Computer-implemented method for predicting the wear to a machining tool, computer program product, and device

Abstract

The invention relates to a method for determining the optimum time for replacing a tool, for which purpose the wear to the tool must be determined. The solution is based on time-dependent modeling of the wear between two wear measurement points, which are each measured at the beginning and at the end of the life cycle of a machining tool. These measurement times are crucial, because the machining process should not be impaired. These measurement points may be captured using any measurement system. A neural network is then suitably trained on the basis of these measured values and can make a prediction about a relevant degree of wear.

Description

[0001] Description

[0002] Computer-implemented method for predicting the wear of a machining tool, computer program product and device

[0003] In industrial manufacturing, a key component is the central control system, which primarily consists of software. The purpose of this software is to control tools and initiate the transport or processing of a workpiece to be manufactured.

[0004] A classic task in industrial manufacturing is machining. The tools used for this purpose are typically subject to wear and tear through use, so condition monitoring plays an important role in the world of manufacturing. Machining tools include anything that can be used to process materials, such as milling cutters, drills, saws, and more.

[0005] In general, it is desirable to design tool changes in such a way that usage times are optimized and thus costs are reduced.

[0006] To find the optimal time for replacement, tool wear must be determined, ideally quantitatively, which is a time-consuming and laborious task. Firstly, tools should not be replaced too early (preventively), as they may still be able to operate with the desired quality for some time. Replacing them too early is not only uneconomical and associated with higher costs, but also not conducive to sustainability. Secondly, tools must not be replaced too late, as many of the workpieces will then not achieve a sufficient quality and the resulting rejects will also severely impact the manufacturer's productivity and sustainability. Added to this is the risk of tool breakage. This is associated with possible damage to the spindle, machine, and workpiece, resulting in longer downtimes due to repairs.

[0007] Furthermore, many factors play a role in determining the wear of machining tools in a manufacturing process, such as the materials used for the workpiece and tool, the cutting parameters, the necessary coolant supply (if any), the temperature reached during machining, etc., which greatly increase the complexity of predicting wear for a machining tool. Changes in cutting parameters during machining can lead to non-linear wear, and this is where previous solutions usually fail. Monitoring tools that are not new and already show signs of wear and have already been used is also difficult, since the previous wear history is usually unknown.

[0008] State of the art

[0009] It is already known to determine the existing wear on a machining tool based on a microscopic image, in particular of the cutting surfaces or machining surfaces. This is shown, for example, in Figure 1. Shown is a top view of a drilling (or milling) head, 11 and 13, and next to it a microscopic evaluation of the images, 12 and 14, in particular of the cutting edges. In the lower case, a new machining tool is shown (i.e., at time t0), where no wear is yet visible (degree of wear 0%). The degree of wear is given as a percentage, for example, the proportion of the affected area relative to the total area of ​​a drill head. The upper image 11 shows the machining tool at time t xThis represents a predetermined period of use. Wear can be seen on the cutting edge (111), in this case a wear level of 90%. This is also highlighted and evaluated in the microscopic analysis (121). For this type of examination, the machining process must be interrupted, and in the worst case, the tool must be removed from the machine tool. This leads to an extension of the tool life; this is generally not done during operation.

[0010] Quality assurance images of the components machined by the tool can also be used for monitoring. Possible criteria include, for example, the finish of the cut edges (precise, clear, or jagged) or the milled surfaces (smooth or rough). However, correspondingly poor results can have various causes and do not necessarily indicate wear of the machining tool.

[0011] The use of a camera during machining is associated with poor photo quality due, for example, to the use of coolants, which make unobstructed recording difficult or even impossible. A fundamental advantage of this method is its quantifiability, as it allows the degree of wear on a tool to be determined down to the pixel. However, if this is done manually, it requires a lot of effort and labor. It is also known to assess the wear of a machining tool based on process signals; this is usually achieved using a fixed threshold for the signal. Examples of such signals include torque, torque-generating spindle current, tool life, operating time, or even the cutting path.

[0012] As soon as the set threshold is exceeded, a request to replace the tool is generated and issued.

[0013] In series production, a kind of fingerprint of the tool can be recorded during the production of a workpiece with the new tool, which can then be used to determine a threshold value, for example. The disadvantage is that for each new workpiece produced (e.g., with a new geometry), a new fingerprint for the machining process must be recorded. Changing the cutting parameters is also not easily possible. Furthermore, a new threshold value must be determined each time, as the manufacturing process depends on many factors, as already described above.

[0014] Another option for determining tool wear is the use of external sensors, such as force and / or vibration sensors. This solution also has numerous disadvantages: Due to the machine's specific geometry and layout, not every machine tool can accommodate a sensor and evaluation unit. Because additional electronic components are used exclusively for this purpose, this solution is also not sustainable. It is also important to note that the relationship between sensor parameters and wear must be known.

[0015] Trend monitoring, which can be implemented using known process signals, is also limited in its application. If the process parameters used, such as cutting speed or feed, are reduced, the amplitude of the current or torque also decreases. If one assumes that the torque-generating current increases with greater wear, reducing the cutting parameters would result in an ambiguous picture of wear. Trend monitoring is also difficult with partially worn tools, as described above, because the condition of the drill is initially unknown. Another option is to use a tool life calculation for wear monitoring. However, this calculation is usually subject to variation. As soon as there are deviations in the properties of the materials used (workpiece and material) or in the process parameters, this calculation becomes inaccurate.

[0016] It is therefore the object of the invention to provide a solution for predicting the wear of a machining tool, which is versatile, requires no setup time, makes the most accurate predictions possible, does not have the disadvantages mentioned above and also offers the most sustainable solution possible.

[0017] This object is achieved by a method according to the features of independent patent claim 1.

[0018] Furthermore, the problem is solved by a computer program product according to the features of patent claim 10.

[0019] The object is also achieved by a device according to the features of independent patent claim 11.

[0020] Further embodiments of the invention are covered by the subclaims.

[0021] The solution presented below does not require microscopy images or measurement points of the tool or workpiece during the machining process. The proposed interpolation method allows wear to be determined at any time from the recorded signals, which are then used to train a neural network.

[0022] The end of a tool's service life is not determined (calculated) preventively, but predictively, taking the actual condition of the tool into account. Therefore, the described solution also offers advantages over calculating the service life.

[0023] The invention is also illustrated below by the figures.

[0024] Figure 1 Microscope images of a machining tool, new and with wear

[0025] Figure 2 a preprocessed current waveform

[0026] Figure His current curve with wear value at 2 points in time,

[0027] Figure 4 a current curve with current integral characteristic,

[0028] Figure 5Current integral characteristic,

[0029] Figure 6 an augmentation of the data during training, Figure 7 training of a neural network with 4 tuples in a row,

[0030] Figure 8Training of the neural network,

[0031] Figure 9 Inference with a trained NN and

[0032] Figure 10 shows an overview of the process in use in an industrial plant.

[0033] Figure 10 shows an overview of how the procedure described below can be used.

[0034] Machine tools 2, such as a drill, a milling machine, or the like, are installed and operated in an industrial facility 1. These devices and machines are controlled, and signals are measured and parameters determined. These signals and parameters can be used to train a neural network s. The method according to the invention helps to predict the degree of wear 6 of the tool used in the machine tool using the neural network, thus supporting the care and maintenance of the facility and maintaining the quality of the workpieces machined with the tool.

[0035] The following requirements must be met in order to apply the proposed procedure:

[0036] - For the training phase of the Kl model, process signals are required on the basis of which the wear is determined.

[0037] As shown in Figure 2, our example uses the torque-forming current, Current, which was always recorded over a complete life cycle of the machining tool. The recording starts at time t0 and ends at t T , where the end of the recording is not defined by a breakage of the machining tool, but can vary. Then the initial wear v0 (for example: 0 %) and the final wear v T (for example, 90%). This can be done by briefly measuring a new drill before it is clamped into the spindle. The resulting wear is v0. After the drill is worn out and replaced, the final value v T measured. This will be explained in more detail later in Figure 5.

[0038] This solution is based on a time-dependent modeling of wear between two wear measurement points, each measured at the beginning and end of a machining tool's life cycle. These measurement times are crucial, as the machining process should not be impaired. These measurement points can be recorded using any measuring system. As an example (see Figure 1 and the description above), microscopy images can be used, which provide an exact degree of wear v. This degree of wear v can be either a physical quantity (e.g., the width of the wear surface) or a percentage, see above.

[0039] Measurement at only two time points is feasible in production.

[0040] In addition to the process signals and wear information, parameters such as the properties of the tool (machining tool material, coolant used, drive type, motor power) and workpiece (material, etc.) are also required. These must also be available from the beginning of the recording to the end.

[0041] Interpolation of wear - labels

[0042] Since only two measuring points (v0 and v T) of wear per life cycle are available, the time-dependent wear is modeled next. In the first step, the signal from which the wear is to be extracted must be pre-processed. One signal that represents wear is, for example, the torque-forming spindle current i, as this essentially reflects the force that the spindle has to deliver. The higher the wear, the more the spindle has to deliver and the higher the current. However, since this is only visible at the moment of cutting, these pieces of the signal must be detected. This can be done, for example, using a supervised neural network (NN, e.g., an RNN or a CNN) or another, e.g., rule-based approach. Idle current, air cutting, acceleration of the spindle, etc. must be removed; only the actual cutting current may be taken into account, as only this reflects the wear.After the cutting signals are detected, they must be concatenated into a single signal. If the cutting parameters remain unchanged during a life cycle, the amplitude of the cutting signal looks schematically as shown in Figure 2, for example. The time curve Time is plotted on the X-axis, the measured current Current is plotted on the Y-axis, and curve 20 shows the current applied, for example, at time t. x , 21, he is at i tx , 22.

[0043] However, if the cutting speed is reduced during machining, the current profile can also fluctuate, see the example in Figure 3. Here, the same current value is measured at time t xl and t x2recorded, 31, 32, which would lead to ambiguity. The same applies if two different CNC subprograms with different cutting parameters are called alternately. This example therefore shows that, in an advantageous embodiment, the current should not be used directly to read the wear if the cutting parameters change during monitoring.

[0044] The two problems listed (on the one hand, changing the cutting parameters and, on the other, predicting the performance of partially worn tools) can be solved by introducing the current integral characteristic curve (red). This is defined in one example as follows:

[0045] Figure 4 takes the example of characteristic curve 30 from Figure 3 and supplements it with a current integral characteristic curve 40. This allows the degree of wear to be determined at any time, independent of the cutting parameters, by accumulating the current. Current curve 30 still has an ambiguous assignment for the current value i. tx at several points in time t xi , t X 2, the new characteristic curve 40 is unique here and again shows a different (higher) current value at each point in time.

[0046] To determine wear during the process, the next step involves training a neural network (NN). The labels required to train the neural network (NN) (e.g., a recurrent neural network (RNN)) are determined as described above. This characteristic curve is only needed during the NN training and no longer during the production phase.

[0047] The training of a neural network NN, 80 is schematically illustrated in Figure 8. The input for the neural network NN is the set of values ​​S, 81 , which contains the signals at a specific time t and, with a "look into the past," the j-previous signals before time t. Time t must be greater than or equal to 0 and also less than or equal to T.

[0048] The number of sequences used in training can vary. However, this has an impact on the inference. If, for example, four sequences are used in training, this determines the time the AI ​​needs to predict wear on used tools. For drills, for example, four sequences with a sampling rate of X may be needed to achieve the desired accuracy, and then perhaps six sequences with a sampling rate of X may be needed for milling heads.

[0049] Parameter P, 82 contains all information such as the cutting parameters and properties of the tool and workpiece. These can include one or more signals.

[0050] P = {Pt-j>Pt-j+i> ->Pt-i>Pt]

[0051] Figures 7 and 8 show how, during training, the neural network is given various tuples {s7, p7}, consisting of signals S and parameters P, as input for training 61. In this specific example, there are three tuples. Bar 60 shows the development of tool wear over time, here from 0% at time t=0 up to the maximum possible (or measured) wear v t , at time T, for example, 90%. The parameter tuples are selected from this period, the width of the windows (i.e. the distance between the measuring points) is a variable. The neural network 80 predicts the wear v t , 62, 83 at time t. The label v t, 85 which is known from the current integral characteristic, is calculated together with the predicted wear v t used to optimize the network. A loss L, 84 is calculated from this. The loss is a so-called loss function that indicates how much is still "missing" until the NN has learned enough. The goal of training is to minimize this, and ideally, at the end of training, L = 0.

[0052] Fig. 6 and 7 show how the data is fed into the network and Fig. 8 shows the training and Fig. 9 the inference.

[0053] Figure 8 shows a proposed training mechanism: augmenting by randomly generating signals S, 81 and parameters P, 82, i.e. S and P have different j and t.

[0054] An example of the NN training mechanism might look like this: the entire signal (divided into X sequences) from t=0 to t=T is used. The signal has 100 measurement points and is divided into 20 sequences. Each sequence then has 5 measurement points. Four sequences are used for training. This results in 20 / 4 = 5 runs.

[0055] Alternatively, you can augment the data. This could look like this:

[0056] 1st run: Seq. 1, 2, 3, 4

[0057] 2nd run Seq. 2, 3, 4, 5

[0058] 3rd run Seq. 3, 4, 5, 6

[0059] 4th run Seq. 4, 5, 6, 7 etc.

[0060] This can also be done randomly. This increases the number of runs and gives the class more content for training.

[0061] The number of sequences can also vary. Dividing these 100 measurement points into 30 sequences can be achieved by overlaying the sequences at the edges. If the first sequence contains measurement points 1, 2, 3, and 4, the second sequence starts at measurement point 3. Because the length and number of sequences can be randomly varied during training, Kl becomes more robust due to the huge amount of data generated by augmentation.

[0062] The required labels describing the wear condition (e.g., in %) are calculated using the current integral characteristic. Thus, the neural network 90 predicts with a few tuples {s7-,p7-} to {s t , p t} the wear and tear v t 91 for used tools.

[0063] Productive phase (inference)

[0064] One problem with wear modeling is the starting point for signal and measurement point recording, unless this point begins with the use of a new machining tool. In a specific example, this would mean that accurate wear prediction during the productive phase is more difficult because the history of the drill used is unknown.

[0065] Inference is already known and represents the productive use of a neural network - it calculates the desired result, e.g., a score, a segmentation, or a classification, or in the given example, wear. The inference concludes the result of a new object of the same class based on the individual adaptations in the previous training. Successful training allows the inference to always draw the correct conclusions about these new objects. During inference, the trained model is applied (see Figure 9). In the case of a new, unused tool, the wear can be t be predicted correctly from the beginning, since the NN knows that at t=0, v=0. In the case of a tool that is already partially worn out, it takes some time for the network to recognize the specific patterns and thus make a correct prediction.

[0066] To monitor quality, additional images from the quality assurance process of the production of components machined by the tool can be used. Possible criteria include, as described above, the finish of the cut edges (precise, clear, or frayed) or the milled surfaces (smooth or rough).

[0067] By using the neural network trained in this way, a prediction can be made at the end for the machining tool under investigation as to at what point in time t the degree of wear of the tool is reached that makes changing necessary.

[0068] The method described above has numerous advantages over the known state of the art:

[0069] It enables wear prediction that isn't tied to series production. For example, it doesn't use "fingerprints," as described in the prior art. It also doesn't require fixed thresholds to determine the tool condition, so this solution can also be used for different workpieces machined consecutively. Cutting parameters can also be changed during machining, and the model will be able to adapt to them.

[0070] Furthermore, no additional external sensors are required. Wear prediction is based exclusively on existing process signals and parameters, making this solution more sustainable overall than existing solutions.

[0071] A computing unit, such as an inter-process communication (IPC) / edge device, is required during the production phase to apply the model. However, multiple applications can also run in parallel on a single device.

[0072] The described solution also offers advantages over trend monitoring of signals. Changes in cutting parameters during monitoring are made possible by the current integral characteristic curve. Wear prediction for partially used tools is also possible through augmentation during training.

Claims

Patent claims 1. Computer-implemented method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) for machining a material in an industrial production, comprising the following steps: - Determining a degree of wear (v0) of the machining tool at a first time (^o) - Determine the degree of wear (v T ) of the machining tool at a second time (tr) - Modelling a time-dependent degree of wear by measuring a Wear-representing signal (20, 30) and representation in a characteristic curve (30, 40) depending on the time (t) and - generating a set of values (S) from the wear-representing signals of the modeled characteristic curve (30, 40) and - Training a neural network (NN) by inputting the set of values (S) and a set of parameters (P) concerning the properties of the machining tool or the material to be machined, - Determine the point in time of maximum wear (v t ) by the neural network, to which a request to exchange the processing tool is made.

2. Method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to claim 1, characterized in that the measurement of the degree of wear is carried out by means of microscopic images of the machining tool (11, 12).

3. Method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the degree of wear (v) is given in percent.

4. Method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) according to claim 1 or 2, characterized in that the degree of wear (v) is specified as a physical quantity, in particular the shape, length or area of a wear surface (111, 121) of the machining tool.

5. Method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the wear-representing signal is the torque-generating drive current (20, 30) of the machining tool (11).

6. A method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that the wear-representing signal uses only the actual cutting current.

7. Method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that a correction of the wear-representing signal (30) by a current integral characteristic curve (40), in particular in accordance with which accumulates the wear-representing signal (30).

8. Method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that a prediction is made for an already used machining tool with previously existing wear traces by applying inference.

9. Method for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) according to one of the preceding claims, characterized in that recordings of a workpiece machined by the machining tool are used for monitoring, in particular the execution of cutting edges or milled surfaces.

10. Computer program product suitable and arranged to carry out the steps according to one of the preceding claims.

11. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12) for machining a material in an industrial production, suitable and arranged for training a neural network (NN, 90), with data of a characteristic curve (30, 40) depending on the time (t) which results from - the model of a time-dependent degree of wear by measuring a wear-representing signal (20, 30), calculated from - a first degree of wear (v0) of the machining tool at a first time (t0) - a second degree of wear (v T ) of the machining tool at a second time (tr) - a set of values (S, 81) from the wear-representing signals of the modelled characteristic curve (30, 40) and - training the neural network (NN, 90) with the data of the value set (S, 81) and further values from a parameter set (P, 82) relating to the properties of the machining tool (11, 12) or the material to be machined, and suitable and configured to execute the neural network (NN, 90) trained in this way for determining a time of maximum wear (v t ) by the neural network (NN, 90), and suitable and arranged to output a time of the request to exchange the machining tool (11, 12).

12. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to claim 11, characterized in that the degree of wear is determined by microscopic images of the machining tool (11, 12).

13. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to claim 11 or 12, characterized in that the degree of wear (v) is given in percent.

14. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to one of claims 11 to 13, characterized in that the degree of wear (v) is specified as a physical quantity, in particular shape, length or area of a wear surface (111, 121) of the machining tool.

15. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to one of claims 11 to 14, characterized in that the wear-representing signal is the torque-forming drive current (20, 30) of the machining tool (11).

16. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to one of claims 11 to 15, characterized in that the wear-representing signal uses only the actual cutting current.

17. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to one of the claims 11 to 16, characterized in that a correction of the wear-representing signal (30) is carried out by a current integral characteristic curve (40), in particular according to which accumulates the wear-representing signal (30).

18. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to one of claims 11 to 17, characterized in that a prediction is made for an already used machining tool with previously existing wear traces by applying inference.

19. Device for predicting the wear of a machining tool (11, 12), according to one of claims 11 to 18, characterized in that recordings of a workpiece machined by the machining tool are used for monitoring, in particular the execution of cutting edges or milled surfaces.

Images