Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Available ScienceDirect
online at www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Manufacturing 48 (2020) 154–158

48th SME North American Manufacturing Research Conference, NAMRC 48, Ohio, USA
48th SME North American Manufacturing Research Conference, NAMRC 48, Ohio, USA
48th SME North American Manufacturing Research Conference, NAMRC 48, Ohio, USA
48th SME North American
Identification Manufacturing
of industrial Research
robot Conference,response
frequency NAMRC 48function
(Cancelled due
fortorobotic
COVID-19)
Identification of industrial robot frequency response function for robotic
Identification ofmilling
industrial robot frequency response function for robotic
milling using
using operational
operational modal
modal analysis
analysis
milling using operational
a
modal analysis
a
Vinh Nguyena*, Shreyes N. Melkotea
Vinh Nguyena*, Shreyes N. Melkotea
a VinhEngineering,
George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical *, Shreyes
NguyenGeorgia N. Melkote
Institute of Technology, 801 Ferst Drive, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
George
George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 801 Ferst Drive, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
a

George W. Woodruff School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, 801 Ferst Drive, Atlanta, Georgia, USA
a
George
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-757-952-5221; E-mail address: vnguyen43@gatech.edu
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-757-952-5221; E-mail address: vnguyen43@gatech.edu
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-757-952-5221; E-mail address: vnguyen43@gatech.edu

Abstract
Abstract
Abstract
Impact hammer experiments are typically used for identifying the Frequency Response Function (FRF) of six-degree-of-freedom (6-dof)
Impact hammer
industrial robots experiments
for machining areapplications.
typically used for identifying
However, the modal theproperties
FrequencyofResponse Functionrobots
6-dof industrial (FRF)change
of six-degree-of-freedom
as a function of robot (6-dof)
arm
Impact hammer
industrial robots experiments
for machining are typically used for identifying the FrequencyofResponse Functionrobots
(FRF) of six-degree-of-freedom (6-dof)
configuration. Hence, describing applications. However,
the robot’s modal the modal
parameters withinproperties
its workspace6-dof industrial
requires off-line impactchange
hammer as experiments
a function of robot
performed armat
industrial robots for machining
configuration. applications. However, the modal properties of 6-dof industrial robots
impactchange as experiments
a function of robot arm
discrete robot Hence, describing
end effector the robot’s
positions, whichmodal parameters
are costly within
and time its workspace
consuming. requires
Instead, it is off-line
more efficient hammer
to calculate the robotperformed
FRF using at
configuration.
discrete robot Hence, describing the robot’s
end effector modal parameters within its workspace requires
it is off-line impact hammer experiments
robotperformed at
Operational Modal Analysispositions,
(OMA), awhich methodarethat
costly and data
utilizes time consuming.
acquired Instead,
during the actual more efficient
machining to calculate
process. This paperthe presentsFRF using
an OMA
discrete robot
Operational end effector
Modal Analysis positions,
(OMA), awhich
methodarethat
costly and data
utilizes timeacquired
consuming. Instead,
during the it is machining
actual more efficient to calculate
process. This the presents
paper robot FRFan using
OMA
approach to identify the robot FRF from measured milling forces and robot tool tip vibrations. Analysis of the milling process data reveal that
Operational
approachforces Modal Analysis
to identify the robot(OMA), a method that utilizesforces
data acquiredrobotduring thevibrations.
actual machining process. This paper presents an OMA
periodic produced in theFRF from
milling measured
process are milling
accompanied by andbackground tool tip
white noise thatAnalysis
induce of the milling
broadband process
excitation data reveal
across that
the robot
approach
periodic to identify
forces the robot
produced in theFRF fromprocess
milling measured
are milling forces by
accompanied andbackground
robot tool tip vibrations.
white noise Analysis
that induce of the milling
broadband processacross
excitation data reveal
the that
robot
structure’s frequency spectrum. Hence, the tool tip vibration signal contains the signature of the structure’s free response that enables the use of
periodic forces
structure’s produced
frequency in the Hence,
spectrum. milling the
process
tool arevibration
tip accompaniedsignalbyis background
contains white noise thatstructure’s
induce broadband excitationenables
across theuse
robot
OMA to estimate the robot’s FRF. The FRF calculated using OMA shown the signature
to be in good of the
agreement free response
with results obtainedthat
from impactthe hammerof
structure’s
OMA to frequency
estimate the spectrum.
robot’s FRF.Hence,
The the tool
FRF tip vibration
calculated using signal is
OMA contains
shown the
to signature
be in good of the structure’s
agreement with free response
results obtained that
fromenables
impactthe use of
hammer
experiments.
OMA to estimate the robot’s FRF. The FRF calculated using OMA is shown to be in good agreement with results obtained from impact hammer
experiments.
experiments.
© 2019 The Authors, Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2019
© 2020The TheAuthors,
Authors. Published by Elsevier
B.V. B.V.
Peer review under thePublished by Elsevier
responsibility of the scientific committee of NAMRI/SME
This
© is The
2019
Peer an open
review access
Authors,
under articleby
thePublished under
responsibility thescientific
Elsevier
of the CC
B.V.BY-NC-ND
committeelicense (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
of NAMRI/SME
Peer-review
Peer review under
under theresponsibility
responsibility ofthe
of thescientific
Scientific Committee
committee of of the NAMRI/SME.
NAMRI/SME
Keywords: Operational Modal Analysis; Robotic Milling; Cutting Forces
Keywords: Operational Modal Analysis; Robotic Milling; Cutting Forces
Keywords: Operational Modal Analysis; Robotic Milling; Cutting Forces

1. Introduction Consequently, to describe the robot’s modal parameters

1. Introduction Consequently,
throughout its to describe the
workspace, the modal
robot’s properties
modal parameters
must be
1. Introduction Consequently,
throughout to describe the the modal
robot’s properties
modal parameters
There is growing interest in using six-degree-of-freedom (6- sampled at multiple discrete arm configurationsmust
its workspace, be
in the
throughout
sampled at itsmultiple
workspace, the arm
discrete modalconfigurations
properties mustin be
the
dof)There is growing
industrial robotsinterest in using machining
for aerospace six-degree-of-freedom
operations due (6- workspace. Measurements of the robot’s dynamic behavior for
There is growing interest in using machining
six-degree-of-freedomdue (6- sampled
workspace. at multiple discrete arm configurations in the
dof) industrial
to their flexibilityrobots
of useforand
aerospace
larger work volumeoperations
[1]. In milling a given armMeasurements
configuration are of the robot’s
usually dynamicusing
performed behavior for
off-line
dof) industrial robots forand
aerospace machining operations due workspace.
aimpact armMeasurements
given hammerconfiguration of the robot’s dynamicusing
behavior for
to their flexibility of use larger work volume [1].
operations that are characterized by large periodic forces, the In milling tests that are usually
apply performed
an impulse excitationoff-line
to the
to their flexibility
that areofanduse and largerby work volume [1].forces,
In milling aimpact
given hammer
arm configuration are usually performed using off-line
operations
tool tip vibrations, characterized large
the resulting surface periodic
profile accuracy the
of robot end effectortests
usingthat apply an impulse
an instrumented modalexcitation to the
impact hammer
operations
tool tip that
vibrations,are characterized
and the by
resulting large
surface periodic
profile forces,
accuracy the
of impact
robot endhammer
effector tests
usingthat
an apply an
instrumented impulse
modal excitation
impact to the
hammer
the machined feature, are influenced by the modal vibration and the corresponding acceleration response is measured. A
tool
the tip vibrations,
machined and the
are resulting surface profile accuracy of robot endcorresponding
effector using acceleration
an instrumented modal is
impact hammer
properties of feature,
the robot influenced by the
arm. Therefore, modal vibration
determining the and the response measured.
force impulse serves as a broadband excitation, and therefore A
the machined
properties of feature,
the are influenced
robot arm. by the determining
Therefore, modal vibration the and
forcethe corresponding
impulse serves as acceleration
a broadband response is and
excitation, measured. A
therefore
appropriate machining conditions to achieve the required part excites structural modes across all frequencies. A system
properties of the robot arm. Therefore, determining the force impulse
excites serves
structural as
modes a broadband
across excitation,
allcan
frequencies.and therefore
appropriate
accuracy andmachining conditions
surface finish requiresto knowledge
achieve the required
of part
the robot’s Frequency Response Function (FRF) be computedAfromsystem
the
appropriate
accuracy andmachining
surface conditions
finish requiresto knowledge
achieve the of
required
the part
robot’s excites
Frequencystructural
Response modes across allcan
frequencies.
be computedAfromsystem
modal properties. However, the modal parameters of a 6-dof displacement (twice Function
integrated (FRF)
from acceleration) the
and the
accuracy
modal and surface
properties.
industrial
finish requires
robot areHowever,
known to the varymodal
knowledge of the
withinparameters
the workspaceof arobot’s
6-dof
[2, 3].
Frequency
displacementResponse
(twice Function
integrated (FRF)
fromcanacceleration)
be computed from
impulse force measurements [4]. However, conducting off-line and the
the
modal properties.
industrial robot areHowever,
known to the varymodal
withinparameters
the workspaceof a [2,
6-dof
3]. displacement (twice integrated
impulse force measurements from acceleration)
[4]. However, conductingand the
off-line
industrial robot are known to vary within the workspace [2, 3]. impulse force measurements [4]. However, conducting off-line

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-757-952-5221.

* Corresponding
E-mail address:author. Tel.: +1-757-952-5221.
vnguyen43@gatech.edu
* Corresponding
E-mail address:author. Tel.: +1-757-952-5221.
vnguyen43@gatech.edu
E-mail address: vnguyen43@gatech.edu
2351-9789 © 2019 The Authors, Published by Elsevier B.V.
2351-9789 ©2019
2351-9789
2020 The Authors. Published byB.V.
Elsevier B.V.
Peer review©under Theresponsibility
the Authors, Published by Elsevier
of the scientific
Thisreview
is an©under
2351-9789
Peer open access
2019the
The article
Authors, under
Published
responsibility by CCcommittee
theElsevier
of the scientific BY-NC-ND of NAMRI/SME
license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
B.V. of NAMRI/SME
committee
Peer-review
Peer under
review under responsibility
the responsibility of scientific
of the the Scientific Committee
committee of the NAMRI/SME.
of NAMRI/SME
10.1016/j.promfg.2020.05.032
 Vinh Nguyen et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 48 (2020) 154–158
2 V. Nguyen, et al./ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000
impact hammer tests over the entire workspace of the robot can
be tedious and time-consuming. Hence, identifying the FRF
from process data gathered from the milling operation can aid
in reducing robot downtime and associated costs.
Operational Modal Analysis (OMA) involves identifying a
structure’s modal properties using vibration data obtained
under operating conditions e.g., the milling process. For
instance, Suzuki et al. [5] calculated the transfer function of a
CNC machine tool structure by inverse analysis of self-excited
regenerative chatter. In addition, Wan et al. [6] used OMA to
identify the process damping coefficients used in regenerative
chatter models. However, performing OMA under chatter
conditions is limited to cutting conditions that can induce
chatter. Note that stable milling is characterized by periodic
forces, which theoretically only excite the structure at
harmonics of the spindle speed (as opposed to the entire
frequency spectrum). Therefore, researchers have utilized
random forced excitation for OMA. Similar to impulses,
random forcing functions permit broadband excitation [7].
Poddar et al. [8] demonstrated a workpiece design that resulted
in random force excitation in face milling operations. In
addition, Li et al. [9] programmed the feed drives to induce
random excitation in the machining process. Another method to
introduce random excitation is to randomly change cutting
parameters during the cutting operation [10, 11]. However,
modifying the milling process to produce random excitation
undermines the purpose of using OMA under normal operating
conditions. Alternatively, OMA under stable milling operations
without random excitation have been demonstrated to only
identify the natural frequency of the structure [12, 13], which is
insufficient for optimal control and for predicting stable
vibrations because identification of the natural frequency does
not specify the amplitude of vibrations. Hence, OMA methods
that have been demonstrated in CNC milling operations are
inadequate for robotic milling applications.
Stable milling operations consist of both periodic content
and random background noise [14, 15]. In addition, application
of OMA in fields outside manufacturing, such as in vibrating
civil structures [16], in-flight helicopters [17], and wind
turbines [18], have shown that forces containing both types of
signals can generate broadband excitation of the structures,
which enables estimation of FRFs. Because 6-dof industrial
robots are significantly more compliant than their CNC
machine tool counterparts, the background random noise can
excite the robot’s natural modes of vibration to measureable
levels suitable for OMA. Note that implementing OMA under
stable milling conditions to identify the complete FRF has not
been demonstrated in prior literature for both CNC and robotic
milling operations. Thus, in this paper, we propose using OMA
to identify the modal parameters of a 6-dof industrial robot
performing a stable milling operation. First, milling
experiments used to collect vibration and force data are
described. Subsequently, OMA is used to determine the FRF of
the robot. The OMA-based FRF is then compared to the FRF
determined from impact hammer tests. A discussion of the level
of stochastic background noise in the measured force signal is
presented. The paper concludes with a discussion of the major
findings and future work.
155
2. Milling Experiments
This section describes the robotic milling experiments
performed on a KUKA KR500-3 6-dof industrial robot.
2.1. Experimental Setup
Figure 1 shows the measurement systems used to acquire
milling process data. A 6-dof laser tracker (Leica AT960 with
T-MAC) and a robot flange-mounted strain gauge based
force/torque sensor (ATI Omega 160) were used to measure the
instantaneous robot vibrations and the milling forces,
respectively, in the X, Y, and Z directions. The resolutions of
the laser tracker and force sensor are 15 μm [19] and 0.75 N
[20], respectively. It is assumed that the compliance of the
robot dominates the system vibrations. Therefore, a constant
matrix transformation was applied to the vibrations measured
by the laser tracker at the location of the T-MAC, which was
mounted to the side of the spindle as seen in Fig. 1, to calculate
the tool tip vibrations. In addition, the tool-spindle structure
was assumed to be completely rigid, and therefore the forces
measured by the force sensor are assumed to be those
experienced by the tool tip. In addition, the milling forces
measured by the force/torque sensor were inverse filtered using
the approach presented in prior work to recover the undistorted
milling forces [21]. A Beckhoff TwinCAT real-time
programming environment was used to record the vibration and
force time series signals at a sampling frequency of 1 kHz.
Fig. 1. View of robot end effector showing the Leica T-MAC 6-dof laser
sensor and the flange-mounted ATI 6-axis force/torque sensor.
Figure 2 shows the robot arm configuration used in the
milling experiment used to gather the milling forces and tool
tip vibrations utilized in OMA. Dry peripheral milling
experiments were performed on an Acetal Resin workpiece
using a two flute, 25.4 mm diameter, 30° helix angle, cobalt
end mill. The feed per tooth, radial depth of cut, and axial depth
of cut, were 0.5 mm, 6 mm, and 6 mm, respectively. The tool
feed direction was aligned with the Y direction indicated in Fig.
2. The spindle speed was 2700 RPM. Note that this speed
corresponds to spindle and tooth passing frequencies of 45 Hz
and 90 Hz, respectively. Hence, the excitation frequencies
present in the milling force signal are located far from the
dominant natural frequencies (~10 Hz in the X and Z directions
and ~25 Hz in the Y direction) of the KUKA KR500-3
industrial robot used in this work. The robot joint values
[𝜃𝜃1 … 𝜃𝜃6 ] corresponding to the arm configuration shown in Fig.
2 were [88.44, -13.62, 72.42, 180.90, 59.55, -0.67] degrees.
156 Vinh Nguyen et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 48 (2020) 154–158
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000
Note that the FRF was assumed to be constant throughout the
length of cut (50 mm).
Fig. 2. Robot arm configuration used in the milling experiment.
2.2. Results
Figure 3 shows the time series and spectral decomposition
of the measured milling forces. As expected, Fig. 3a shows that
the force components exhibit a strong periodic behavior, which
is consistent with the spectral decomposition shown in Fig. 3b.
Specifically, the spectral decomposition of the milling forces
shows that the milling force consists primarily of the spindle
(45 Hz) and tooth passing (90 Hz) frequencies and their
harmonics. However, Fig. 3a also shows the presence of a noise
component superposed onto the periodic time series signal.
Because white noise is uniform in magnitude across the
frequency domain, the stochastic signal can induce broadband
excitation of the robot structure.
Fig. 3. a) Time series data and b) frequency decomposition of the milling
force data.
Figure 4 shows the corresponding time series and frequency
decomposition of the robot tool tip vibrations. Fig. 4a shows
forced vibrations that primarily correspond to the spindle and
tooth passing frequency of 45 Hz and 90 Hz in the X, Y, and Z
directions. Interestingly, the time series data also show
vibrations at a lower frequency superposed onto the vibrations
corresponding to the tooth passing frequency. These lower
frequency vibrations, which are close to the robot’s natural
frequency of ~10 Hz in the X and Z directions and ~25 Hz in
3
the Y direction, are also apparent in the frequency
decomposition of the vibrations shown in Fig. 4b. These lower
frequencies correspond to the robot’s free vibration response
characteristics even though the tooth passing frequency is the
most dominant excitation frequency in the milling force signal.
Consequently, OMA can be used to determine the robot FRF.
Fig. 4. a) Times series data and b) frequency decompositions of the tool tip
vibrations measured by the laser tracker.
3. Operational Modal Analysis
This section describes the OMA method used to calculate
the robot FRF from milling force and tool tip vibration data.
The results of the OMA are presented along with determination
of the minimum white noise variance required to calculate the
robot FRF for a given sensor configuration.
3.1. Calculating the Frequency Response Function
Consider the power spectral density of the robot tool tip
vibrations 𝑉𝑉(𝑓𝑓) for a random white noise (or an impulse) force
input to be
𝑉𝑉(𝑓𝑓) = 𝐹𝐹(𝑓𝑓)𝐻𝐻(𝑓𝑓) + 𝑁𝑁(𝑓𝑓) (1)
where 𝐹𝐹(𝑓𝑓), 𝐻𝐻(𝑓𝑓), and 𝑁𝑁(𝑓𝑓) are the power spectral densities
of the cutting force, robot structure, and noise of the vibration
sensor, respectively [7]. Note that Equation (1) assumes that
the measurement noise of the force sensor is small compared to
the random white noise force. Thus, we can multiply Equation
(1) by 𝐹𝐹 ∗ (𝑓𝑓) , which is the complex conjugate of 𝐹𝐹(𝑓𝑓) ,
resulting in
𝐹𝐹 ∗ (𝑓𝑓)𝑉𝑉(𝑓𝑓) = 𝐹𝐹 ∗ (𝑓𝑓)𝐹𝐹(𝑓𝑓)𝐻𝐻(𝑓𝑓) + 𝐹𝐹 ∗ (𝑓𝑓)𝑁𝑁(𝑓𝑓) (2)
Each term in Equation (2) can be transformed into auto and
cross spectral densities using Welch’s Method that results in
𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓) = 𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓)𝐻𝐻(𝑓𝑓) + 𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓) (3)
where 𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓) , 𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓) , and 𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓) are the force-vibration
cross spectral density, the force auto spectral density, and the
 Vinh Nguyen et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 48 (2020) 154–158 157
4 V. Nguyen, et al./ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000

force-sensor noise cross spectral density. By assuming the estimate the minimum threshold of white noise required to
vibration measurement sensor noise and input signal are not excite the structure at a level measurable by the laser tracker.
correlated, the cross spectral density 𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓) approaches 0 after
averaging. Hence, the following equation can be used to
calculate the robot FRF

𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓)
𝐻𝐻(𝑓𝑓) = (4)
𝐺𝐺𝑓𝑓𝑓𝑓 (𝑓𝑓)

Thus, the FRF of the robot structure can be determined from

Equation (4) after calculating the auto spectral density of the
cutting force signal and the cross-spectral density of the force
and vibration signals.
Modal impact hammer experiments were used to calculate
the reference FRF to validate the proposed OMA method.
Specifically, an impact hammer (PCB 086D05) was used to
apply an impulse excitation collinear with a uniaxial
piezoelectric accelerometer (PCB 352A21) mounted to the tool
tip, as shown in Fig. 5. The accelerometer was initially placed
on the tool collinear with the X axis, and an impulse was
Fig. 6. Impact hammer (solid) and OMA FRFs (dashed).
applied in the accelerometer’s measurement axis. The
accelerometer was then placed on the tool collinear with the Y
3.2. White Noise Threshold
axis and the measurement was retaken. Finally, the
accelerometer was attached to the bottom of the tool slightly
A simulation was performed to determine the minimum
off the tool axis and the impulse loadings were applied at a
white noise threshold required for OMA to be effective for the
different location on the bottom of the tool to obtain the Z
experimental setup used in this work. A zero mean Gaussian
direction FRF. The time series force excitations and
white noise with variance 𝜎𝜎 2 was simulated and used as input
acceleration responses were recorded at 17 kHz using the
to the Y direction FRF shown in Fig. 6. The Y direction FRF
MetalMax software. Similar to OMA, the FRF was calculated
was used in the simulation since it is the least compliant FRF
from the twice-integrated acceleration and the impact hammer
in the system and would therefore produce the smallest
force data using Equation (4).
vibrations. Since no harmonic forces were used in the
simulation, the simulated output is the corresponding robot
vibration resulting from a force consisting of only Gaussian
white noise. The peak-to-valley vibration amplitude was
calculated for each input with variance 𝜎𝜎 2 . If the peak-to-valley
vibration amplitude is below the laser tracker resolution (15
μm), the sensor would be unable to measure the vibration
corresponding to the white noise excitation. Figure 7 shows the
simulation results. As expected, the peak-to-valley vibration
amplitude increases with the noise variance. In addition, Fig. 7
shows that to satisfy the minimum threshold, the Gaussian
white noise variance must be above 75 N2 for this particular
Fig. 5. Modal impact experimental setup. robot arm configuration.

Figure 6 shows the results of the OMA using the data

presented in Figs. 3 and 4 along with the results from the impact
hammer experiments. The FRFs calculated from OMA are
shown to be in good agreement with the FRFs obtained from
the impact hammer experiments. In addition, the Root Mean
Squared Errors (RMSE) for the X, Y, and Z direction FRF
magnitudes are 0.29 μm/N, 0.20 μm/N, and 0.30 μm/N. Note
that while the OMA-calculated Y direction FRF appears to
have the smallest RMSE, this is correlated with the Y direction
being the stiffest configuration. Thus, Fig. 6 shows that OMA
using milling process data is a feasible approach to determine
the robot FRF. However, the OMA method is only feasible due
to the existence of background white noise in the milling force
data that excites the robot structure. Hence, it is useful to Fig. 7. Gaussian white noise simulation results of peak-to-valley vibration vs.
input noise variance.
158 Vinh Nguyen et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 48 (2020) 154–158
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2019) 000–000
The following equation was used to verify that the noise
variance in the milling forces shown Fig. 3 is sufficient to
produce a measurable structural excitation
𝑇𝑇
𝜎𝜎 2 = ∫ 𝑃𝑃(𝑓𝑓)𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑
2 [2] L. Cen, S.N. Melkote, CCT-based mode coupling chatter avoidance in
where P(f) is the power spectral density of the measured cutting
force signal and T is the total time window. Note that the
spindle rotation frequency and tooth passing harmonics of
milling are present in the power spectral density, which distorts
the calculation of 𝜎𝜎 2 . Hence, the milling process harmonics
were filtered from the power spectral density. The values of 𝜎𝜎 2
for the measured X, Y, and Z forces were 232 N 2, 278 N2, and
251 N2, respectively, which are all above the minimum
threshold shown in Fig. 7. In addition, the variance of the force
sensor measurement noise (0.56 N2) is significantly smaller
than 𝜎𝜎 2 for the measured X, Y, and Z forces, thus validating
the assumption invoked in Equation (1). Hence, the noise in the
milling experiments in this work is adequate to excite the robot
structural modes sufficiently for the laser tracker to measure.
However, note that a stiffer system would require larger 𝜎𝜎 2 to
excite its modes to a measurable level. Because 6-dof industrial
robots are more compliant than their CNC counterparts, the
free response is easier to measure in robotic milling
applications. This explains why prior research in CNC milling
were unable to calculate the FRF using OMA under stable and
non-random milling conditions [8-13].
4. Conclusion
This paper presented a methodology for determining the
FRF of industrial robots using OMA. The cutting forces and
tool tip vibrations measured in robotic milling experiments
were used to calculate the FRF of the robot structure. Even
though the milling harmonics were far from the robot’s natural
frequencies, the vibration results showed that the robot’s
natural modes were still being excited by background white
noise present in the time series force signal. The calculated FRF
was shown to be in good agreement with the FRF determined
from modal impact hammer tests for the same robot
configuration. In addition, the minimum threshold for the input
noise variance was calculated to validate the claim that
sufficient white noise exists in the milling force signal to
produce measurable excitation of the robot’s natural
frequencies. Future work includes using the FRF obtained from
OMA to calibrate and augment models that predict the robot’s
modal properties as a function of arm configuration.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by Boeing Research &
Technology and the Boeing Manufacturing Development
Center at Georgia Tech through the Strategic Universities
Program.
5
References
[1] S. Mejri, V. Gagnol, T.-P. Le, L. Sabourin, P. Ray, P. Paultre, Dynamic
characterization of machining robot and stability analysis, The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 82 (2016)
(5) 351-359.
robotic milling, Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 29 (2017) 50-61.
[3] S. Mousavi, V. Gagnol, B.C. Bouzgarrou, P. Ray, Dynamic modeling and
stability prediction in robotic machining, The International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 88 (2017) 3053-3065.
[4] V. Nguyen, T. Cvitanic, S. Melkote, Data-Driven Modeling of the Modal
Properties of a 6-DOF Industrial Robot and its Application to Robotic
Milling, Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, (2019) 1-24.
[5] N. Suzuki, Y. Kurata, T. Kato, R. Hino, E. Shamoto, Identification of
transfer function by inverse analysis of self-excited chatter vibration in
milling operations, Precision Engineering, 36 (2012) 568-575.
[6] M. Wan, J. Feng, Y.-C. Ma, W.-H. Zhang, Identification of milling process
damping using operational modal analysis, International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture, 122 (2017) 120-131.
[7] A. Brandt, Noise and Vibration Analysis: Signal Analysis and Experimental
Procedures, John Wiley & Sons, 2011.
[8] D. Poddar, M. Shunmugam, Development of an automated modal
extraction methodology through OMA by random cutting excitation of a
legacy milling machine, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing, 122
(2019) 448-462.
[9] B. Li, L. Li, H. He, X. Mao, X. Jiang, Y. Peng, Research on modal analysis
method of CNC machine tool based on operational impact excitation, The
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, (2019) 1-
20.
[10] J. Berthold, M. Kolouch, V. Wittstock, M. Putz, Identification of modal
parameters of machine tools during cutting by operational modal analysis,
Procedia CIRP, 77 (2018) 473-476.
[11] B. Li, H. Cai, X. Mao, J. Huang, B. Luo, Estimation of CNC machine–
tool dynamic parameters based on random cutting excitation through
operational modal analysis, International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture, 71 (2013) 26-40.
[12] I. Zaghbani, V. Songmene, Estimation of machine-tool dynamic
parameters during machining operation through operational modal
analysis, International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 49
(2009) 947-957.
[13] B. Powałka, K. Jemielniak, Stability analysis in milling of flexible parts
based on operational modal analysis, CIRP Journal of Manufacturing
Science and Technology, 9 (2015) 125-135.
[14] K. Zhu, G. Hong, Y. Wong, W. Wang, Cutting force denoising in micro-
milling tool condition monitoring, International Journal of Production
Research, 46 (2008) 4391-4408.
[15] S. Wojciechowski, R.W. Maruda, G.M. Krolczyk, P. Niesłony,
Application of signal to noise ratio and grey relational analysis to minimize
forces and vibrations during precise ball end milling, Precision
Engineering, 51 (2018) 582-596.
[16] P. Mohanty, D.J. Rixen, Operational modal analysis in the presence of
harmonic excitation, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 270 (2004) 93-109.
[17] B. Peeters, B. Cornelis, K. Janssens, H. Van der Auweraer, Removing
disturbing harmonics in operational modal analysis, in: Proceedings of
International Operational Modal Analysis Conference, Copenhagen,
Denmark, 2007.
[18] S. Chauhan, M. Hansen, D. Tcherniak, Application of operational modal
analysis and blind source separation/independent component analysis
techniques to wind turbines, in: Proceedings of XXVII International Modal
Analysis Conference, Orlando (FL), USA, 2009.
[19] Leica Absolute Tracker AT960, Hexagon Metrology, 2019,
https://www.hexagonmi.com/en-US/products/ laser-tracker-
systems/leica-absolute-tracker-at960.
[20] F/T Sensor: Omega160, ATI Industrial Automation, 2019,
https://www.ati-ia.com/products/ft/ ft_models.aspx?id=Omega160.
[21] V. Nguyen, S.N. Melkote, Modeling of flange-mounted force sensor
frequency response function for inverse filtering of forces in robotic
milling, Procedia Manufacturing, 34 (2019) 804-812.