Surface Qualification Toolpath Optimization for Hybrid Manufacturing
Hybrid manufacturing machine tools have great potential to revolutionize manufacturing by combining both additive manufacturing (AM) and subtractive manufacturing (SM) processes on the same machine tool. A prominent issue that can occur when going from AM to SM is that the SM process toolpath does n...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of Manufacturing and Materials Processing Vol. 5; no. 3; p. 94 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , |
Format: | Journal Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Basel
MDPI AG
01-09-2021
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Summary: | Hybrid manufacturing machine tools have great potential to revolutionize manufacturing by combining both additive manufacturing (AM) and subtractive manufacturing (SM) processes on the same machine tool. A prominent issue that can occur when going from AM to SM is that the SM process toolpath does not account for geometric discrepancies caused by the previous AM step, which leads to increased production times and tool wear, particularly when wire-based directed energy deposition (DED) is used as the AM process. This work discusses a methodology for approximating a part’s surface topology using on-machine contact probing and formulating an optimized SM toolpath using the surface topology approximation. Three different geometric surface approximations were used: triangular, trapezoidal, and a hybrid of both. SM toolpaths were created using each geometric approximation and assessed according to three objectives: reducing total machining time, reducing surface roughness, and reducing cutting force. Different prioritization scenarios of the optimization goals were also investigated. The optimal surface approximation that yielded the most improvement in the optimization was determined to be the hybrid surface topology approximation. Furthermore, it was shown that when the machining time or cutting force optimization goals were prioritized, there was little improvement in the other optimization goals. |
---|---|
Bibliography: | USDOE EE0008303; AC05-00OR22725 |
ISSN: | 2504-4494 2504-4494 |
DOI: | 10.3390/jmmp5030094 |