Machined Surface Evaluation via Vibration Simulation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for evaluating machined surfaces do not accurately replicate how humans perceive surfaces through visual and tactile senses, leading to rejection of workpieces despite low surface roughness due to perceived cusps and gritty textures.

Innovation Solution

A control device and machine tool system that simulates a machined surface to calculate vibration stimulus frequency and amplitude, allowing for detection by human tactile sense, and modifies the machining process to prevent detectable vibratory stimulation, thereby improving surface evaluation and machining accuracy.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If surface roughness is minimized through conventional machining, then manufacturing precision is improved, but human tactile perception detects unpleasant gritty texture due to cusp formations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesurface roughnessVSAvoidtactile discomfort from cusps
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary simulation of the machined surface and calculation of vibration stimulus frequency before actual machining. By predicting the tactile perception outcomes in advance, the system can adjust machining parameters proactively to avoid creating cusps that would cause gritty texture, rather than relying solely on post-processing measurement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes machining parameters (feed rate, cutting speed, depth of cut) based on calculated vibration stimulus frequencies. By adjusting these parameters, the system optimizes the balance between surface roughness and cusp formation, ensuring that the resulting surface meets both manufacturing precision requirements and human tactile comfort criteria.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Measurement precision

If multiple surface evaluation criteria are measured using projection methods, then measurement precision is improved, but the evaluation does not reflect actual human sensory perception

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesurface property measurementVSAvoidhuman sensory perception data
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of information

Solution Approach 1:

The system creates a simulated model of the machined surface that copies the actual surface geometry. This simulation allows for calculation of vibration stimulus frequency that would be experienced by human touch, providing a virtual representation that bridges objective measurement and subjective human perception without requiring actual human testing.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The system replaces direct human tactile testing with computational calculation of vibration stimulus frequency. Instead of relying on human observers to physically touch and evaluate surfaces, the system uses mathematical models to predict tactile perception outcomes, eliminating the loss of information that occurs when human sensory data is not captured.

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

3Object-affected harmful factors

If machining process is modified to eliminate detectable vibrations, then human tactile comfort is improved, but machining time and productivity may be reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetectable vibratory stimulationVSAvoidmachining efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
Object-affected harmful factorsVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The system calculates vibration stimulus frequency and simulates surface outcomes before finalizing machining parameters. This preliminary analysis allows for optimization of the machining process to achieve the minimum parameter modifications needed to eliminate detectable vibrations, rather than applying excessive conservative measures that would unnecessarily reduce productivity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Data Source

PatentEP2980664B1Workpiece worked surface evaluation method, control device, and working machine
Publication Date: 2020.03.18 MAKINO MILLING MASCH CO LTD
  • EP2980664B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2980664B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2980664B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A worked surface of a workpiece is evaluated on the basis of how the surface is actually perceived by a person's (observer's) eyes (vision) or fingers (touch), and a work process whereby a workpiece is worked is changed on the basis of the evaluation.