Sinker EDM Machining Condition Determination via Cavity Model Tessellation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional machining condition determining systems for sinker electric discharge machining struggle to accurately calculate machining areas, especially for tool electrodes with complex three-dimensional geometries, requiring multiple computation methods for different shapes.

Innovation Solution

A system that produces a cavity model as a solid model, tessellates it into a mesh of polygons, projects these polygons onto a plane perpendicular to the axis of advancement, and calculates the machining area by summing the areas of projected polygons to determine machining conditions such as current peak for the tool electrode.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If conventional machining area calculation methods are used for different tool electrode geometries, then multiple computation methods are required, but the system complexity increases and calculation accuracy decreases for complex geometries

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemachining area calculation accuracyVSAvoidcomputation method complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies universality by creating a single computation method that works for all tool electrode geometries. The method represents both the tool electrode and workpiece as solid models, calculates their difference to generate a cavity model, and uses mesh generation with projection techniques. This universal approach eliminates the need for multiple geometry-specific computation methods while maintaining high calculation accuracy for machining area determination.

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

Solution Approach 2:

The patent applies segmentation by dividing the complex geometry calculation into discrete manageable steps: representing tool electrode and workpiece as solid models, calculating their difference, generating a mesh of polygons from the cavity model, and projecting these polygons onto a reference plane. This segmentation transforms an intractable complex geometry problem into a series of solvable computational steps that work universally for any geometry.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

2Measurement precision

If iterative methods like Newton-Raphson are used to calculate machining area from surface models, then calculation accuracy improves, but computation time increases significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemachining area calculation accuracyVSAvoidcomputation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies preliminary action by pre-generating a mesh of polygons from the cavity model before performing the actual machining area calculation. The mesh is created by representing the tool electrode and workpiece as solid models, calculating their difference, and generating a polygonal representation. This preliminary mesh generation eliminates the need for iterative calculations during the actual machining condition determination, significantly reducing computation time while maintaining accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces iterative numerical methods (mechanical/computational iteration) with a direct geometric calculation approach. Instead of using iterative methods like Newton-Raphson that require repeated calculations, the patent uses solid model difference calculation and mesh projection, which provide direct solutions. This substitution eliminates iterative convergence requirements and dramatically reduces computation time.

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

3Manufacturing precision

If machining area is calculated for complex three-dimensional tool electrode geometries, then accurate machining conditions can be determined, but conventional methods fail to provide accurate results

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemachining condition accuracyVSAvoidcalculation reliability for complex geometry
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by transforming the geometry representation from simple analytical surfaces to solid models with mesh discretization. The cavity model is represented as a collection of polygons with defined vertices and orientations, allowing accurate calculation of machining area for any complex geometry. This parameter transformation from continuous surfaces to discrete polygonal meshes enables reliable computation for arbitrarily complex three-dimensional tool electrode geometries.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS7596424B2Machining condition determining system and method for sinker electric discharge machining apparatus
Publication Date: 2009.09.29 SODICK CO LTD
  • US7596424B2 patent drawing
  • US7596424B2 patent drawing
  • US7596424B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of determining machining condition for a sinker electric discharge machining apparatus in which a tool electrode is advanced along a z-axis to machine the workpiece, comprises the steps of: (a) producing a cavity model (D) as a solid model of part of the tool electrode; (b) tessellating the cavity model into a mesh of triangle each of triangles having an ordered set of vertices and having an orientation defined by the ordering of the vertices; (c) projecting the triangles on an xy plane surface; (d) summing up areas (S) of the projected triangles having the same orientation to calculate a machining area; and (e) determining machining conditions based on the machining area.