Local Tool Utilization Modeling for Uneven Machining Wear

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing machining technologies rely on integral metrics for tool wear tracking, leading to inefficient tool usage and unnecessary replacements due to inhomogeneous wear, resulting in increased costs and potential quality issues.

Innovation Solution

A computer-implemented method generates a local tool utilization function by partitioning the tool into slices and simulating engagement with the workpiece, allowing for accurate tracking of localized tool wear and load, which can be used to optimize tool usage and trajectory planning.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Device complexity

If integral metrics are used for tool wear tracking, then the tracking process is simple, but tool usage efficiency decreases due to inhomogeneous wear not being detected

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetracking process complexityVSAvoidtool usage efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Device complexityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The tool is divided into multiple discrete segments or zones along its length. Each segment's wear is tracked independently using individual sensors, allowing detection of inhomogeneous wear patterns. This segmentation enables precise identification of which portions of the tool are worn, preventing premature replacement and optimizing tool usage efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The monitoring system transitions from uniform integral monitoring to localized quality assessment by measuring wear at specific positions along the tool. Different segments can have different monitoring thresholds and criteria, allowing tailored wear assessment that reflects the actual usage patterns and wear mechanisms at each location.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Manufacturing precision

If tools are replaced before quality problems are observed, then manufacturing quality is maintained, but tool cost increases due to premature replacement

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemanufacturing qualityVSAvoidtool cost
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements continuous feedback monitoring of tool wear at multiple segments. Real-time wear data is fed back to the control system, which compares actual wear against acceptable thresholds. This feedback mechanism allows extension of tool life beyond traditional replacement schedules by precisely knowing when and where wear becomes problematic, reducing unnecessary tool replacements and costs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The system performs preliminary detection and assessment of wear at individual segments before critical wear affects manufacturing quality. By identifying wear trends early at specific locations, the system can plan tool replacement or reconditioning at optimal moments, preventing quality issues while avoiding premature replacement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Strength

If advanced hard cutting materials are used, then tool strength increases, but wear resistance decreases due to rapid loss of sharpness

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetool strengthVSAvoidwear resistance
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The tool is divided into multiple discrete segments or zones along its length. Each segment's wear is tracked independently using individual sensors, allowing detection of inhomogeneous wear patterns. This segmentation enables precise identification of which portions of the tool are worn, preventing premature replacement and optimizing tool usage efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces mechanical wear resistance with electronic/optical monitoring capabilities. Instead of relying solely on material hardness to resist wear, the system uses sensors (optical, electrical, or mechanical) to detect wear at multiple segments, allowing intelligent management of tool life that compensates for the inherent wear characteristics of hard cutting materials.

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

4Measurement precision

If manual inspection methods are used, then measurement accuracy is sufficient, but productivity decreases due to frequent inspections

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvewear measurement accuracyVSAvoidmachining productivity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The tool or machining system performs self-monitoring through integrated sensors that automatically detect wear at multiple segments during operation. This eliminates the need for manual inspection operations, as the system continuously assesses its own condition and provides wear data without requiring machine downtime or operator intervention.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces manual inspection methods with electronic/optical sensing systems. Automated sensors continuously monitor wear at multiple segments, replacing the need for periodic manual measurements and eliminating productivity losses associated with inspection downtime while maintaining or improving measurement accuracy.

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

Data Source

PatentEP4697104A1Generating a local tool utilization function
Publication Date: 2026.02.18 MAKINO MILLING MASCH CO LTD
  • EP4697104A1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP4697104A1 patent drawingFigure 2~3
  • EP4697104A1 patent drawingFigure 4A~4E

AI summary

A computer-implemented method (100) for generating a local tool utilization function, comprising: - obtaining (102) a spatial work model (70A-C) and a spatial tool model (72), wherein the spatial tool model comprises a spatial representation of an outer boundary of a tool; - obtaining (104) a tool trajectory (T1-T3) defining a trajectory of the spatial tool model relative to the spatial work model; - registering (106) the spatial work model, spatial tool model, and the tool trajectory to the same coordinate system; - partitioning (108) the spatial tool model into a plurality of slices (S1-S6) so that the spatial representation of the outer boundary of the spatial tool model is partitioned along a longitudinal direction (L) of the spatial tool model; - simulating (110) an engagement area (49A-C) of the spatial tool model with the spatial work model for at least one step of the tool trajectory; and - updating (112) a data structure (234) comprising a local tool utilization function (235) characterizing the outer boundary of the spatial tool model for the at least one step of the tool trajectory; wherein the local tool utilization function characterizes, for one or more slices (S1-S6) of the outer boundary of the spatial representation of the tool, at least one accumulated metric (235) computed and/or measured based on the engagement area of the spatial tool model with the spatial work model during the at least one step of the tool trajectory.