2003
DOI: 10.1016/s0890-6955(02)00268-7
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Analysis of geometric errors associated with five-axis machining centre in improving the quality of cam profile

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 59 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, the various methods for modeling the geometric errors from different perspectives have experienced a gradual development [7]. To describe the error of the cutter location and the tool orientation between the two kinematic chains, the error model is normally established using homogeneous transformation sciENcE aNd tEchNology matrices (HTM) [10,18,20], denavit-hartenberg (D-H) method [16], modified denavit-hartenberg (MD-H) method [19], or multi-body system (MBS) theory [31,32]. Among these different approaches, MBS theory, first proposed by Houston, has evolved into the best method for the modeling of geometric errors of machine tools because it provides for a simple and convenient method to describe the topological structure of an MBS [21].…”
Section: Volumetric Error Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, the various methods for modeling the geometric errors from different perspectives have experienced a gradual development [7]. To describe the error of the cutter location and the tool orientation between the two kinematic chains, the error model is normally established using homogeneous transformation sciENcE aNd tEchNology matrices (HTM) [10,18,20], denavit-hartenberg (D-H) method [16], modified denavit-hartenberg (MD-H) method [19], or multi-body system (MBS) theory [31,32]. Among these different approaches, MBS theory, first proposed by Houston, has evolved into the best method for the modeling of geometric errors of machine tools because it provides for a simple and convenient method to describe the topological structure of an MBS [21].…”
Section: Volumetric Error Modelmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As shown in Eqs. (10) to (16), only 3 M , 5 M , 6 M and 7 M are related to the machining accuracy reliability of the machine center in Z-direction. As shown in Table 9, the failure probabilities of 3 M and 6 M are greater than the failure probabilities of 5 M and 7 M .…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…• Error due to the placement of locators [5][6][7][8] • Geometric/form defects of the workpiece [9][10][11][12] • Errors due to deformation of locators [13][14][15][16][17][18] • Kinematic defects/ machine tool errors [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26] • Misc. errors due to tool wear, heat, NC codes, etc… Fig.…”
Section: Positioning Errorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Jha and Kumar [9] used a generalized volumetric error model of a five-axis machine based on D-H transformation matrix for geometric error compensation, which improved the quality of the CAM profile creation experiment. Lei and Hsu [10] reported another test ball measurement device that helps directly measure the overall position errors of a five-axis machine tool.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%