subsequently, it is possible to t these parameters by using polynomial functions. These polynomial functions allow us to determine the surface errors in the domain of modeled cutting conditions. Based on these functional relationships between cutting conditions and surface errors, we try to correct the tool path in order to effectively reduce the errors by using an iterative algorithm. An iterative algorithm allows us to integrate changes of the cutting conditions according to the corrected tool path. To compensate for the surface errors, manufacturing tolerances are also taken into account. Experimentation is carried out in order to validate the approaches proposed in this paper. # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: CAD/CAM; Computer-aided inspection (CAI); Surface error compensation; Inspection error; On-machine measurement (OMM); Closed-loop conguration; Prole milling; Tool deection; Tool runout

1. Introduction Recently, rapid developments of CAD/CAM systems make it possible to manufacture various products in CNC machining centers. Furthermore, various machining problems faced in the past have been overcome by many researchers efforts. However, some critical problems have not been denitely solved in spite of a number of suggested approaches. This paper will treat the problems of machined surface errors. In fact, the two typical causes producing machined surface errors can be largely classied into machine factors and cutting tool factors in the machining processes. It is actually difcult to take into account these factors in the CAD/CAM software systems because they vary according to each type of machine and cutting tool. Hence, these problems have been treated separately.

Corresponding author. Tel.: 82-32-860-7306; fax: 82-32-868-1716. E-mail address: chomwnet@inha.ac.kr (M.-W. Cho). 1 Tel.: 82-32-234-0603; fax: 82-32-234-0607.

For the machined surface error compensation, there has been research dealing to in real-time on-line control methods [13]. These approaches consist in controlling cutting forces during the milling process in order not to exceed the specic forces. In contrast to these approaches, Watanabe and Iwai [4,5] tool position shifting based on predicted surface error acquiring cutting forces. In order to implement this proposed concept in real-time, it is necessary to use the measuring instruments (e.g. dynamometer, sensor, amplier, etc.) resulting in expensive machining costs. Moreover, controlling the cutting forces cannot compensate precisely for the surface errors and leads to increasing the machining time. On the other hand, off-line type error compensation approaches have been proposed [69]. These approaches consist of correcting the tool path based on the machined surface prediction before the real milling process. These approaches require a series of simulations to model the cutting forces, to calculate the tool deection and to predict the machined surface shapes. In this case, the simulation errors produced in each step can be accumulated and become an important factor affecting the accurate error compensation. In fact, these approaches have been improved by using

0924-0136/02/$ see front matter # 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 9 4 3 - 3

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

89

Fig. 1. Comparison between inspection processes using CMM and OMM.

various methods [1012]; nevertheless the compensation process becomes more complicated. Lo and Hsiao [6] proposed an off-line error compensation approach based on an inspection process, which can ameliorate the drawbacks of other methods. In their method, the machining process is rstly executed with the nominal tool path, and then the surface errors were measured on a coordinate measuring machine (CMM). A subsequent machining process was executed with a corrected tool path symmetrically shifted as much as the measured errors. This series of processes are repeated until the machining errors appropriately disappear. Although this process will allow for a simple effective implementation of the error compensation process for repeated parts, as mentioned in their study, but it has some drawbacks. First, the inspection process using CMM needs to remove the workpiece on the CNC machine and to x it on CMM. In this case, it is difcult to expect accurate inspection results because the coordinates are distorted due to the movement of the workpiece from the CNC machine to CMM and because the global time of the process increases. In addition, for only one desired surface, the same process must be repeated and the compensation process must be established again for other desired surfaces. Moreover, the deection amount varies according to the tool axis direction, while the surface errors are considered as one measured error on the milled surface. Therefore, it is difcult to precisely compensate for the machining errors, especially when the dimensional tolerances are taken into account. Generally, it is necessary to inspect the quality of the nal manufactured part after completing the machining process. In the conventional inspection process, the machined surface accuracy is often measured on the CMM, controlled by a computer. To improve the measuring accuracy based on the measuring errors induced manual inspection process, various research to derive optimal inspection conditions from a CAD database have been proposed [13,14], which are often

referred to as a computer-aided inspection (CAI) process. As a result of this research, it is possible to inspect the dimensional accuracy of complex shape products through an appropriate measuring point selection and an automatic analysis of the inspection results. Fig. 1(a) illustrates the interrelationship between CAD, CAM and CAI in this case. However, a productivity drop can occur because of the expensive cost of the CMM and the increase of the inspection process time. Moreover, if an inspection process is required during the machining process (e.g. between roughing and nishing), the movement of the workpiece between the CMM and the CNC machining center can cause inspection errors due to the coordinate changes. To decrease these problems, the on-machine measurement (OMM) system has recently been focused on as a new inspection process technique. The OMM system makes it possible to carry out the inspection process directly on the same CNC machining center by exchanging only a cutting tool for a measuring probe. In this case, both the CAD and the CAM database have to be simultaneously considered to constitute an inspection database because manufacturing and inspection processes can be performed on the same CNC machining center. In fact, the authors presented research [15,16] to implement an effective inspection process on OMM based on this concept called CAD/CAM/CAI integration concept (see Fig. 1(b)). In this study, we present the compensation process of machining errors for an application of the CAD/CAM/CAI integration concept. On the basis of the measured surface errors on the OMM system, we characterize the inspection data by dening characteristic error parameters, and then we derive functional relationships between the machining conditions and these error parameters. By integrating the functional relationships into an iterative computational process, we achieve a tool path correction methodology in order to signicantly reduce the surface errors with respect to the tolerance criteria. Through an experimental example, we show how

90

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

to apply the proposed approach in a concrete case of prole milling.

2. Machining error compensation based on the OMM data 2.1. Proposed approach In order to reduce the drawbacks noted above, we propose in this paper an improved compensation process based on the OMM inspection data. Our principal objective is to establish an effective surface error compensation process, which allows a reduction of surface errors in the dimensional tolerance criteria without unnecessary repeating processes and steps. Based on the surface inspection results, we demonstrate a functional relationship between the machining errors and the cutting conditions. This functional relationship is directly used in order to establish a tool path correction methodology, which is an iterative type algorithm. The global process is illustrated in Fig. 2. 2.2. Geometric error compensation of machining center In the inspection process on the OMM system, the inspection accuracy mainly depends on two error sources:

(1) geometric error of a machine; (2) probing error. The geometric error of a machine means the error originally produced at the tool tip is due to dimensional and form errors of the elements of its kinematic linkage system, and the angular and positional misalignments between them. The OMM system is established by exchanging a cutting tool for a measuring probe, causing an inspection error produced at the probe. Furthermore, when using a touch type probe, it is necessary to take into account probing errors called pretravel variation, which is one of the major sources contributing to the inaccuracy of probing [17,18]. Using a certicate sphere as a reference artifact, it is possible to characterize pre-travel variation according to probe approaching direction, stylus length, probe diameter and so on. As a matter of fact, the authors suggested a step-bystep volumetric error analysis on the basis of a closed-loop conguration of multi-axis machine tools [19]. This research contributed towards an improvement of the sculptured surface machining under the tool runout effect, but it did not deal with the tool deection effects emphasized in this study. Based on the closed-loop conguration approach, we try to compensate for the geometric errors of a machining center for the improved inspection process planning on the OMM system as well as the accurate machining process.

Fig. 2. Global process of proposed approach.

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

91

Fig. 3. Closed-loop configuration.

The closed-loop conguration is a representation method, which can simply depict the integrated error factors due to the machine misalignment [19]. When using the OMM system for the inspection process and the cutting tool for the machining process, it is possible to apply the closed-loop conguration. Taking into account both the inspection and the machining processes, the closed-loop conguration can be schematized in Fig. 3. Here, X represents the X-directional table movement and Y represents the Y-directional movement. Z represents the probe movement or the cutting tool movement in the Z-direction. W represents the distance of the nal probe tip or cutting tool point with respect to the reference center of the table. P represents the probe position and T represents the tool position. Therefore two similar equations can be obtained (see Fig. 3(a)): XY W ZT XY W ZP (1) (2)

corresponds to the same normal directional distance as the probe ball radius at the measuring position, and TL represents a theoretical tool position. In this case, owing to the machine geometric error, Eqs. (1) and (2) are not equivalent. Therefore the machining errors will be denoted by the difference between TL and T, and the inspection errors will be denoted by the difference between PL and P (see Fig. 3(b)). To compensate for these error terms, it is necessary to deal with the geometric errors of the machining center rst. The concrete process of the geometric error compensation of machining center will be presented by experimentation. In the closed-loop conguration representation (see Eq. (1)), the term T corresponds to the tool position, which cannot be placed at an accurate position due to tool deection and runout. In this study, the consideration of these effects will be integrated into the surface error compensation methodology. 2.3. Surface error characterization Generally, the machined prole forms are not the same as the deected tool form. Under the same cutting conditions, the cutting forces vary according to the rotational position of

In fact, this relationship can be realized only in an ideal case. Taking into account the error factors, the closed-loop conguration can be represented as shown in Fig. 3(b). Here, PL represents a theoretical probe center position, which

Fig. 4. Surface generated under the tool deflection effect.

92

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

Fig. 5. Characteristic parameters of surface error and tolerance.

the tool. It means that the deection amount also varies according to tool angular position. Therefore, the machined surface forms are differently generated as compared to the deected tool form. Fig. 4 illustrates how to generate the surface under tool deection effects according to tool rotation. The surface errors are uniformly distributed on the machined surface. Hence, it is necessary to characterize the errors in order to compare them with the given tolerance criteria. In the surface prediction process for the error compensation according to the tolerance criteria, two extreme errors can be taken into account as the predominant factors regardless of the surface morphology. This means that we have to focus our consideration on the error interval and deviation amount rather than the precise surface shape. First, we dene maximal error Emax and minimal error Emin to quantitatively analyze the surface error distribution. The maximal error Emax is the largest algebraic error on the milled surface with respect to a given coordinate on the desired prole. If this error leads to an undercut with respect to the desired prole, Emax has positive values. Contrarily, if it leads to an overcut, Emax has negative values. Similarly, minimal error Emin is the smallest algebraic error on the milled surface with respect to a given coordinate on the desired prole. If this error leads to an undercut with respect to the desired prole, Emin has positive values. Contrarily, if it leads to an overcut, Emin has negative values. Based on these two extreme errors Emax and Emin, we dene error zone to characterize the distributed surface errors (see Fig. 5(a)). Under the deection effects, this error zone deviates from reference prole. To analyze the error zone, it is necessary to dene two characteristic parameters: width of error zone Werr and deviation amount of error zone Derr. In fact, these parameters cannot represent all geometrical information of the machined surface form.

However, these make it possible to effectively analyze the deection effects on the machined surfaces because it is not necessary to recognize the precise surface shape in order to compare it with the tolerance criteria. These characteristic parameters are derived as follows: Werr 1 Emax Emin ; 2 Derr Emin 1 Werr 2 (3)

In this case, we take into account a manufacturing tolerance. Generally, the tolerance zone is decided by two surfaces enveloping the spheres of diameter Wtol, while the centers of the spheres are located on a desired surface. According to circumstances, this desired surface is not coincidental with the reference surface of the tolerance. It is obvious that the machined surfaces have to be in close vicinity to the desired surface in order to fulll the tolerance. Similarly to represent the tolerance parameters of the characterized surface error parameters Werr and Derr, we dene width of tolerance criteria Wtol and deviation amount of tolerance criteria Dtol. Here, Wtol represents the diameter of the sphere dening the tolerances as mentioned and Dtol represents the distance between the desired surface and the reference surface. Fig. 5 shows these parameters in the sectional view. Therefore, comparing only these parameters, it is possible to check whether the machined surface can fulll the given tolerance. 2.4. Surface error prediction process with characterized parameters Werr and Derr For the surface error prediction, considerable research has been suggested in the past. Major portions of this research consist of predicting the surface errors through the cutting force and the tool deection prediction processes. The cutting force prediction is mainly based on an empirical analysis of the cutting pressure KT and KR [12,20,21]. This

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

93

requires a series of cutting tests to determine the values of KT and KR from the cutting forces measured by using various expensive instruments. The tool deection prediction has been achieved by applying the cantilever beam model and the nite element method (FEM) [22]. These steps can make the surface error prediction sophisticated and inefcient. Moreover, it is necessary to take into account the nonlinearity of tool ute locus during the machining process due to the tool deection and runout effects, which inuences the machined surface forms [23]. To improve on the drawbacks of the past research, we try to derive direct functional relationships between the cutting conditions and the surface errors. We expect that these functional relationships can avoid the cutting force and the tool deection prediction processes. In fact, various factors can be considered as cutting conditions. If the cutting tool, workpiece material and rotation velocity are xed, we can consider three important factors, the radial depth of cut RD, the axial depth of cut AD and the feedrate FD as cutting conditions. Prole milling plays a major role in general cases of at-end milling, and in this study prole milling is emphasized. Hence, let the axial depth of cut AD and the feedrate FD be given constant values. In this case, it is possible to dene polynomial functions between Werr, Derr and the radial depth of cut RD Werr ; Derr polynomialRD (4)

To determine this dened polynomial functions, by using the OMM system we do an inspection process of a machined workpiece, which is specied in order to meet varied cutting conditions during the machining process. Since the initial shape of the specied workpiece and the variation of the radial depth of cut RD are known, it is possible to relate the measured values of Werr and Derr with corresponding values of RD. On the basis of these related values, it is possible to determine the polynomial functions representing direct relationships between Werr, Derr and RD. Therefore these polynomial functions can be integrated in a tool path compensation, which will be proposed in the following section. Accordingly, tool path compensation can be efciently established by considering the variation of cutting conditions due to tool path correction. The details will be presented in the following section through an experimental example. 2.5. Tool path correction methodology When correcting a tool path on the basis of the estimated surface error effects, the radial depth of cut is changed compared to that encountered along the nominal tool path. It means that the changed radial depth of cut induces a change on the surface error that affects the initial estimate. This will be repeated until the changes of the surface error effects and the radial depth of cut mutually decrease, and then they merge in a state of balance. In fact, Lo and Hsiao [6] proposed a surface error compensation process, which consists of repeating the inspection and machining processes until the surface

errors are appropriately reduced. In this case, several machining and inspection processes have to be carried out each time the desired surface forms are changed. In this paper, we propose an improved compensation process through a computational procedure, which consists of comparing the surface errors with the tolerance tool correcting the tool path iteratively. Since this proposed approach is carried out only in the computational procedure before real machining processes, repetitive machining and inspection processes are not required even if the desired surface forms are changed. The tool path correction methodology is presented as follows. When a nominal tool path is being generated in a CAM system, the CL-point data are determined in order for the errors of interpolation between the CL-points not to exceed the given tolerance. If the initial shape of the workpiece between consecutive CL-points does not maintain the same form, the cutting tool will encounter a varied depth of cut while passing these CL-points. Therefore the nominal tool path rst has to be divided into an appropriate number of tool positions in order to take into account the depth of cut transitions. For each divided tool position, we apply an iterative procedure to search for a corrected tool position. This procedure is depicted in Fig. 6. Here, TPN represents a divided tool position from a nominal tool path, and i TPC represent a corrected tool position at ith iteration. For each ith iteration, we compute values of i Werr and i Derr with respect to i RD corresponding to the corrected tool position i TPC . The corrected tool position i TPC is repetitively corrected by a previously computed value of i Derr until i Derr should be coincidental with Dtol. Finally, it is possible to reach a mth iteration, where m Derr , computed at the tool position m TPC corrected by m1 Derr, would be coincidental with Dtol. This algorithmic process is summarized as follows: TPC TPN ; % Initialization of the corrected tool position i TPC For i 1 to M do Begin i RD f i TPC ; % Calculation of the radial depth of cut i RD with respect to i TPC i Werr polynomiali RD ; % Calculation of i Werr by the polynomial function (see Eq. (4)) i Derr polynomiali RD ; % Calculation of i Derr by the polynomial function (see Eq. (4)) If Dtol i Derr % 0 Exit of For statement; Else i1 TPC Dtol i Derr ; End This algorithm will be applied into all the divided tool positions until we will obtain all the corrected tool positions. Finally, a set of the corrected tool positions becomes a corrected tool path. As mentioned, this tool path correction methodology is carried out in a computational process. According to circumstances, m Werr can be larger than Wtol after nishing the
1

94

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

Fig. 6. Iterative procedure to correct a tool position.

tool position correction if a narrow tolerance is imposed on the desired surface. Since this case could be checked using our tool path correction methodology, it is possible to avoid unnecessary tool path correction with respect to the tolerance. In other words, the computational tool path correction process allows us to nd out tolerance criteria, which can be fullled in the given machining conditions.

3. Experimental work In this section, we treat an experimental example in order to illustrate how to apply the proposed approach in a concrete case. First, we compensate for the geometric errors of the used machining center in order to improve the accuracy of the tool and the probe location on the machine. 3.1. Geometric error compensation When using a three-axis machining center, the geometric error components in the closed-loop conguration can be described as follows: EXi(Xj) translational error with respect to Xi-axis when moving along Xj-axis. EAi(Xj) rotational error with respect to Xi-axis when moving along Xj-axis. EAi(XZ) Xi-directional component of X-axis squareness error with respect to Zi-axis. EAi(YZ) Xi-directional component of Y-axis squareness error with respect to Zi-axis.

In order to estimate the geometric error amounts on the machining center when the cutting tool or the probe is located at an arbitrary position, it is possible to derive 4 4 transformation matrices consisting of these error component terms [15,19]. Therefore, if the values of these error components could be determined, it would be possible to model the geometric errors of the machining center. In this study, we used a laser interferometer (see Table 1) to measure the geometric error components of a three-axis vertical machining center (HiMac-V100, Hyundai). These measured geometric error components are shown in Fig. 7 and Table 2. On the basis of the measured error components, it is possible to determine the transformation matrices. Since the transformation matrices are functions of the cutting tool or the probe locations, it is possible to compensate for the geometric errors when the CL-points or the probe positions
Table 1 Specifications of laser interferometer Model Manufacturer Wavelength Resolution ML10 measurement laser Renishaw 632.9 nm 1 nm

Table 2 Squareness error components Between X and Z EAXZ 0:067 mrad EBXZ 0:010 mrad Between Y and Z EAYZ 0:026 mrad ECYZ 0:021 mrad

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

95

Fig. 7. Translational and rotational error components.

are given. In this study we carry out the machining and inspection processes taking into account the geometric error compensation. 3.2. Probing error compensation As mentioned, a pre-travel variation can occur in the OMM inspection process despite the compensation process of the geometric errors of the machining center. To compensate for the pre-travel variation errors, we use a certicate sphere called master ball (Renishaw, 25 mm diameter) and a touch type probe (Renishaw, 2 mm diameter, 80 mm stylus length).

Generally, the pre-travel variation errors depend on tilt angle and roll angle according to the probe approaching directions. When using the OMM system on a three-axis machining center, the tilt angle varies from 08 to 908 and the roll angle varies from 08 to 3608. In these ranges, we measure the pretravel variations by using a certicate sphere, which can vary according to the tilt angle and the roll angle as shown in Fig. 8. When inspecting the surface errors on the OMM system, we compensate for pre-travel variations on the basis of this probing error map. The tilt and roll angle can be determined by the geometric shape of the desired surface corresponding to the CAD data.

96

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

Fig. 8. Pre-travel variation according to tilt and roll angles.

3.3. Surface error characterization based on the OMM data Through the compensation processes for the geometric errors of the machining center and the probing errors (i.e. pre-travel variation), we expect that the machining and the inspection errors can be signicantly reduced. Therefore we suppose that the tool deection and runout effects become predominant causes producing the surface errors in the machining process. Here, we characterize these effects by using the proposed approach. First, we carried out the atend milling processes of two specimen workpieces as shown in Fig. 9. These machining processes are carried out for two kinds of radial depth cut variation. The rst case, called up mode cutting, corresponds to the cutting process with the radial depth of cut being gradually on the increase. On the contrary, the other case, called down mode cutting, corresponds to the cutting process with the radial depth of cut being gradually on the decrease. Through these two different cutting processes, it is possible to check the variations of Werr and Derr for two cases of up mode and down mode cuttings. In these machining processes, we used a at-end mill with initially machined parts as shown in Fig. 9. The detail

Table 3 Specifications of machining process Tool Diameter of flute part Diameter of cylindrical part Used length Flute part length Flute number Helix angle Machining conditions Rotation velocity Feedrate Milling mode Radial depth of cut Axial depth of cut Workpiece material 6 mm 8 mm 50 mm 30 mm 4 308 1500 rpm 30 mm/min Down milling 02.5 mm (varied) 6 mm (fixed) Mild steel

specications of the cutter and the machining conditions are depicted in Table 3. We measured the surface errors distributed on the machined surfaces by using the OMM system. At each position we determined maximal and minimal errors Emax and Emin. Subsequently, the characterized parameters Werr and Derr can be determined by Eq. (3). According to the

Fig. 9. Machining process of specimen workpieces.

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

97

Fig. 10. Characterization of Werr and Derr.

Fig. 11. Trapezoidal shape of experimental workpiece.

locations of the measuring points, it is possible to nd out the values of the radial depth of cut RD corresponding to all Werr and Derr. Based on these inspection data, we determined the polynomial functions relating Werr and Derr to RD. Fig. 10 shows these polynomial functions and measured Werr and Derr with respect to RD. Here, the values of Werr vary with respect to the up mode and the down mode cuttings, but the values of Derr vary regardless of the up mode and the down mode cuttings. Therefore this fact has to be taken into account when correcting the tool path. 3.4. Tool path correction process To illustrate the tool path correction process based on the functionally characterized Werr and Derr, we carry out two machining processes with a trapezoidal shape workpiece (see Fig. 11) under the same machining conditions as described in Table 3: (1) a cutting process by the nominal path; (2) a cutting process by the corrected path. This workpiece allows machining under an up mode and a down mode. In this case, the axial depth of cut has a xed value of 6 mm and the radial depth of cut varies between 0 and 2.2 mm. On the desired surface 0.15 mm of the dimensional tolerance is imposed. All other machining conditions are the same as shown in Table 3. Through the proposed tool path correction methodology, we obtain a new tool path as shown in Fig. 12. Compared to

the nominal path dened by straight line, the corrected tool path is modied according to the variation of the radial depth of cut. The machining processes were carried out with both nominal and corrected tool paths (Fig. 13). Finally, we obtained the surface error distributions on these machined parts in the CMM system as shown in Fig. 14. In the cutting process with the nominal tool path, 0.32 mm of maximal error appears in the central part of the desired surface and the RMS error corresponds to 0.21 mm. A major portion of the surface errors cannot fulll the tolerance as indicated by the gray part in Fig. 14(a). In the cutting process with the corrected tool path, overall surface errors were reduced inside the tolerance zone and became signicantly stable. In this case, the maximal error is reduced to about 0.1 mm and the RMS error corresponds to 0.05 mm.

Fig. 12. Nominal and corrected tool paths.

98

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899

Fig. 13. Machining process of specimen workpieces.

Fig. 14. Surface error distributions measured on CMM.

4. Conclusion The ultimate purpose of the paper is to implement the CAD/ CAM/CAI integration concept by using the OMM system. For this purpose, this paper presented an application example to achieve an improved machining process by exchanging machining data and inspection data between CAM and CAI systems. Concretely, we tried to improve the machined surface accuracy by correcting the tool path based on the inspection data acquired on the OMM system. First, the closed-loop conguration method was proposed in order to compensate for the geometric error of the machining center: consequently, the accuracy of the machining and the inspection processes could be improved. Also, we took into account tool deection and runout effects as a predominant cause producing the surface errors. To efciently analyze the inspected surface errors, we dened the characterized surface error parameters Werr and Derr. Without the intermediate processes such as cutting force, tool deection and runout estimation processes,

we derived the polynomial functions directly relating to the cutting conditions with Werr and Derr measured on the OMM system. Integrating these polynomial functions into an iterative computational process, we proposed a tool path correction methodology. Through an experimental example, we illustrated how to apply the proposed approach into a concrete case. As a result, we succeeded in compensating for the surface errors with respect to the imposed tolerance. Acknowledgements This work was supported by Korean Research Foundation Grant (KRF-99-005-E00006). References
[1] S.-J. Huang, C.-Y. Shy, Fuzzy logic for constant force control of end milling, IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 46 (1) (1999) 169176.

M.-W. Cho et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 8899 [2] S.J. Rober, Y.C. Shin, O.D.I. Nwokah, A digital controller for cutting force control in the end milling process, Trans. ASME, J. Dyn. Syst., Meas. Control 119 (1997) 146152. [3] S. Qian, Automatic feed-rate control command generationa step toward to intelligent CNC, Comput. Ind. 25 (1993) 199204. [4] M.Y. Yang, J.G. Choi, A tool deflection compensation system for end milling accuracy improvement, Trans. ASME, J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 120 (1998) 222229. [5] T. Watanabe, S. Iwai, A control system to improve the accuracy of finished surfaces in milling, Trans. ASME, J. Dyn. Syst., Meas. Control 105 (1983) 192199. [6] C.C. Lo, C.Y. Hsiao, CNC machine tool interpolator with path compensation for repeated contour machining, Comput. Aided Des. 30 (1) (1998) 5562. [7] Z. Lechniak, A. Werner, K. Skalski, K. Kedzior, Methodology of off-line software compensation for errors in the machining process on the CNC machine tool, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 76 (1998) 42 48. [8] E.M. Lim, C.-H. Menq, D.W. Yen, Integrated planning for precision machining of complex surfaces. III. Compensation of dimensional errors, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 37 (9) (1997) 13131326. [9] E.M. Lim, C.-H. Menq, Error compensation for sculptured surface productions by the application of control surface strategy using predicted machining errors, Trans. ASME, J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 119 (1997) 402409. [10] S. Spiewak, An improved model of the chip thickness in milling, Ann. CIRP 44 (1) (1995) 3942. [11] C.-C. Tai, K.-H. Fuh, A predictive force model in ball-end milling including eccentricity effects, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf. 34 (7) (1994) 959979. [12] J.W. Sutherland, R.E. Devor, An improved method for cutting force and surface error prediction in flexible end milling systems, Trans. ASME, J. Eng. Ind. 108 (1986) 269279.

99

[13] M.-W. Cho, M.K. Kim, K. Kim, Flexible inspection system based on a vision guided coordinate measuring machine, Int. J. Prod. Res. 33 (5) (1995) 14331448. [14] N. Duffie, J. Bollinger, R. Piper, M. Kroneberg, CAD-directed inspection and error analysis using surface patch database, Ann. CIRP 33 (1) (1984) 347350. [15] M.-W. Cho, S.-H. Lee, T.-I. Seo, On-machine measurement of sculptured surfaces on based on CAD/CAM/CAI integration. I. Measurement error modeling, J. Korean Soc. Prec. Eng. 16 (10) (1999) 172181. [16] M.-W. Cho, J.-S. Kim, T.-I. Seo, J.-H. Cho, On-machine measurement of sculptured surfaces based on CAD/CAM/CAI integration. II. Inspection planning strategy, J. Korean Soc. Prec. Eng. 16 (12) (1999) 109118. [17] P.A. Cauchick-Miguel, T.G. King, Factors which influence CMM touch trigger probe performance, Int. J. Mach., Tools Manuf. 38 (4) (1998) 363374. [18] F.M.M. Chan, E.J. Davis, T.G. King, K.J. Stout, Some performance characteristics of a multi-axis touch trigger probe, Meas. Sci. Technol. 8 (8) (1997) 837848. [19] J.-H. Cho, M.-W. Cho, K. Kim, Volumetric error analysis of a multiaxis machine tool machining a sculptured surface workpiece, Int. J. Prod. Res. 32 (2) (1994) 345363. [20] W.A. Kline, R.E. Devor, J.R. Lindberg, The prediction of cutting forces in end milling with application to cornering cuts, Int. J. Mach., Tool Des. Res. 22 (1) (1982) 722. [21] F. Koenigsberger, A.J.P. Sabberwal, An investigation into the cutting force pulsations during milling operations, Int. J. Mach., Tool Des. Res. 1 (1961) 1533. [22] L. Kops, D.T. Vo, Determination of the equivalent diameter of an end mill based on its compliance, Ann. CIRP 39 (1) (1990) 9396. [23] J. Tlusty, Basic non-linearity in machining chatter, Ann. CIRP 30 (1) (1981) 299304.