Servo-Controlled Centerless Grinding Tooling Change

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Centerless grinding methods require significant skill and time for tooling changes to accommodate workpieces of various sizes, leading to decreased efficiency and increased costs.

Innovation Solution

The method involves using servomotors to arithmetically control the movement of the blade, grinding wheel, and regulating wheel, allowing for automated tooling changes without adjusting the guide plate, ensuring consistent contact angles and positions for efficient processing of workpieces of different diameters.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If manual tooling change is performed to accommodate workpieces of various sizes, then adaptability is improved, but productivity deteriorates due to time-consuming adjustments

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveability to handle workpieces of various sizesVSAvoidefficiency during tooling change
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The blade position is made dynamically adjustable through automated control systems. The blade can be automatically positioned at optimal locations based on workpiece diameter without manual intervention, enabling quick adaptation to different workpiece sizes while maintaining high productivity through programmable motion control

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system changes operational parameters automatically by controlling blade position and movement based on workpiece specifications. By programmatically adjusting blade position parameters rather than manually reconfiguring the tooling, the system achieves both adaptability to various workpiece sizes and maintained productivity through automated parameter setting

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Adaptability or versatility

If manual tooling change is performed to accommodate workpieces of various sizes, then adaptability is improved, but loss of time increases due to skilled operator intervention

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveability to handle workpieces of various sizesVSAvoidtime required for tooling change
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs self-adjustment of blade position automatically based on workpiece diameter specifications. The automated control system eliminates the need for skilled operators to manually adjust tooling, enabling the machine to service itself during parameter changes, thereby reducing both time loss and dependency on skilled labor

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

Manual mechanical adjustment operations are replaced with automated control systems that programmatically position the blade. This substitution of manual mechanical operations with automated control eliminates time-consuming manual intervention while maintaining the ability to adapt to different workpiece sizes through software-controlled positioning

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

3Extent of automation

If automated control with servomotors is implemented, then extent of automation is improved, but device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveautomation of tooling changeVSAvoidcomplexity of control system
Core Design Contradiction:
Extent of automationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The automated control system with servomotors serves multiple functions: it controls blade positioning, manages tooling changes, and adapts to various workpiece sizes through a single integrated system. This multi-functionality justifies the increased complexity by consolidating multiple control tasks into one universal automated system rather than requiring separate mechanisms for each function

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentEP2105250B1Method for centerless grinding
Publication Date: 2016.03.16 MICRON MACHINERY
  • EP2105250B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2105250B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2105250B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

To provide a centerless grinding method which facilitates a tooling change and enables automation. A blade 11 is disposed slidable along a first straight line 101, i.e., Y axis, a grinding wheel 7 is disposed slidable along a second straight line 102, i.e., X axis, and a regulating wheel 9 is disposed slidable along a third straight line 103 intersecting with the second straight line at an angle θ 2. At a tooling change, then, the blade is moved in a negative direction of the Y axis with an increase in diameter of a workpiece, the grinding wheel is moved in a negative direction of the X axis with an increase in diameter of the workpiece, and the regulating wheel is moved in a positive direction of the Y axis and also in a positive direction of the X axis with an increase in diameter of the workpiece. With this, angles α and β, which a contact angular position reference line S makes with line segments OB and OR, are made always constant.