Machining Vibrations: Machining Vibrations, Also Called Chatter, Correspond To The Relative Movement Between The
Machining Vibrations: Machining Vibrations, Also Called Chatter, Correspond To The Relative Movement Between The
workpiece and the cutting tool. The vibrations result in waves on the machined surface.
This affects typical machining processes, such as turning, milling and drilling, and
atypical machining processes, such as grinding.
Machining vibrations
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality
standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this
article if you can. (September 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template
message)
Machining vibrations, also called chatter, correspond to the relative movement between the
workpiece and the cutting tool. The vibrations result in waves on the machined surface. This affects
typical machining processes, such as turning, milling and drilling, and atypical machining processes,
such as grinding.
A chatter mark is an irregular surface flaw left by a wheel that is out of true in grinding [1] or regular
mark left when turning a long piece on a lathe, due to machining vibrations.
As early as 1907, Frederick W. Taylor described machining vibrations as the most obscure and
delicate of all the problems facing the machinist, an observation still true today, as shown in many
publications on machining.
Mathematical models make it possible to simulate machining vibration quite accurately, but in
practice it is always difficult to avoid vibrations and there are basic rules for the machinist:
Rigidify the workpiece, the tool and the machine as much as possible
Choose the tool that will excite vibrations as little as possible (modifying angles, dimensions,
surface treatment, etc.)
Choose exciting frequencies that best limit the vibrations of the machining system (spindle
speed, number of teeth and relative positions, etc.)
Choose tools that incorporate vibration-damping technology.
Contents
[hide]
1Industrial context
o 1.1Link between high-speed machining and vibrations
o 1.2Different kinds of problems and their sources
2Laboratory research
o 2.1High-speed strategies
o 2.2Modeling
2.2.1Stability lobe theory
2.2.2Time domain numerical model
o 2.3Paths
3Industrial methods used to limit machining vibrations
o 3.1The classic approach
o 3.2Limitations of the available methods
4See also
5References
6External links
Industrial context[edit]
Link between high-speed machining and vibrations[edit]
The use of high speed machining (HSM) has enabled an increase in productivity and the realization
of workpieces that were impossible before, such as thin walled parts. Unfortunately, machine centers
are less rigid because of the very high dynamic movements. In many applications, i.e. long tools,
thin workpieces, the appearance of vibrations is the most limiting factor and compels the machinist
to reduce cutting speeds and feeds well below the capacities of machines or tools.
Different kinds of problems and their sources[edit]
Vibration problems generally result in noise, bad surface quality and sometimes tool breakage. The
main sources are of two types: forced vibrations and self-generated vibrations.
Forced vibrations are mainly generated by interrupted cutting (inherent to milling), runout, or
vibrations from outside the machine.
Self generated vibrations are related to the fact that the actual chip thickness depends also on
the relative position between tool and workpiece during the previous tooth passage. Thus
increasing vibrations may appear up to levels which can seriously degrade the machined
surface quality.
Laboratory research[edit]
High-speed strategies[edit]
Industrial and academic researchers [2][3][4][5] have widely studied machining vibration. Specific
strategies have been developed, especially for thin-walled work pieces, by alternating small
machining passes in order to avoid static and dynamic flexion of the walls. The length of the cutting
edge in contact with the workpiece is also often reduced in order to limit self-generated vibrations.
Modeling[edit]
The modeling of the cutting forces and vibrations, although not totally accurate, makes it possible to
simulate problematic machining and reduce unwanted effects of vibration.
Stability lobe theory[edit]
Multiplication of the models based on stability lobe theory, which makes it possible to find the best
spindle speed for machining, gives robust models for any kind of machining.
Time domain numerical model[edit]
Time domain simulations compute workpiece and tool position on very small time scales without
great sacrifice in accuracy of the instability process and of the surface modeled. These models need
more computing resources than stability lobe models, but give greater freedom (cutting laws, runout,
ploughing, finite element models). Time domain simulations are quite difficult to robustify, but a lot of
work is being done in this direction in the research laboratories.
Paths[edit]
In addition to stability lobe theory, the use of variable tool pitch often gives good results, at a
relatively low cost. These tools are increasingly proposed by tool manufacturers, although this is not
really compatible with a reduction in the number of tools used. Other research leads are also
promising, but often need major modifications to be practical in machining centers. Two kinds of
software are very promising: Time domain simulations which give not yet reliable prediction but
should progress, and vibration machining expert software, pragmatically based on knowledge and
rules.
See also[edit]
Balancing machine
Shock Pulse Method
References[edit]
1. Jump up^ http://www.toolingu.com/definition-250230-5546-chatter-mark.html
2. Jump up^ Altintas, Yusuf. Manufacturing Automation: Metal Cutting Mechanics, Machine Tool
Vibrations, and CNC Design. Cambridge University Press, 2000, ISBN 978-0-521-65973-4
3. Jump up^ Cheng, Kai. Machining Dynamics: Fundamentals, Applications and Practices. Springer,
2008, ISBN 978-1-84628-367-3
4. Jump up^ Schmitz, Tony L., Smith, Scott K. Machining Dynamics: Frequency Response to Improved
Productivity. Springer, 2008, ISBN 978-0-387-09644-5
5. Jump up^ Maekawa, Obikawa. Metal Machining: Theory and Applications. Butterworth-Heinemann,
2000, ISBN 978-0-340-69159-5
8.41 Describe the adverse effects of vibrations and chatter in machining.
The adverse effects of chatter are discussed in Section 8.11 and are summarized briefly below:
Poor surface finish, as shown in the right central region of Fig. 8.72 on p. 501.
Loss of dimensional accuracy of the workpiece.
Premature tool wear, chipping, and failure, a critical consideration with brittle tool materials,
such as ceramics, some carbides, and diamond.
Possible damage to the machine-tool components from excessive vibration and chatter.
Objectionable noise, particularly if it is of high frequency, such as the squeal heard when
turning brass on a lathe with a less rigid setup.
Related Topics:
If you want to use a high speed milling spindle to machine aggressively, then
information about chatter should be more than just background noise.
What is chatter?
It's not just vibration. In machining, chatter is the vibration that feeds on itself as the tool
moves across the part.
The tool, toolholder and spindle together will vibrate at some natural frequencya
frequency at which this assembly "naturally" wants to vibrate. In fact, the assembly is
likely to vibrate at more than one such natural frequency at the same time.
At the tool tip, this vibration leaves waves in the machined surface. The waviness can
cause the next cutting edge to experience a variable load. When that happens, this
variable load feeds the vibration that already exists, making it worse.
The finish of the part is affected; you might be able to see the chatter marks clearly. If
chatter persists, the life of the spindle may also be affected.
However, the more immediate and serious consequence relates to efficiency. Most
shops deal with chatter by setting their machining parameters low. Therefore, instead of
tool strength and spindle horsepower defining the metal removal rate, chatter becomes
the limiting factor that keeps the process from reaching its potential.
When milling at high spindle speeds, there is a potentially more promising option.
Certain limited ranges of spindle speed may be stable zones. Within these ranges, the
rate of cutting edge impacts synchronizes with a natural frequency of the system. The
chip load becomes level, so the cut is smooth. The depth of cut can therefore be
increased, and sometimes it can be dramatically increased.
A stable value of spindle rpm applies only to a particular combination of spindle, tool,
toolholder and tool overhang length. These four factors make up a complete assembly.
Every different assembly has to be evaluated separately; evaluating just the spindle is
not enough.
However, any particular spindle and tooling assembly is likely to have more than one
stable zone. Therefore, finding just one stable speed zone might not be enough.
Another, much faster speed may also be stable.
However, on a spindle that has a maximum speed of 10,000 rpm or more, the
potentially more effective solution becomes possible. It is likely that the chatter can be
addressed by finding some optimal speed that permits a much greater depth of cut.
It can be done experimentally, through test cutting. (See "Chatter Control for the Rest of
Us" for an example.) It also can be found through measurement, using a tap test. This
test involves tapping the tool with a delicate hammer and measuring the frequency
response with electronic equipment. The resulting graph of frequency response will
suggest the system's various stable speeds. There is even software available that
accomplishes something similar by listening to the cut with a microphone. (See "Sweet,
Sweet Spot .")
For every spindle, tool, toolholder and tool overhang combination that you want to use
effectively at high speeds, you should find the optimum spindle speed, along with the
corresponding depths of cut you have been able to achieve in the various materials your
shop runs.
Feed rate is not included here, because feed rate has less effect on chatter.
Make all of this speed and depth-of-cut data available to programmers. They should
then refer to this matrix of optimal cutting parameters whenever they use a particular
combination of machine, tooling and workpiece material.
No. The cut is stable because the cutting edge impacts are timed with the vibration. The
tool is still vibrating. Therefore, accuracy needs to be watched; the vibrating tool might
not place a machined surface precisely where expected. The phenomenon is called
"surface location error" (see "Understanding Surface Location Error ").
Tool tuning (see "The Overhang Effect ") might be thought of as the next step. The shop
that has mastered finding and using its optimal speeds might then consider modifying
those optimal speeds.
One way to do this is through the tool overhang length. By playing with this length, the
stable speed zones might be changed. It might even be possible to use all of a
machine's available spindle rpm effectively, by manipulating the tool overhang so that a
stable speed zone coincides with the spindle's maximum rpm.