The Influence of Automated Machining Strategy on Geometric Deviations of Machined Surfaces

This paper deals with various automated milling strategies and their influence on the accuracy of produced parts. Among the most important factors for surface quality is the automated milling strategy. Milling strategies were generated from two different programs, CAM system SolidCAM, with the help...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Applied sciences Vol. 11; no. 5; p. 2353
Main Authors: Varga, Ján, Tóth, Teodor, Frankovský, Peter, Dulebová, Ľudmila, Spišák, Emil, Zajačko, Ivan, Živčák, Jozef
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: Basel MDPI AG 01-03-2021
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This paper deals with various automated milling strategies and their influence on the accuracy of produced parts. Among the most important factors for surface quality is the automated milling strategy. Milling strategies were generated from two different programs, CAM system SolidCAM, with the help of workshop programming in the control system Heidenhain TNC 426. In the first step, simulations of different toolpaths were conducted. Using geometric tolerance is becoming increasingly important in robotized production, but its proper application requires a deeper understanding. This article presents the measurement of selected planes of robotized production to evaluate their flatness, parallelism and perpendicularity deviations after milling on the coordinate measuring machine Carl Zeiss Contura G2. Total average deviations, including all geometric tolerances, were 0.020 mm for SolidCAM and 0.016 mm for Heidenhain TNC 426. The result is significantly affected by the flatness of measured planes, where the overlap parameter of the tools has a significant impact on the flatness of the surface. With interchangeable cutter plate tools, it is better to use higher overlap to achieve better flatness. There is a significant difference in production time, with SolidCAM 25 min and 30 s, and Heidenhain 48 min and 19 s. In accordance with these findings, the SolidCAM system is more suitable for production.
ISSN:2076-3417
2076-3417
DOI:10.3390/app11052353