A New Approach to the Estimation

of Cutting Dynamics Using Active

Min Chen
Carl R. Knospe
e-mail: crk4y@virginia.edu
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace
Engineering,
University of Virginia,
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Magnetic Bearings
A new experimental approach to identify the cutting dynamics in turning operations is
presented. This method treats the problem as a closed-loop gray-box identification prob-
lem and is based upon spectral analysis and least squares estimation techniques. An
active magnetic bearing is employed both to excite the system and to increase the tools
damping. The inherent time delay of the cutting process is removed in identification by
limiting the observation period to less than one revolution period of the workpiece. The
coefficients of several cutting tests were identified. The methodology was validated by
predicting the critical depth of cut from the identification results and comparing with the
experiment result measured from a cutting test. DOI: 10.1115/1.2034509

1 Introduction ing at a constitutive level is the regeneration mechanism: the in-

Throughout the past few decades, industrial interest in increas-
ing the metal removal rate MRR in machining has grown mark-
edly. High MRR typically requires both large depth of cut and
high spindle speed. Unfortunately, the achievable depth of cut is
often constrained by the onset of chatter, which may result in poor
surface finish, tool failure, and damage to the workpiece or ma-
chine itself. An empirical solution to avoid chatter is to stiffen
spindles by increasing diameters, which, on the other hand, in-
creases the difficulty for spindles to achieve high speed 1.
Active magnetic bearings AMBs have many advantages for
high speed machining. First, they permit a significant increase in
bearing surface speed, allowing larger diameter stiffer spindle
rotors at higher rotational speeds. Second, their active nature per-
mits greater spindle damping and the active suppression of chatter
2.
However, the advanced control design techniques for such chat-
ter amelioration require an accurate mathematical model of the
cutting dynamics. This paper presents a new approach to identify
the cutting process dynamics from experimental data using active
magnetic bearings. The ideas presented may be applied in other
machining contexts where actuators other than a magnetic bearing
are present.
1.1 Machining Process Machining is a process resulting
from the interaction of tool structure and cutting process. Model-
ing the machining process requires identification of both the tool
dynamics and the cutting dynamics. A model of the tool structure
can be determined by relatively easy and accurate tests without
conducting cutting. Unfortunately, modeling of the cutting process
is a much more difficult problem. For over six decades, research-
ers have studied the dynamics of metal removal, both theoretically
and experimentally. Theoretical approaches, including analytical,
mechanistic, and numerical methods 3, have produced qualita-
tive models explaining the effects of the various cutting param-
eters. However, these theoretical approaches require experimental
identification to determine constitutive parameters within the
model. Alternatively, models can be developed directly from ex-
perimental data, essentially a black box approach.
In this work, our attention is focused on turning. Methods simi-
lar to those presented here could be applied to other machining
operations. Central to understanding the cutting dynamics of turn-
Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division for publication in the
ASME JOURNAL OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING. Manuscript received
January 22, 2004; final revision received February 13, 2005. Review conducted by:
Y. C. Shin.
stantaneous depth of cut is determined by both the deflection of
the tool and the wavy surface left by the tools previous passage.
Therefore, the cutting process can be treated as two separate and
parallel dynamic systems in feedback interconnection with the
tool structure 4: inner modulation, which refers to the wave
cutting process, and outer modulation, which refers to the wave
removing 5 process. Figure 1 shows a block diagram of such a
machining process model.
In the figure, delay time T is equal to the period of one revolu-
tion in turning; outer modulation rt = yt T; and the disturbance
dt is a stochastic cutting force caused by chip breakage, machine
vibrations, and the workpieces hard spots. Previous analysis of
fundamental mechanics 57 as well as experimental investiga-
tions on cutting dynamics 810 indicate that Gi and Go may be
modeled by simple linear dynamics cutting force coefficients
DCFC models:
Gis = kis + kids, Gos = kos + kods 1
In DCFC models, all the coefficients are real scalars.
1.2 Cutting Dynamics Identification. Experimental identifi-
cation of the cutting process dynamics is made significantly more
difficult by the presence of the cutting process feedback loop.
Since this feedback is inherent to cutting, experiments must be
performed on system operating in closed-loop. In comparison to
open-loop identification, closed-loop identification is more in-
volved 11,12. Complicating this identification problem is the
very high order description that would be required to represent the
large delay in polynomial models in either discrete or continuous
domains. Finally, the correlation between inner and outer modu-
lations due to the delay, rt = yt T, also poses problems for
identification. This can be illustrated by the following example:
Consider the system
Fs = Gis Ys + Gos Rs 2
with measurements Ys , Rs, and Fs. Suppose that inputs Rs
and Ys are related by
Rs = eTsYs 3
It is obvious the system
Fs = Gis + Ls eTs Ys + Gos Ls Rs 4
will have the same input-output relation as the system in Eq. 2,
with an arbitrary transfer function Ls. Therefore, finding the true
transfer functions Gis and Gos from the measurements is es-
sentially impossible by standard black-box techniques. Special

Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering NOVEMBER 2005, Vol. 127 / 773
Copyright 2005 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 1 Machining process block diagram

methods must be employed to separate this correlation between

Rs and Ys in identification.
Several experimental methods have been developed for this
identification problem. Brussel 13 proposed a method in which
an exciter was used to arbitrarily adjust the phase angle between
the inner and outer modulations so that the correlation between
them was separated. Due to the variance of the spindle speed,
this approach requires sophisticated equipment to keep the phase
shift at a constant value. Ahn 14,15, Yang 8, and Cho 16 ships.
identified the cutting dynamics in time-domain modified autore-
gressive moving average vector MARMAV models. These meth-
ods also permit continuous evaluation of the cutting dynamics
over the frequency range of interest. Minis and his colleagues
9,17 conducted impact tests during cutting to identify the inner
modulation. Experimental data were only recorded in the first
revolution so that the outer modulations influence was removed.
Marchelek and Tomkow 10 applied the so-called frequency
tuning method to estimate both inner and outer modulation mod-
els from frequency response plots. However, the wavy responses
caused by the delay feedback loop prevented the estimation from
attaining high accuracy.
The proposed method is based on widely used spectral analysis
and least squares estimation techniques. This method divides ex-
periment data into small time segments, each of which is shorter
than one revolution period. As a result, the delay feedback effect
is removed as we shall show. This method is not sensitive to the
turning speed and does not require the direct measurement of
cutting force, yet can still achieve accurate results. Both inner and
outer modulation coefficients can be estimated. For the sake of
simplicity, only the cutting dynamics in the feed direction are
identified in this paper. Three-dimensional cutting processes can
be identified by the same approach without any difficulty.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In Sec. 2,
the identification method and its mathematical foundation are pre-
sented. Section 3 follows with a discussion of the method and a
comparison with other approaches. Sections 4 and 5 present our
Fig. 2 Identification block diagram
rn = yn NT 6
and NT = T. Figure 2 shows a block diagram of these relation-
Assume the dynamics Ge and Gt have been estimated from
separate open-loop identifications. The cutting dynamics identifi-
cation problem can be stated as follows:
Given known transfer functions Ge and Gt, measurement of
excitation vn and tool displacement yn, identify the cutting
coefficients in Eq. 1. We will assume for this problem that Eq.
6 is valid and disturbance dn is an independent sequence.
For this closed-loop, gray-box identification problem, our ap-
proach is indirect: first the closed-loop dynamics are identified
from correlation and spectral analysis of cutting signals, and then
the cutting coefficients are determined from the closed-loop esti-
mation results.
2.1 Spectral Analysis. For any stationary signals at and bt
observed at uniform intervals, the cross-correlation and cross
power spectral density are defined as 18
N
1
Rab = lim
N 2N + 1 n=N
anbn +
+
Pab = R
=
abe
j
7
Autocorrelation and autospectral density can be handled as spe-
cial cases of Eq. 7. Of course, random processes cannot be ob-
served over an infinite time in practice. With only a finite number

experimental setup for cutting dynamics identification and the of sampled observations, we must consider a truncated signal
identification results. In Sec. 6, the critical depth of cut is pre- an 0 n N 1
dicted based on the identified cutting dynamics, and the result is an = 8
0 otherwise
verified in a cutting test. Finally, a summary is found in Sec. 7.
The classic correlation estimator for truncated signals is
N1
2 Identification Method

1
Like most identification methods, the proposed approach re- Rab = anbn + 9
N n=0
quires an external input vt during cutting. In this work, an active

magnetic bearing, driven by a white noise generator, is employed and, as shown in 18, the expectation for this estimator is
to provide this input. The relationships for the identification prob- N
lem, based on discrete observations of signals, are N 1
ERab = W Rab, where W = N

fn = Giq1 yn + Goq1 rn + dn 0 otherwise

10
yn = Geq1 vn + Gtq1 fn 5
Equation 10 states that the correlation estimator on truncated
where q1 denotes the backward shift operator, q1un = un 1; signals is biased by a triangular Bartlett window W.
rn satisfies Finally, the spectral density estimator for truncated signals is

774 / Vol. 127, NOVEMBER 2005 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 3 Correlation between rn and yn for NT = 200 and N = 200
N1
Pab =
=N+1
Rabej 11
Based on the above preliminaries, we shall show that if the
number of observations N NT,
rn is uncorrelated to the external inputs vn and dn and
the correlation between rn and yn caused by the time
delay is reduced, and can be greatly diminished under cer-
tain conditions.
For the causal system shown in Fig. 2, the output yn is gov-
erned by external inputs and previous outputs:
yn = fv ,, vn,d ,,dn,y ,,yn 1 As this argument makes clear, the effect of a short observation
Then, the outer modulation, rn = yn NT, is a linear combi-
nation of the system inputs/outputs up to time n NT. Because
input vn is an independent noise sequence, vn NT
+ 1 , , vn + NT 1 are uncorrelated to any signal prior to time
n NT, and are therefore independent with respect to rn. Hence,
for N NT , rn is uncorrelated with vn N + 1 , , vn + N 1
and the expectation of the cross-correlation function ERrv
= 0 for N + 1 , N 1. The expectation of the cross-spectral
density is zero as well:
N1
EPrv =
=N+1
ERrvej = 0 13 where G denotes system frequency response, which can be
implying that vn and rn are independent with a short enough
period of observation. For the same reason, dn and rn are also
independent in this case.
As shown in Fig. 2, the correlation between rn and yn is
caused from two loops: one is the dynamics of Go and Gt, another
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
is the delay relationship of rn = yn NT. Shortening the obser-
vation period is helpful in weakening the correlation caused by the
delay. This is demonstrated in Fig. 3.
In Fig. 3a, the autocorrelation Ry has its peak value at
= 0. Since rn = yn NT, the cross-correlation Rry = Ry
+ NT. The Bartlett window is zero for N, as shown in Fig.
3b. As discussed previously, the correlation Rry is equal to the
product of Rry and the Bartlett window. When N NT, the
small weighting on the edge of the Bartlett window has the effect
of greatly reducing the delay correlation, as shown in Fig. 3c.
Obviously, reducing N results in lower delay correlation. Increas-
ing the damping of the tool will also reduce the delay correlation,
since the autocorrelation Ry will decrease more quickly with
increasing .
12 period is to break the delay feedback loop. Throughout the re-
mainder of this paper, we will assume N NT.
2.2 Inner Modulation Identification. Based on Eq. 5, the
observed system output yn can be written as
yn = Ge vn GtGi yn + Gt dn + GtGo rn 14
If the system is stable, the spectral relationship corresponding
to the input vn is
1 + GtGi Pyv = Ge Pv + Gt Pdv
+ GtGo Prv 15
obtained by replacing the backward shift operator q1 in the trans-
fer function by ej. To simplify the notation without causing
any ambiguity, we will omit the frequency variable in equations
in what follows. Since dn and rn are essentially uncorrelated
to vn , Pdv and Prv are negligible. Hence Eq. 15 can be
simplified as
NOVEMBER 2005, Vol. 127 / 775
 1 + GtGi Pyv = Ge Pv
where the influence of outer modulation disappears. Solving Eq.
16 at each frequency, the frequency response of the inner modu-
lation can be obtained. For DCFC estimation, substituting the cut-
ting dynamics model of Eq. 1 results in the relationship
1 + Gt kis + kid j Pyv = Ge Pv
Upon rearranging Eq. 17, the following equation is obtained:
Gt Pyv kis + Gt Pyv j kid = Ge Pv Pyv 18
This result may be expressed for a collection of discrete fre-
quencies in matrix form as
Xi bi = Y i
where
realGt1 Pyv1 realGt1 Pyv1 j1
imagGt1 Pyv1 imagGt1 Pyv1 j1
Xi
realGts Pyvs realGts Pyvs js effectively removed by using a short observation period in the
imagGts Pyvs imagGts Pyvs js of length L long enough, then to segment the data into K nonover-
realGe1 Pv1 Pyv1
imagGe1 Pv1 Pyv1
Y i: =
realGes Pvs Pyvs
imagGes Pvs Pyvs
bi = kis kidT
and 1 , , s are the frequency points considered. Note that the
above matrices are written in terms of real and imaginary parts so
as to guarantee that the resulting bi is real. The coefficient can
then be estimated using the standard least squares algorithm:
bi = kis kidT = XiTXi1XiTY i
The identified inner modulation frequency response is then
Gi = kis + jkid
2.3 Outer Modulation Identification. Outer modulation can
be identified in a similar manner as the inner modulation. Since
the delay loop between yn and rn is broken, the outer modu-
lation signal rn can be treated as an external input. The system
spectral density corresponding to input rn is
1 + GtGi Pyr = Ge Pvr + Gt Pdr + GtGo Pr
where both Pdr and Pvr are negligible. Therefore, Eq. 22
can be further simplified:
1 + GtGi Pyr = GtGo Pr
From Eq. 16, we obtain the relationship
1 + GtGi = Ge Pv/Pyv
which can be used to replace the unknown Gi in Eq. 23. Then
Ge Pv Pyr = GtGo Pr Pyv
where the only unknown variable is Go. By substituting Eq. 1
into Eq. 25, we obtain
Gt Pr Pyv kos + Gt Pr Pyv j kod = Ge Pv Pyr 26
Equation 26 can be transformed to the standard least squares
form, and then the outer modulation coefficients can be estimated
in the similar way as shown in Eqs. 1921.
776 / Vol. 127, NOVEMBER 2005
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
16 3 Discussion
3.1 Damping Requirement. As shown is Eq. 10, the esti-
mated correlation will be biased due to the finite observation pe-
riod. Consequently, the estimated spectral density will be essen-
tially biased as well. This situation becomes more adverse when
the observation period is short. For the estimates of Pyv , Pyr, and
17
Pr, we wish to limit the biases to an acceptable level. Generally,
increasing the tool structural damping will significantly decrease
the settling time of the system response, which results in the most
significant correlation amplitude at the center of the Bartlett win-
dow. Therefore, the bias on the estimation is reduced with higher
structural damping. A well-damped system also results in the de-
coupling of rn and yn. Such tool structural damping can be
19
achieved by applying appropriate feedback control via the active
magnetic bearing. Nevertheless, the requirement of significant
damping achieved by passive or active methods is one limitation
of the proposed identification approach.
3.2 Spectral Analysis Considerations. The analysis pre-
, sented indicates that the influences of the delayed feedback can be
spectral analysis. In practice, we would like to collect cutting data
lapping blocks of length N NT, where L = K N. After power
spectral density calculation on each block is done, average power
spectral density can be computed to reduce the impact of measure-
ment noise on estimation accuracy.
Since the frequency resolution of P is 1 / N, short obser-
vation period N will prohibit obtaining the frequency response in
details over the frequency range of interest. To circumvent this
problem, the spectral density calculation can be repeated several
times for several different values for N with each Ni NT. Then,
estimates at supplemental frequencies with a resolution of
1 / Ni can be obtained.
3.3 Excitations for Outer Modulation Identification. In the
spectral analysis for the inner modulation, the external excitation
input vn has a large frequency bandwidth essentially white.
20 However, because the delay feedback loop is broken by the
proposed method, external input vn does not affect the outer
modulation loop. The signal rn is used as the external input for
21 outer modulation dynamics identification. Consequently, the accu-
racy of the outer modulation identification will not be as great as
for the inner modulation since:
The bandwidth of rn depends on the bandwidth of the
closed loop system which may not be significantly high. To
remedy, least squares estimation points should be selected
within the systems pass band frequency range so as to re-
duce the influence of noise.
22
The signal rn must be calculated from the measurement of
the closed-loop system output yn which, in general, has
more noise than the measurement of the independent exter-
nal input vn used in inner modulation identification.
23
The coupling between yn and rn due to the time delay,
although greatly reduced, cannot be completely removed by
the proposed approach.
24
3.4 Comparison With Other Methods. A comparison be-
tween the proposed approach and previous identification methods
25 8,9,1317 is provided here:
Closed-Loop Identification. The previous methods have em-
ployed direct identification techniques, which treat the input-
output data as if it was obtained from open-loop experiments. It is
well known that open-loop methods in closed-loop identification
result in biased estimation, and the success greatly depends on
whether the power spectral density of the excitation signals domi-
nates that of the noise signals 20. Although Yang 8 identified
the cutting coefficients in closed-loop form, they used a third-
Transactions of the ASME
 Fig. 4 Photograph of the experiment test rig showing tool,
front and rear platforms, flexures, and active magnetic bearing
order model for delay feedback which will typically be insuffi-
cient to obtain accurate estimation. Using a higher order model for
delay with their method may be impractical as it will greatly in-
crease the computational complexity. The proposed method is an
indirect approach, where system noise, in theory, will not bias the
estimation result.
Separation of Modulations. To simplify identification, most of
the prior methods have employed special techniques to decouple
the inner and outer modulations, such as cutting a volute of thread
10, recording the cutting data only during the first revolution of
cutting 9, or carefully tuning the phase shift between the two
modulations 13. The proposed approach divides the data into
short blocks to break the delay feedback loop. As a result, cutting
experiments can be conducted in normal cutting conditions, and
cutting data from many revolutions not just the first may be
used. Long data records may be employed to increase estimation
accuracy.
Modeling Development. Some prior methods 8,9,13 only fit
the cutting dynamics at the resonance or several specific frequen-
cies. The proposed method determines cutting coefficient esti-
mates so as to fit many points over the entire frequency range of
interest. The use of a greater range of frequencies should reduce
the estimation errors incurred.
Experiment Setup. For most prior identification approaches, dy-
namometers are necessary for the direct measurement of cutting
forces. In the proposed approach direct force measurement is not
necessary. To achieve the higher damping required for the pro-
posed method, however, active control would typically be
required.
Sensitivity to Workpiece Speed. Often lathe speed and hence
delay may vary during operation, due to load variations and gear/
Fig. 6 Comparison between free tool vibration and PID controlled tool vibration;
data from impact tests
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 5 Experimental arrangement
belt dynamics. The proposed approach requires only that a lower
bound to the delay related to the upper bound of the speed be
known so as to set the observation period. Moreover, the outer
modulation may be calculated based on real-time measurement of
lathe speed. Therefore, the estimation results are insensitive to
variations in lathe speed.
4 Test Setup
A specially designed test rig was employed to examine the pro-
posed identification method. It consists of two platforms mounted
on flexures. On the front platform the cutting tool and a one-axis
accelerometer are mounted. The rear platform is driven by a mag-
netic bearing. The platforms are connected by a leaf spring. The
flexures allow rectilinear motion only in the feed direction. This
one degree of freedom configuration simplifies the identification
problem for the purpose of this paper. It should be noted that the
techniques proposed may be readily used for multiple degree-of-
freedom systems. Figure 4 is a photograph providing a close-up
view of the test rig. A schematic illustration of the experimental
equipment is shown in Fig. 5.
The magnetic bearing used is an eight-pole radial stator. Two
groups of coils generate opposing attracting forces along the feed
direction. The bearing accomplishes two tasks important for the
identification: providing the excitation for identification, and in-
creasing the tool structural damping. Figure 6 shows that the PID
controller significantly increases the damping and decreases the
settling time of the tool vibration. Therefore, more accurate cut-
ting dynamics estimates can be obtained on the controlled tool
structure.
NOVEMBER 2005, Vol. 127 / 777
 Table 1 Experiment test conditions was carried out in preprocessing the recorded cutting signals.
First, tool displacement yn was calculated from tool acceleration
Lathe speed 702 2 RPM nominal delay 0.085 s by double integration. The inaccurate low-frequency data were
feed rate 0.076 mm/ rev 0.0030 in. / rev removed by a high-pass filter. Then, the outer modulation rn was
coolant none
computed from the displacement yn and measured lathe speed.
Workpiece material Aluminum 6061, T6 Finally, yn , rn, and the excitation vn were divided into short
heat treatment none segments with observation period less than 0.085 s.
shape cylinder For each depth of cut, the four cutting coefficients as defined in
diameter 41 mm 1.6 in.
depth of cut 0.152.06 mm 0.006 0.081 in. Eq. 1 were estimated. Figure 7 shows these results, along with
95% confidence intervals for the inner modulation coefficients
Tool insert Kennametal, CNMG 1204MG, KC730 computed via the method introduced in the Appendix. The con-
rake angle 5 degree fidence interval for the outer modulation estimates are difficult to
clearance angle 10 degree obtain, since estimation may be biased by the residual correlation
nose radius 0.8 mm 1 / 32 in.
between rt and yt.
The test with zero depth of cut was an open loop test, without
contact between workpiece and tool. The identified coefficients
An optical sensor is used to measure the lathe speed as required are essentially zero, which is consistent with the nonexistent cut-
for computation of the outer modulation. Since cutting coeffi- ting force in this case. The cutting force becomes significant as
cients may depend on the lathe speed, a feedback controller was soon as the tool contacts the workpiece, due to the existence of
employed to regulate the lathe speed via a variable frequency ploughing force acting on the tool nose region. This phenomenon
drive VFD. As a result, the lathe can be operated at any specified can be confirmed by the apparent jump in the identified inner
speed with an accuracy of 2 rpm. Both AMB control and the cutting stiffness kis between zero and very small depth of cut. The
lathe speed control algorithms are implemented by a dSPACE
identification results show that the relationship of kis to depth of
1103 digital controller. The white noise excitation, lathe speed,
cut is essentially linear for values greater than 0.8 mm. The be-
and tool acceleration signals are recorded simultaneously by an
havior below 0.8 mm can be understood when considering the
HP 3566A analyzer at a sampling rate of 2048 Hz.
round edge of the tool nose 21,22. Results for the inner modu-
5 Experiment Results lation damping coefficients show that the process damping kid is
essentially zero for all cut depths.
A series of cutting experiments for ten different depths of cut Although the identification of the outer modulation dynamics
were performed on the test rig. The objective of identification was cannot be expected to be as accurate as that for the inner modu-
to find the relationship between cutting coefficients and depth of lation as discussed in Sec. 3.3, the identified stiffness coefficient
cut. The test conditions are given in Table 1.
Cutting was stable during all tests, and no chatter was detected. kos shows a linear relationship to depth of cut. The identified
Each cutting test lasted more than 60 s. The following procedure process damping kod shows considerably greater scatter than that

Fig. 7 Identification results: dynamic cutting coefficients vs. depth of cut. The
cross marks x are the estimated values, and the bars represent 95% confidence
intervals.

778 / Vol. 127, NOVEMBER 2005 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Fig. 8 Nyquist contour for Gt1 eTs
in kid. However, this scatter is, indeed, small and due to the effect
of noise. The extimate of kod may best be considered as zero.
The following conclusions can be drawn from the results:
1. In general, the stiffness coefficients for inner and outer
modulations are equal, and both are linear functions of depth
of cut.
2. The damping coefficients for inner and outer modulations
are small and are likely independent of depth of cut.
Not surprisingly, these conclusions coincide with those of pre-
vious investigators 1,4,79.
The identified cutting process model for depth of cut values
above 0.8 mm may be represented as
Gi = Go = kis = 378 h 0.35 N/mm2 27
where h is the depth of cut in mm. The 95% confidence interval
for this estimation is 70.4 N / mm2.
6 Stability Boundary Prediction and Verification
The method employed in 17 for predicting critical depth of
cut is used here to verify the accuracy of the identified model in
Eq. 27. Referring to the cutting process shown in Fig. 1, the
characteristic equation of the closed loop is
1 + GtGi GtGoeTs = 0 28
Using the identified model, this characteristic equation can be
simplified as
1 + kisGt1 eTs = 0 29
The Nyquist stability criterion 23 may then be used to deter-
mine the critical cutting stiffness for 702 RPM. Figure 8 shows
that the Nyquist contour for the system Gt1 eTs intersects the
negative real axis at 0.0011. Therefore, the critical cutting stiff-
ness can be calculated as kis = 1 / 0.0011= 910 N / mm. Applying
Eq. 27, the critical depth of cut can be predicted to be
2.76 0.19 mm.
Experimental determination of the critical depth of cut was con-
ducted by cutting a conical workpiece with the same tool, lathe
speed, and feed rate used previously. Due to the conical shape, the
depth of cut started small and increased continuously during cut-
ting. At first, cutting was stable but then chatter occurred. Figure 9
shows the tool acceleration in the test and the corresponding real-
time depth of cut. The critical depth of cut was found to be 2.65
mm, which was within the predicted range 2.47, 2.95 and quite
close 4% to the nominal estimate of 2.76 mm.
7 Summary
A new approach for identifying cutting coefficients in turning
has been presented. This approach incorporates the widely ac-
cepted DCFC model and allows identification of both the inner
and outer modulation coefficients. For successful implementation,
this approach requires that the tool be significantly damped. This
Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
Fig. 9 Experiment validation of the chatter prediction
would most likely necessitate active control of tool-structure vi-
bration. To illustrate the method, a series of cutting experiments
was conducted, and the cutting coefficients were identified for
various depths of cut. Satisfactory accuracy was confirmed by
successfully predicting the critical depth of cut.
Because this approach only requires a short observation period,
it can be readily extended to online cutting parameters identifica-
tion and monitoring tool wear.
Nomenclature
uniform sampling interval,
d cutting disturbance forces, N
f dynamic cutting force acting in tool feed direc-
tion, N
Ge dynamics from excitation to tool displacement
Gt dynamics from cutting force to tool
displacement
Gi inner modulation dynamics
Go outer modulation dynamics
kis , kid inner modulation stiffness and process damp-
ing coefficients
kos , kod outer modulation stiffness and process damp-
ing coefficients
N number of samples in one observation
NT number of samples in one workpiece
revolution
r tool displacement left on the workpiece on
tools previous pass, mm
T delay time,
v excitation signals
y tool displacement in tool feed direction, mm
Appendix: Calculation of Confidence Intervals for Co-
efficient Estimates
In least squares estimation, it is assumed that the data that make
up matrices X and Y see Eq. 19 are observed from stationary
processes. In this case, the variances of X and Y will be included
in the residual. However, in the proposed two-step identification
approach, the elements within X and Y are calculated using the
averaged spectral density estimates and frequency response esti-
mates for the nominal systems. The variances for the averaged or
nominal variables are smaller than those for the true variables.
Therefore, least squares estimation may underestimate the vari-
ance of residuals, as well as the confidence intervals. This prob-
lem can be compensated by introducing another error term in the
estimation.
Assume observations X and Y satisfy
X X X, Y Y Y A1
Then, the least squares method based on averaged observation
is
NOVEMBER 2005, Vol. 127 / 779
 X b = Y b X Y = Y + e1 A2 standard variance. For instance, k 2 k , k + 2 k represents a 95%
confidence interval.
where e1 denotes the error caused by using averaged observations
in the estimation. If X is not correlated to Y, then
2e1 = b22 X
2
+ Y
2
A3 References
1 Smith, S., and Tlusty, J., 1990, Update on High-speed Milling Dynamics,
where b2 denotes the two-norm of the vector b. ASME J. Eng. Ind., 112, pp. 142149.
Combining with the least squares residuals, e2 = Y X b, the 2 Fittro, R. L., and Knospe, C. R., 1998, -Synthesis Control Design Applied to
total error variance will be a High Speed Machining Spindle With Active Magnetic Bearing, 6th Inter-
national Symposia on Magnetic Bearings, Cambridge, MA, USA, pp. 449458.
2e = 2e1 + 2e2 A4 3 Ehmann, K., Kapoor, S., Devor, R., and Lazoglu, I., 1997, Machining Process
Modeling: A Review, ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 119, pp. 655663.
4 Merritt, H. E, 1965, Theory of Self-excited Machine-tool Chatter, Contribu-
Using this compensated error variance 2e , comprehensive con- tion to Machine-tool Chatter Research-1, Trans. ASME, 87, pp. 447455.
fidence intervals can be calculated by the method discussed in 5 Tlusty, J., 1978, Analysis of the State of Research in Cutting Dynamics,
Sec. 3.3. CIRP Ann., 27, pp. 583589.
The following will show the estimation of e1 for the inner 6 Wu, D. W., and Liu, C. R., 1985, An Analytical Model of Cutting Dynamics.
Part 1: Model Building, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 107, pp. 107111.
modulation identification. Let us define the boundaries for the 7 Sisson, T. R., and Kegg, R. L., 1969, An Explanation of Low-speed Chatter
nominal transfer function G as G, and the observed Effects, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 91, pp. 951558.
spectral density range around the averaged power spectral density 8 Yang, X., and Eman, K., 1985, Analysis of Three-dimensional Cutting Pro-
cess Dynamic, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 107, pp. 336342.
P is P. Equation 17 can be rewritten as 9 Minis, I., Magrab, E., and Pandelidis, I., 1990, Improved Methods for the
Prediction of Chatter in Turning, Part 2: Determination of Cutting Process
1 + Gt Gt kis + kid j Pyv Pyv Parameters, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 112, pp. 2127.
10 Marchelek, K., and Tomkow, J., 1993, Experimental Investigations in Cutting
= Ge Ge Pv Pv A5 Dynamics, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 115, pp. 508-511.
11 Gustavsson, I., Ljung, L., and Soderstrom, T., 1977, Survey Paper: Identifi-
Ignoring the second-order error terms, we obtain cation Processes in Closed Loop, Identifiability and Accuracy Aspects, Auto-
matica, 13, pp. 5975.
X = PyvGt GtPyv 12 Forssell, U. and Ljung, L., 1999, Closed-loop Identification Revisited, Au-
tomatica, 35, pp. 12151241.
Y = PvGe GePv Pyv A6 13 Van Brussel, H., and Vanherck, P., 1971, A New Method for the Determina-
tion of the Dynamics Cutting Coefficient, 12th MTFR Conference, Manches-
Assuming that all s are independent with respect to each ter.
other, that every satisfies normal distribution with zero mean, 14 Ahn, T., and Eman, K., 1985, Cutting Dynamics Identification by Dynamics
Data System DDS Modeling Approach, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 107, pp. 91
and that the variance of is known, the combined variance can be 94.
calculated 24 as 15 Ahn, T., and Eman, K., 1987, Determination of Inner and Outer Modulation
Dynamics in Orthogonal Cutting, ASME J. Eng. Ind., 109, pp. 275280.
X
2
= Pyv2G
2
+ Gt22Py 16 Cho, D., and Eman, K., 1990, In-Process Identification of the Milling Opera-
t v
tion, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 303, pp. 325337.
17 Minis, I., Magrab, E., and Pandelidis, I., 1990, Improved Methods for the
Y
2
= Pv2G
2
+ Ge22P + 2Py A7 Prediction of Chatter in Turning, Part 3: A Generalized Linear Theory, ASME
e v v
J. Eng. Ind., 112, pp. 2835.
Finally, according to Eq. A3, the variance of e1 can be written 18 Kay, S. M., 1988, Modern Spectrum Estimation: Theory and Application,
as Prentice-Hall, Engle wood Cliffs, NJ.
19 Bowerman, B., and OConnell, R., 1990, Linear Statistical ModelsAn Ap-
2e1 = kis + kid j2X
2
+ Y
2
A8 plied Approach, 2nd ed., PWS-KENT Publishing Company, Pacific Grove,
CA.
Although the values of kis and kid are unknown at this point, an 20 Karimi, A., and Landau, I., 1998, Comparison of the Closed-loop Identifica-
tion Methods in Terms of the Bias Distribution, Syst. Control Lett., 34, pp.
estimate can be used in Eq. A8. 159167.
The standard variance of the estimated coefficients can be com- 21 Young, T., Mathew, P, and Oxley, P., 1987, Allowing for Nose Radius Effects
puted by in Predicting the Chip Flow Direction and Cutting Forces in Bar Turning,
Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part C: Mech. Eng. Sci., 120, pp. 213226.
ks = e C11, kd = e C22 A9 22 Boothroyd, G., and Knight, A., 1989, Fundamental of Machining and Machine
Tools, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New york.
where = Y Y b X Y / S 2, S is the number of frequency
2 T T T 23 Ogata, K., 1970, Modern Control Engineering, Prentice-Hall, Englewood
Cliffs, NJ.
points, and Cii are the diagonal elements of the XTX1 matrix. 24 Ljung, L., 1987, System Identification-Theory for the User, Prentice-Hall,
The confidence interval in this case can be calculated based on the Englewood Cliffs, NJ.

780 / Vol. 127, NOVEMBER 2005 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 11/14/2017 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use