OBRABOTKA METALLOV

Introduction. The analysis of factory lathe-automatic operations revealed a significant variety of multi-tool setups and identified its areas of application. To develop a matrix theory of accuracy for multi-tool machining and create a unified algorithmic approach to errors modeling for all possible spatial multi-tool setups, it is necessary to consider the flexibility of the technological system in all coordinate directions. In this regard, it is required to systematize a large number of existing multi-tool setups and classify it to structure the information and improve the understanding of its application. Purpose of the work is to develop a classification of multi-tool setups on multi-carriage and multi-spindle CNC lathes, enabling the creation of both a matrix model of machining accuracy for each classification class and a unified generalized matrix model of machining accuracy for the entire classification class. The work investigates the systematics of multi-tool setups, oriented toward the development of matrix models of machining accuracy. Therefore, the classification considered in this work is aimed at identifying the characteristics of force loading and deformation of the technological system during multi-tool machining. The research methods involve identifying the parameters used for classification and the hierarchy of these parameters, which determines the levels and order of the systematics. Based on the principles of systematics of multi-tool setups used in traditional automatic lathes, an analysis of its adaptation to the capabilities of modern lathes designed for multi-tool machining is conducted. Results and discussion. As a result of the research, a formalized six-level classification of multi-tool setups is developed, which includes the following aspects: the method of workpiece mounting, the set of carriages, the types of cutting tools, the types and directions of carriage feeds, the orientation of cutting tools relative to the workpiece, and the method of tool engagement (parallel, sequential). This classification takes into account the technological capabilities for organizing multi-tool machining on modern CNC lathes. The main classes of the proposed systematics of multi-tool setups in the presented work include single-carriage single-coordinate setups, single-carriage two-coordinate setups, dual-carriage single-coordinate setups, dual-carriage two-coordinate setups, and multi-carriage setups. The proposed systematics of multi-tool setups on lathe group machines is aimed at developing machining accuracy models and can serve as a basis for developing recommendations on cutting modes for these CNC machines. The proposed classification of multi-tool setups forms the foundation of the methodological support for the CAD system of lathe-automatic operations and serves as the basis for creating next-generation CAD systems for lathe operations.

1. Shinno H., Hashizume H. Structured method for identifying success factors in new product development of machine tools. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2002, vol. 51 (1), pp. 281–284. DOI: 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61517-0.

2. Moriwaki T. Multi-function machine tool. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2008, vol. 57 (2), pp. 736–749. DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2008.09.004.

3. Brecher C., Esser M., Witt S. Interaction of manufacturing process and machine tool. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2009, vol. 58 (2), pp. 588–607. DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.005.

4. Tomiyama T., Gu P., Jin Y., Lutters D., Kind Ch., Kimura F. Design methodologies: industrial and educational applications. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2009, vol. 58 (2), pp. 543–565. DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2009.09.003.

5. Shinno H., Yoshioka H., Sawano H. A frame-work for systematizing machine tool engineering. International Journal of Automation Technology, 2013, vol. 7 (6), pp. 760–768. DOI: 10.20965/ijat.2013.p0760.

6. Usubamatov R., Harun A., Sanuddin A. Optimisation of machining parameters by criterion of maximum productivity. International Journal of Production Research, 2014, vol. 52 (10), pp. 2946–2953. DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2013.857440.

7. Usubamatov R., Zain Z., Sin T. Optimization of multi-tool machining processes with simultaneous action. International Journal of Advanced and Manufacturing Technology, 2016, vol. 82, pp. 1227–1239. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-015-6920-x.

8. Levin G., Rozin B., Dolgui A. Optimization of multi-tool cutting modes in multi-item batch manufacturing system. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 2013, vol. 46 (9), pp. 766–771. DOI: 10.3182/20130619-3-RU-3018.00357.

9. Cakir M.C., Gurarda A. Optimization of machining conditions for multi-tool milling operations. International Journal of Production Research, 2000, vol. 38 (15), pp. 3537–3552. DOI: 10.1080/002075400422789.

10. Dolgui A., Levin G., Rozin B. Optimisation of the aggregation and execution rates for intersecting operation sets: an example of machining process design. International Journal of Production Research, 2000, vol. 58 (9), pp. 2658–2676. DOI: 10.1080/00207543.2019.1629668.

11. Daoud Z., Purcheck G. Multi-tool job sequencing for tool-change reduction. International Journal of Production Research, 1981, vol. 19 (4), pp. 425–435. DOI: 10.1080/00207548108956670.

12. Torres W., Brand M., Serebrenik A. A systematic literature review of cross-domain model consistency checking by model management tools. Software and Systems Modeling, 2021, vol. 20 (3), pp. 897–916. DOI: 10.1109/SYSCON.2017.7934729.

13. Yusubov N., Abbasova H. Models for machining accuracy in multi-tool adjustment. International Journal of Automotive and Mechanical Engineering, 2020, vol. 17 (3), pp. 8067–8085. DOI: 10.15282/ijame.17.3.2020.01.0605.

14. Kalidasan R., Senthilvelan S., Dixit U.S., Vaibhav J. Double tool turning: machining accuracy, cutting tool wear and chip morphology. International Journal of Precision Technology, 2016, vol. 6 (2), p. 142. DOI: 10.1504/IJPTECH.2016.078189.

15. Brecher C., Epple A., Neues S., Fey M. Optimal process parameters for parallel turning operations on shared cutting surfaces. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2015, vol. 95, pp. 13–19. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2015.05.003.

16. Fu R., Curley P., Higgins C., Kilic Z., Sun D., Murphy A., Jin Y. Double-sided milling of thin-walled parts by dual collaborative parallel kinematic machines. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2022, vol. 299, p. 117395. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117395.

17. Zhao X., Tao B., Yang L., Ding H. Asymmetrical nonlinear impedance control for dual robotic machining of thin-walled workpieces. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 2020, vol. 63, p. 101889. DOI: 10.1016/j.rcim.2019.101889.

18. Yan Y., Xu J., Wiercigroch M. Stability and dynamics of parallel plunge grinding. International Journal of Advanced and Manufacturing Technology, 2018, vol. 99, pp. 881–895. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-018-2440-9.

19. Yamato S., Nakanishi K., Suzuki N. Development of automatic chatter suppression system in parallel milling by real-time spindle speed control with observer-based chatter monitoring. International Journal of Precision Engineering and Manufacturing, 2021, vol. 22, pp. 227–240. DOI: 10.1007/s12541-021-00469-2.

20. Weck M., Staimer D. Parallel kinematic machine tools – current state and future potentials. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2002, vol. 51 (2), pp. 671–683. DOI: 10.1016/S0007-8506(07)61706-5.

21. Azvar M., Budak E. Multi-dimensional chatter stability for enhanced productivity in different parallel turning strategies. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 2017, vol. 123, pp. 116–128. DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2017.08.005.

22. Kanakaraju V., Hassan F., Kalidasan R. Numerical analysis of surface integrity in parallel turning. Part A: Influence of cutting tool nose radius. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2021, vol. 38 (1), pp. 186–190. DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.06.511.

23. Hassan F., Kanakaraju V., Kalidasan R., Norkey G. Numerical analysis of surface integrity in parallel turning. Part B: Influence of cutting tool chamfer angle and chamfer width. Materials Today: Proceedings, 2021, vol. 44 (1), pp. 266–270. DOI: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.464.

24. Brecher C., Trofimov Y., Bäumler S. Holistic modelling of process machine interactions in parallel milling. CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, 2011, vol. 60 (1), pp. 387–390. DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2011.03.025.

25. Yusubov N.D., Abbasova H.M., Khankishiyev I.A. Entwicklung einer projektierungstheorie für die mehrwerkzeugbearbeitung mit den möglichkeiten der modernen CNC-werkzeugmaschinen. Forschung im Ingenieurwesen, 2021, vol. 85, pp. 661–678. DOI: 10.1007/s10010-021-00478-7.

26. Yusubov N.D. Matrix models of the accuracy in multitool two-support setup. Russian Engineering Research, 2009, vol. 29, pp. 268–271. DOI: 10.3103/S1068798X09030125.

27. Bogatenkov S.A., Sazonova N.S., Yusubov N.D., Mammadov P.V., Bazhenov R.I. Increasing the productivity of multitool machining on automated lathes by optimizing the machining plan. Russian Engineering Research, 2021, vol. 41 (11), pp. 1071–1074. DOI: 10.3103/S1068798X21110046.

28. Bogatenkov S.A., Sazonova N.S., Guzeev V.I., Yusubov N.D., Abbasova G.M. Increasing the productivity of multitool machining on automated lathes by optimizing the tool positions. Russian Engineering Research, 2021, vol. 41 (11), pp. 1075–1079. DOI: 10.3103/S1068798X21110058.

29. Usher J.M., Bowden R.O. The application of genetic algorithms to operation sequencing for use in computer-aided process planning. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 1996, vol. 30 (4), pp. 999–1013. DOI: 10.1016/0360-8352(96)00048-4.

30. Indrajit M., Pradip K.R. A review of optimization techniques in metal cutting processes. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2006, vol. 50 (1–2), pp. 15–34. DOI: 10.1016/j.cie.2005.10.001.

31. Usubamatov R., Ismail K.A., Sah J.M. Mathematical models for productivity and availability of automated lines. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2013, vol. 66, pp. 59–69. DOI: 10.1007/s00170-012-4305-y.

32. Ozturk E., Comak A., Budak E. Tuning of tool dynamics for increased stability of parallel (simultaneous) turning processes. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2016, vol. 360, pp. 17–30. DOI: 10.1016/j.jsv.2015.09.009.

33. Yusubov N., Abbasova H. Full-factor matrix model of accuracy of dimensions performed on multi-purpose CNC machines. Obrabotka metallov (tekhnologiya, oborudovanie, instrumenty) = Metal Working and Material Science, 2021, vol. 23 (4), pp. 6–20. DOI: 10.17212/1994-6309-2021-23.4-6-20.

34. Kurt A., Sürücüler S., Kirik A. Developing a mathematical model for the cutting forces prediction depending on the cutting parameters. Technology, 2010, vol. 13 (1), pp. 23–30.

35. Koshin A.A. Teoriya tochnosti i optimizatsiya mnogoinstrumentnoi tokarnoi obrabotki. Diss. dokt. tekhn. nauk [Accuracy theory and optimization of multi-tool turning. Dr. eng. sci. diss.]. Chelyabinsk, 1997. 290 p. (In Russian).

36. Koshin A.A. Obrabotka na tokarnykh stankakh: naladka, rezhimy rezaniya [Processing on lathes: adjustment, cutting conditions]. Handbook. Chelyabinsk, Siti-Print Publ., 2012. 744 p.

37. Koshin A.A., Yusubov N.D. Elementy matrichnoi teorii tochnosti mnogoinstrumentnoi obrabotki v prostranstvennykh naladkakh [Elements of matrix theory of multitool processing accuracy in three-dimensional setups]. Vestnik mashinostroeniya = Russian Engineering Research, 2013, no. 9, pp. 13–17. (In Russian).

38. Yusubov N.D., Abbasova Kh.M., Dadashov R.E. [Models of cutting forces during mechanical machining on modern machines of turning group]. Vserossiiskii forum molodykh issledovatelei – 2023 [All-Russian forum of young researchers – 2023]. Petrozavodsk, 2023, pp. 236–246. (In Russian).