Autonomous Grinding Head with Force Feedback

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current grinding technologies lack the ability to autonomously and accurately remove material from complex workpieces with varying geometries and dimensions, often resulting in incomplete or uneven processing.

Innovation Solution

A system that uses an optical sensor to capture images of a workpiece, compiles them into a virtual model, identifies specific grinding regions, projects a target grinding profile onto the model, and generates a tool path for the grinding head to follow, while maintaining a target force to achieve precise material removal.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Extent of automation

If traditional grinding technologies are used, then the grinding process can be performed, but the system lacks autonomy and accuracy in handling complex workpiece geometries

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautonomous grinding capabilityVSAvoidgrinding accuracy on complex geometries
Core Design Contradiction:
Extent of automationVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a virtual copy of the physical workpiece through 3D scanning and point cloud processing. This digital replica allows the system to analyze complex geometries, plan grinding paths, and simulate material removal before actual grinding occurs, enabling autonomous operation while maintaining high precision on complex surfaces

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces traditional mechanical measurement and path planning methods with optical sensing (lasers, cameras) and computational algorithms. The system uses vision-based technologies to capture workpiece geometry, process point clouds, and generate toolpaths automatically, substituting manual mechanical operations with automated optical-mechanical-integrated systems

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Manufacturing precision

If material removal is increased to handle uneven surfaces, then surface coverage improves, but the risk of removing too much material and deviating from target profile increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesurface finish uniformityVSAvoidmaterial removal control
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements a closed-loop feedback system where the actual workpiece geometry is scanned and compared against the target CAD model. The system calculates the difference (deviation map) and uses this information to adjust the grinding path and material removal rate in real-time, ensuring that material is removed only where needed while maintaining surface uniformity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary scanning and virtual material removal simulation before actual grinding. The system pre-calculates the optimal grinding path and material removal strategy by comparing the as-scanned geometry with the target profile, allowing the system to plan precise material removal that achieves uniform surfaces without excessive material loss

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Productivity

If the grinding head follows a predetermined tool path, then the process is efficient, but it cannot adapt to actual workpiece geometry variations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvegrinding cycle efficiencyVSAvoidadaptation to geometry variations
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The patent transforms static, predetermined toolpaths into dynamic, adaptive paths. The system continuously updates the grinding path based on real-time geometric measurements from scanning, allowing the tool to adjust its position and orientation dynamically to match actual workpiece variations while maintaining efficient material removal rates

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

4Manufacturing precision

If force control is not implemented, then the grinding process is simpler, but the applied force varies causing inconsistent material removal

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvematerial removal consistencyVSAvoidforce control system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent incorporates force feedback mechanisms that monitor the contact force between the grinding head and workpiece in real-time. The system uses this force information to adjust grinding parameters and maintain consistent contact pressure, ensuring uniform material removal rates while compensating for variations in workpiece hardness and surface conditions

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS12134166B1System and method for autonomously grinding a workpiece
Publication Date: 2024.11.05 GRAYMATTER ROBOTICS INC
  • US12134166B1 patent drawing
  • US12134166B1 patent drawing
  • US12134166B1 patent drawing

AI summary

A method for autonomously grinding a workpiece includes: accessing a virtual model defining a geometry of the workpiece; identifying a grinding region on the workpiece; and projecting a target grinding profile onto the grinding region on the workpiece. The method also includes: based a geometry of the workpiece and the target grinding profile, generating a tool path for removal of material from the grinding region to the target grinding profile; and assigning a target force to the target region. The method also includes, during a processing cycle: accessing a sequence of force values output by a force sensor coupled to a grinding head; navigating the grinding head across the grinding region according to the tool path; and, based on the sequence of force values, deviating the grinding head from the tool path to maintain forces of the grinding head on the grinding region proximal the target force.