Gear Grinding Setup Using Dual Closed-Loop Geometry Correction

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing gear grinding processes face challenges in achieving high accuracy for the final flank shape due to deviations from pre-final grinding strokes, which cannot be fully corrected by conventional single closed-loop quality control systems.

Innovation Solution

Implementing a multi-stage closed-loop system, comprising a first quality control loop for setting up a pre-final target geometry and a second quality control loop for achieving the final target geometry, allowing for separate correction and optimization of each grinding stroke.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If a single closed-loop quality control system is used for gear grinding, then the process is simple and easy to operate, but the manufacturing precision of the final flank shape is insufficient due to uncorrected deviations from pre-final grinding strokes

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefinal flank shape accuracyVSAvoidquality control system structure

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent divides the quality control system into two independent closed loops: a first closed loop for pre-final grinding strokes and a second closed loop for the final grinding stroke. Each loop independently determines and corrects axis movements for its specific grinding stage, preventing deviation accumulation and improving final flank shape accuracy without requiring a completely complex new system architecture

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The first closed loop performs preliminary quality control by determining corrected axis movements for pre-final grinding strokes before the final grinding occurs. This preliminary correction of deviations in advance ensures that the final grinding stroke starts from an improved baseline, enhancing the ultimate manufacturing precision of the flank shape

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

2Manufacturing precision

If conventional single closed-loop correction is applied to all grinding strokes, then the correction process is simple, but deviations from pre-final strokes are not fully compensated and are transferred to the final geometry

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveflank shape accuracyVSAvoidcorrection process complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Manufacturing precisionVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The correction process is segmented into two independent closed loops, where the first loop corrects deviations for pre-final grinding strokes and the second loop corrects deviations for the final grinding stroke. This segmentation allows each loop to optimize corrections for its specific stage, fully compensating deviations without requiring overly complex unified correction algorithms

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Each closed loop implements independent feedback mechanisms: the first loop measures and corrects deviations from pre-final grinding strokes, and the second loop measures and corrects deviations from the final grinding stroke. These nested feedback systems ensure that deviations are detected and corrected at each stage, preventing their transfer to the final geometry while maintaining manageable correction process complexity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Productivity

If the number of grinding strokes is reduced to achieve short machining times, then productivity increases, but the ability to correct deviations through multiple quality control iterations is limited

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvemachining timeVSAvoidflank shape accuracy

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSManufacturing precision

Solution Approach 1:

The first closed loop performs preliminary quality control and correction for pre-final grinding strokes before the final grinding occurs. This preliminary action ensures that deviations are corrected in advance, allowing the final grinding stroke to achieve high precision even when the total number of grinding strokes is minimized for productivity

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The dual closed-loop system enables continuous quality control and correction throughout the grinding process. The first loop continuously corrects pre-final strokes, and the second loop continuously corrects the final stroke, ensuring that useful corrective action is maintained throughout without requiring additional grinding strokes, thus preserving both productivity and precision

Inventive Principle:

Principle #20Continuity of useful action

Data Source

PatentUS20250121444A1Method for setting up a gear grinding process and a gear grinding process

Publication Date: 2025.04.17 KLINGELNBERG AG

AI summary

A method for setting up a gear grinding process: determining axis movements and/or a geometry of a grinding tool one for multiple grinding strokes by a first quality control loop repeating the steps of grinding, measuring, and correcting for a pre-final target geometry of a gearing, which has an allowance to a final target geometry of the gearing; determining axis movements and/or a geometry of a grinding tool for one for a multiple grinding strokes by second quality control loop by repeating the steps of grinding, measuring, and correcting for the final target geometry of the gearing. The steps of grinding, measuring, and correcting are repeated on one component or on a multiple components until a gearing ground on the respective component or the respective components achieves a predetermined accuracy with respect to the pre-final target geometry and subsequently with respect to the final target geometry.