See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/223429117

Correction of dynamic effects on force measurements made with piezoelectric

dynamometers

Article  in  International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture · November 2006

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.12.006

CITATIONS READS

60 464

3 authors, including:

P. Vieville Paul Lipinski

Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Metz University of Lorraine
24 PUBLICATIONS   202 CITATIONS    256 PUBLICATIONS   2,170 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Temperature measurement View project

Stomatology and cranio-maxillofacial reconstruction View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Paul Lipinski on 06 June 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 ARTICLE IN PRESS

International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

Correction of dynamic effects on force measurements made with

piezoelectric dynamometers
Luis Ricardo Castroa,b,, Pascal Viévilleb,c, Paul Lipinskia,b
a
Laboratoire de Physique et Mécanique des Matériaux (L.P.M.M.), Metz, ıˆle du Saulcy F57045 cedex 1, France
b
Ecole Nationale d’Ingénieurs de Metz (E.N.I.M.), Metz, ıˆle du Saulcy F57045 cedex 1, France
c
Laboratoire de Fiabilité Mécanique (L.F.M.), Metz, ıˆle du Saulcy F57045 cedex 1, France
Received 23 November 2005; accepted 13 December 2005
Available online 26 January 2006

Abstract

An original method for measuring dynamic forces using a commercial piezoelectric dynamometer is presented. This approach is based
on the construction of a correction function taking into account the dynamic behavior of the mechanical environment: milling machine,
measuring device and workpiece assembly. It allows measurement of the cutting forces for a large frequency domain exceeding the
bandwidth of the piezoelectric dynamometer used. Through the located excitations, the complex equation of Transmissibility between
the cutting forces and the dynamometer measurements is obtained. The methodology has been applied for a three-component
commercial dynamometer fixed on a milling machine. It has been validated by means of the addition of controlled sinusoidal excitations.
This method has applications in high-speed machining and in cutting processes involving instabilities.
r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Force measuring; Dynamometer dynamics; Frequency response function; Modal analysis

1. Introduction uses transducers mounted on the tool or workpiece

Machining comprises the principal operations in the
manufacturing of mechanical parts. The most common
cutting processes are milling, turning, drilling and grinding.
In these processes, the measurement of the cutting forces
has important and extensive applications within industry
and research alike. The estimation of cutting forces allows
to supervise tool wear evolution, predict machined work-
piece surface quality, establish material machinabilities,
optimize cutting parameters and study phenomena such as
chip formation or apparition of vibrations.
Independent of the machining operation type, methods
for cutting force measurements can be divided into two
general categories. The first corresponds to the category
that uses the current or voltage signals emitted by the tool
machine drive motor or control systems [1–5]. The second
Corresponding author. Laboratoire de Physique et Mécanique des
Matériaux (L.P.M.M.), Metz, ı̂le du Saulcy F57045 cedex 1, France. Tel.:
+33 3 87 34 69 30; fax: +33 3 87 34 42 79.
E-mail address: l.castro@enim.fr (L. Ricardo Castro).
assemblies [7–23].
It seems to be important to review the principal methods
to identify their advantages and limitations. As the main
evaluation parameter, we choose the performance of the
measurement system for determining the precise response
to dynamic solicitations, which are associated with severe
cutting conditions. The machining process excites machine,
measurement device and workpiece assembly to frequen-
cies that, in function of the structural dynamics, exceed the
measuring system bandwidth, causing significant errors in
the cutting force readings.
Considering the general classification mentioned above,
in the first group Altintas [1] measures the direct current
drive motor consumed. The armature current is propor-
tional to the motor torque, which is a function of the
equivalent feed drive inertia acceleration, the viscous
damping, the friction and the cutting forces. The method
is limited by the current loop transducers’ bandwidth that
reaches 20 Hz. The same method employing a servomotor
current was tested later by Kim et al. [2,3], who extended
the bandwidth to 70 Hz. Jeong and Cho [4] added the

0890-6955/$ - see front matter r 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.12.006
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1708 L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715
motor signal responsible for holding the constant position
in the perpendicular feed axis. They also used a higher
bandwidth current transducer increasing the domain up to
130 Hz. The instrumentation used in the studies mentioned
above has the advantage of not changing the dynamic
properties of the workpiece assembly. But, their bandwidth
is not enough to be used in unconventional machining.
Auchet et al. [5] estimated the cutting forces from the
command voltage of a milling machine spindle with active
electromagnetic bearings. They attained a frequency of
4 kHz. The limitation of the method is the implantation of
the active electromagnetic bearing spindle. Recently,
Albretch et al. [6] have also shown a compensation method
of the force measurements using a disturbance Kalman
filter. It was constructed from the frequency response
function (FRF) between the force in the tool tip and the
displacement of the spindle flange. The force is measured
by a piezoelectric dynamometer as reference and the
displacement is measured by a capacitive sensor installed
in the spindle housing, avoiding changes to the machine’s
dynamic behavior. They found the method frequency limit
to 1 kHz because it depends on the phase’s invariability of
the reference system that begins to diminish for higher
frequency values.
Within the second group, the instrumentation may be
placed in the tool holder or workpiece supports. Strain
gauges have been widely used. These transducers can be
mounted directly on the tool in the case of turning. Scheffer
and Heyns [7] used this assembly, which has an acceptable
frequency performance of 3 kHz, but it has a sensitivity
problem in the radial axis. Strain gauges can also be a part
of a general application dynamometer [8–11], but this type
of dynamometer usually has a low bandwidth. Korkut [8]
calculated the resonance frequency in 192.2 Hz.
Another method of tool instrumentation in turning is
suggested by Jin et al. [12]. They consider the cutting force
in tangential direction by means of an optic transducer that
allows measurement of the displacement of a tool point
caused by its elastic deformation. The measurement system
does not disturb the tool holder rigidity, reaching a
resonance frequency of 950 Hz.
Chung and Spiewak [13,14] propose the tool milling
instrumentation in a milling machine with a three-
component accelerometer. The signals are treated with a
self-tuning filter and double-integrated to obtain the
spindle deflections proportional to the cutting forces. The
measurement system has a good performance at elevated
frequencies, but it does not allow measuring static or
quasistatic forces.
The most common devices for measuring the cutting
forces in this type of manufacturing processes are the
piezoelectric dynamometers [15–24]. The piezoelectric
transducers produce a charge signal proportional to their
deformation. These transducers have a good compromise
between rigidity and sensitivity. But the measuring system
bandwidth diminishes considerably because it depends on
the assembly’s dynamic properties. Different approaches
have been developed to circumvent this problem [18–22].
We discuss two main solutions.
First, Lapoujolade et al. [18,19] measure the dynam-
ometer cover plate accelerations, estimate an equivalent
mass and remove the inertial components from the forces
measured by the dynamometer. This methodology is
known as accelerometrical compensation. The method
revealed some accuracy problems, thus it was necessary to
construct a more rigid prototype dynamometer.
The second approach consists of finding the FRF
between the cutting forces and the signals emitted by
the dynamometer; this function is used to correct the
measurements [20–22]. Tounsi and Otho [20,21] use
accelerometers to measure the dynamometer response,
but the coherence estimation revealed that the method is
limited to 700 Hz.
In this study, the FRF approach is applied to correct the
dynamical forces because it permits to identify their
components in the frequency domain. This is an important
tool that helps to understand the physics of the machining
instabilities. This paper presents the development of the
FRFs between the excitation force transducer and the
signals measured by a commercial piezoelectric dynam-
ometer. The experimental devices, procedures employed
and the method validation made by sinusoidal excitation
tests are also described.
2. Problem statement
The dynamic properties of the cutting force measuring
system depend on the workpiece, the dynamometer and
the machine [24]. The severe cutting conditions associated
with the assembly’s dynamic properties excite the piezo-
electric dynamometer to frequencies that exceed its
bandwidth, causing erroneous readings of the cutting
forces. The experimental setup used to evaluate the
measurements made by the dynamometer as well as to
obtain the FRFs used in the correction method is shown in
Fig. 1.
A comparison of the z-components of force measured by
the dynamometer and the reference force transducer, in the
temporary domain, shows that with excitations belonging
to certain frequency bands, the errors are significant and a
correction method is necessary (Fig. 2). The frequency
band in Fig. 2b is equivalent to the band obtained under a
milling process with spindle speeds between 16 000 and
24 000 rpm, using a three-edged cutting tool.
3. Correction method
The correction method proposed in this paper consists of
quantifying the dynamic force measurement error of the
workpiece–dynamometer–machine system by means of
the FRF matrix known as Transmissibility. Subsequently,
this error is removed from the dynamometer dynamic
readings using a mathematical approach.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715 1709

(1) Shaker
(2) Force sensor
(3) Conditioner
(4) (6)
(4) Elastic bands (8)
(5) Rod
(6) Noise generator (1)
(7)
(7) Sinus generator
(8) Amplifier
(5) 8 (13)
(9) Dynamometer
(2) (3)
(10) Machine
(9)
(11) Charge amplifier
(12) Acquisition equipment (12)
(13) PC
(10)
(11)

Fig. 1. Experimental arrangement.

300
50 Reference force transducer
Dynamometer Kistler
Reference force transducer
Dynamometer Kistler
200

0 100
Force [N]
Force [N]

0
-50

-100

-100
-200

-150 -300

1.870 1.875 1.880 1.885 1.935 1.940 1.945

(a) Time [s] (b) Time [s]

Fig. 2. Comparison between the measurements of the dynamometer and the force transducer in the temporary domain within a located frequency band
excitation. (a) Random excitation between 0 and 400 Hz; (b) sinusoidal excitation between 1200 and 1600 Hz.

The FRF matrix is established experimentally. The FRF
components are fundamental in the accuracy of the
correction method. Therefore, various evaluations are
carried out in the experimental acquisition of the FRFs
in order to assure their quality. In a second stage, the
measurement spectra are corrected by multiplying the
FFTs with the inverse FRF matrix (Fig. 3).
In order to experimentally determine the FRF matrix
[T(jo)], the modal analysis approach is used, but the system
response is described by forces rather than displacements
or accelerations. It is supposed that the measuring system
has a linear behavior. Therefore,
fKðjoÞg ¼ ½TðjoÞ
fF ðjoÞg,
where the input variable {F(jo)} is the vector of the Fourier
transforms of the excitation signals corresponding to the
machining forces or to the known transducer forces during
the construction of the correction function. The output
variable {K(jo)} is the vector of Fourier transforms of the
response signal emitted by the dynamometer. Using the
modal analysis approach, a general element of this matrix,
say Tmn(jo), is given by
K m ðjoÞ
T mn ðjoÞ ¼ , (2)
F n ðjoÞ
where m and n indicate the response and excitation degrees
of freedom (DOF), respectively.
It must be noted that the signal emitted by the force
transducer during the FRF matrix-obtaining stage is
substituted for the cutting force on one axis in real
machining conditions. Then, it is necessary to establish
(1) the inverse function that allows to find the cutting force
{F(jo)} during a cutting process from the dynamometer
signals and the Transmissibility.
Finally, the signals emitted by the dynamometer in the
time domain are registered, processed to find their spectra
and corrected using the inverse FRF matrix.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1710 L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715

Correction method

FRFs calculation from

Experimental FRFs
excitation and systeme
obtaining stage
response (Transmissibilities)

- Accuracy of the FRF

Evaluation of the curvers (Transmissibilities)
excitation devices
Optimization of the - Coherence
FRFs quality
Evaluation of the - Noise appearance in the FRF
excitation Procedures curves (Transmissibilities)
- Coherence

Force measuring stage

Measurements
correction stage

Measurements multiplication
by the inverse Transmissibility
matrix using the discret
experimental functions

Fig. 3. Diagram of the correction method stages.

4. Experimental frequency response function
4.1. Experimental procedure
To obtain the Transmissibility matrix, a series of
experiments using a known excitation force have to
be performed. The first step consists of defining the
excitation system. In the studied case, different attachment
configurations, to avoid the introduction of unwanted
excitations, have been evaluated on the FRF. Two
electromagnetic shakers with different attachments and
rod drivers have been compared, as well as three impact
hammers with different tips. Additionally, the coherence
between the input force and the response of the dynam-
ometer has been estimated. The coherence constitutes a
quality factor employed in evaluating the power relation
between the response and the input.
The second stage consists of establishing the excitation
conditions that allow maximizing the FRF accuracy. The
excitation of the system is made with white noise filtered by
a located frequency band (LFB). The width of the LFB is a
decisive parameter in the FRF accuracy, especially at high
frequencies. As the LFB width diminishes, less noise
appears in the FRF and the coherence quality increases.
However, the excitation LFB width cannot be diminished
indefinitely since additional measurements and processing
become tedious and too long. Therefore, it is necessary to
search a LFB width with a good compromise between the
number of tests and the FRF quality. Fig. 4 contains an
example of three Transmissibilities and their respective
coherences obtained from different excitation LFB widths.
The frequency band illustrated is a zoom contained by the
three excitation LFBs. These tests show that the shortest
LFB excitation (2000–2400 Hz) has the best performance
with a coherence close to unity. In contrast, the other two
excitation LFBs (0–3200 and 0–6400 Hz) confirm the need
to divide the total bandwidth.
The third stage comprises the excitation tests. A test
consists of an excitation in stable regime within the LFB
during the recording time. It is necessary to carry out the
tests in adjacent bands until covering all of the frequency
range required for the measurements’ correction. There-
fore, the number of tests corresponds to the total frequency
band divided by the selected LFB.
In each test, the signals of the force transducer and the
dynamometer are registered. The data processing consists
of calculating the FRFs and the coherences between the
force transducer signal and the dynamometer signals. The
type of FRF used is H1, which calculates the relation
between the input-response cross-spectrum (GFK) and the
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715 1711

Excitation band between 2000-2400 Hz 1.00

Excitation band between 0-3200 Hz
Excitation band between 0-6400 Hz
Transmissibility modulus [N/N] 2.0
0.98

Transmissibility Coherence
0.96
1.9

0.94

1.8
0.92
Excitation band between 2000-2400 Hz
Excitation band between 0-3200 Hz
Excitation band between 0-6400 Hz
1.7 0.90

2160 2180 2200 2220 2240 2160 2180 2200 2220 2240
(a) Frequency [Hz] (b) Frequency [Hz]

Fig. 4. Quality evolution of the FRF in function of the excitation LFB width; (a) Transmissibility and (b) Transmissibility coherence.

input auto-spectrum (GFF). This function minimizes the when the system is redundant, the Transmissibility matrix
response signal error. Additionally, the FRF is estimated [T] is rectangular and cannot be inversed directly. Conse-
from a linear average of several records. quently, Eq. (1) has to be multiplied by the transpose of the
Finally, the FRF matrix components are constructed Transmissibility to obtain a square matrix. Furthermore,
from the combination of FRFs from all tests. Each test as the matrix is a nested complex, the hermitian transpose
contributes its excitation LFB. The coherence is con- is required instead of the ordinary one. The hermitian
structed in the same manner, allowing a good quality transpose is obtained by replacing each term of the
evaluation of each test. complex function matrix by its conjugate before carrying
out the transpose of the new matrix, i.e. H ½T
¼ ½T
T where
4.2. Experimental setup the conjugate term of the complex function Tmn is written
as T mn . This leads to
Fig. 1 shows the chosen arrangement. The input force is H
½T
fKg¼H ½T
½T
fF g. (3)
generated by an electromagnetic shaker LDS V400 (1),
which is instrumented with a force transducer PCB 208C03 Introducing the two new matrices
(2). The transducer is regulated by a signal conditioner
fY g ¼ H ½T
fKg, (4)
PCB 488A22 (3). The shaker is freely supported by elastic
bands (4) and their attachment to the force transducer is a
½A
¼ H ½T
½T
, (5)
rod (5) which is flexible in the direction of the non-excited
axis to avoid introducing unwanted excitations. Two types we have
of generators control the shaker. An analyzer B&K 2032
fF g ¼ ½A
1 fY g. (6)
(6) in generator function is used to emit white noise in the
LFBs and a multifunction synthesizer HP 8904A (7) is used This calculation procedure can be implemented using the
to produce superimposed sinusoidal signals in the valida- dynamometer global signal calculated arithmetically from
tion phase. The amplification signal is provided by means the four dynamometer sensors or employing each sensor
of an amplifier LDS PA500 (8). individually. In this work, both cases have been tested on
The system response is calculated from the signals the z-axis. The calculation from the global signal is the
emitted by a commercial quartz three-component dynam- simplest case because there is only one component. The
ometer Kistler 9255B (9), mounted on the table of a force can be obtained from the procedure mentioned above
high-speed milling machine Gambin 120 CR (10). The or directly by inversing Eq. (1) and multiplying by the
dynamometer uses a charge amplifier Kistler 5017 (11). The conjugate to eliminate the imaginary term from the
acquisition and analysis are made with an equipment of denominator. Therefore,
eight channels LMS Pimento (12) and a PC (13).
T zK z
F z ðjoÞ ¼ , (7)
5. Determination of the excitation forces T zT z
where the Transmissibility is obtained by employing the
During a cutting process, the signals emitted by the global response Tz and the global dynamometer signal Kz.
dynamometer are recorded and have to be corrected using On the other hand, in the case where the four signals are
the FRFs matrix. Therefore, Eq. (1) must to be inversed in independent, the system is redundant. The number of
order to find an expression for the cutting forces from the components or DOF of the unknown {F}-vector is less
dynamometer signals and the FRFs matrix. Nevertheless, than the number of components of the {T}-vector, so a

1712 L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715
unique solution for the system does not exist. To overcome
this difficulty, the problem can be treated using the mean-
squares method, as proposed by Auchet et al. [5].
This procedure is developed and illustrated below for the
z-component as the unknown cutting force. It can be
extended to the other two axes in the same way. Since the
vector {K(jo)} has four components, each sensor is
considered as one DOF of the system, and because the
vector {F(jo)} is reduced to one component Fz(jo), Eq. (1)
becomes
fK m ðjoÞg ¼ fT mz ðjoÞgF z ðjoÞ,
where {Km(jo)} is the dynamometer vector containing the
four sensors’ z-components, {Tmz(jo)} the vector com-
posed by the four FRFs between each sensor and the
reference force transducer on the z-axis, and Fz(jo) the
single force z-component. From Eqs. (3)–(8), the solution
of this redundant system can be written as
T̄ z1 K 1 þ T̄ z2 K 2 þ T̄ z3 K 3 þ T̄ z4 K 4
F z ðjoÞ ¼
T̄ z1 T 1z þ T̄ z2 T 2z þ T̄ z3 T 3z þ T̄ z4 T 4z
which is equivalent to Eq. (7).
6. Experimental results
6.1. Frequency response functions
We recall that the experimental purpose is to obtain the
FRFs between the reference force sensor and the dynam-
ometer on the z-axis. The FRFs have been found for the
global signal as well as for each one of the dynamometer
sensors. The corresponding functions have been defined
between 0 and 4000 Hz and the selected excitation LFB
width is 400 Hz. It provides a good compromise between
the number of tests and the FRFs accuracy. These
bandwidth parameters imply 10 LFB adjacent excitations.
1.0
0.8
Transmissibility Coherence
0.6
Exploitable
Range: LFB
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1000 2000 3000
Frequency [Hz]
Fig. 5. Coherence from a LFB excitation. The LFB of excitation
corresponds to the exploitable zone: 2000–2400 Hz.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
Fig. 5 illustrates an example of coherence obtained using
an LFB excitation. The chosen LFB excitation is between
2000 and 2400 Hz, where the result provides evidence of an
excellent performance.
The FRF from the global signal also allows predicting
the dynamometer measurement errors due to the dynamic
effects. It must be noted that the modulus without dynamic
distortion, i.e. the static case, corresponds to unity (Fig. 6).
Nevertheless, if a zoom is performed, there are measure-
ment errors of around 50% in the vicinities of 1000 Hz
(Fig. 6b). This FRF is used in Eq. (7) to correct the
(8)
measurements from the global signal. In contrast, Fig. 7
shows the FRFs constructed over the whole bandwidth for
the four sensors. These experimental Transmissibilities are
replaced in Eq. (9) to correct the measurements from the
individual signals.
6.2. Correction method validation
, (9)
During the correction method validation, the same
assembly is used as in the FRFs-obtaining stage (Fig 1).
The force transmitted by the force transducer replaces the
cutting force on the z-axis and is the reference for the
corrected dynamometer measurements. The excitation is a
sum of sinusoidal functions that simulates the cutting
force’s behavior during milling (Fig. 8). However, it must
be noted that the Transmissibilities are obtained from
white noise excitations. Therefore, every type of periodic
excitation in the entire frequency bandwidth can be
corrected.
The global and individual dynamometer signals are
recorded and operated into Eqs. (7) and (9) respectively,
together with the Transmissibility’s components and their
conjugates, to obtain the corrected cutting force spectra.
The effectiveness of the correction method has been
evaluated by means of different tests with sinusoidal
excitation functions, varying the amplitude and frequency.
The tests swept the whole frequency range between 0 and
4000 Hz. Fig. 9 gives an example which compares the
force transducer and the dynamometer spectra with
and without the correction method. For this test, the
excitation conditions correspond to those shown in Fig. 8.
The excellent correspondence between the spectra of
Fig. 9b testifies to the quality of the proposed method.
The performance of the correction method using the
individual signals is summarized in Fig. 10. It shows the
percentage of the differences between the reference force
sensor and the dynamometer spectra with and without
correction. It is possible to appreciate that the correction
method improves extensively the accuracy of the force
readings in the entire frequency range analyzed. The error
with and without correction has different orders. The
4000 maximum error in the corrected spectra remains very low;
it has been estimated to about 20% (Fig. 11). On the other
hand, the measurement error without correction can reach
5000% in the proximity of the resonance zone (Fig. 10b).
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715 1713

80 5
4.5

Transmissibility modulus [N/N]

Transmissibility modulus [N/N]

70
4
60
3.5
50 3
40 2.5
30 2
1.5
20
1
10 0.5
0 0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 0 1000 2000 3000
(a) Frequency [Hz] (b) Frequency [Hz]

Fig. 6. Transmissibility of the global signal represents the inverse modulus of the correction function and the evolution of the measuring error in the
frequency domain; (a) entire frequency band 0–4000 Hz and (b) frequency band between 0 and 3000 Hz.

Fig. 7. Transmissibilites between the reference force sensor and each dynamometer sensor on the z-axis; (a) first sensor, (b) second sensor, (c) third sensor
and (d) fourth sensor.

4 A comparison between the correction method using the

global and the individual signals has also been carried out
3
(Fig. 11). The individual signal method shows a better
2
Control amplitude [V]

performance. Nevertheless, the difference between these

1 two approaches is not significant.
0
-1
7. Discussion
-2
-3 It has been established experimentally that the appear-
ance of dynamic excitations at higher frequencies than
0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01
those of the piezoelectric dynamometer bandwidth causes
Time [s] significant reading errors in the force measurements
Fig. 8. An example of sinusoidal excitation function used in the [5,18–23]. For measuring dynamic forces at high frequen-
verification method. cies, a correction method must be implemented.
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
1714 L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715

Dynamometer spectrum Reference transducer spectrum

30 20
Reference transducer spectrum Dynamometer spectrum
25
15

Force modulus [N]

Force modulus [N]

20

15 10

10 5

5
0
0
2050 2150 2250 2350 2450
2050 2150 2250 2350 2450
-5 -5
(a) Frequency [Hz] (b) Frequency [Hz]

Fig. 9. Spectra comparison between the force transducer and dynamometer measurements; (a) dynamometer measurement without correction and (b)
dynamometer measurement corrected.

5000
120
Without correction spectra Without correction spectra
4500 Corrected spectra
Corrected spectra
100
Error in the spectra modulus [%]

4000

Error in the spectra modulus [%] 3500

80
3000

60 2500

2000
40
1500

1000
20
500

0 0
100 500 900 1300 1700 2100 2500 2900 3300 3700
(a) Frequency [Hz] (b) Frequency [Hz]

Fig. 10. Results of the correction method. The comparison of the percentage error in the spectra modulus between the reference force transducer and the
dynamometer measurements with and without correction over the entire bandwidth; (a) 0–2000 Hz and (b) 2000–4000 Hz.

50 An experimental method has been developed to

45 Corrected spectra from the global signal determine the Transmissibilities between a reference
Error in the spectra modulus [%]

40 Corrected spectra from the four individual force transducer and the sensors of a piezoelectric
signals dynamometer. The FRFs found have a high repeatability
35
and do not present significant influence from the platform
30
shaker [13].
25 The excitation method proposed is a combination of
20 stepped-sine and random excitations. It is capable of
15 supplying enough energy over the entire frequency range
10 assuring a complete modal excitation. To improve the
Transmissibility accuracy in the neighborhood of the
5
measurement system’s modes, an excitation zoom can
0
be made by diminishing the LFB width. The method can be
200 1000 2000 2800 3600
Frequency [Hz]
extended to other cutting force measuring systems with the
purpose of evaluating or correcting the measurements. The
Fig. 11. Comparison of the error in the spectra modulus between the proposed excitation method can also be an interesting tool
measurements corrected from the global signal and corrected from the for structural modal analysis.
four individual signals.
The geometry and the mechanical properties of the
workpiece can change the dynamic properties of
An evaluation of the force calculation procedure has the measurement system. Therefore, the analysis of
been carried out by means of a comparison between the the measurement system with the analytical coupling
conventional global signal and the individual signals. The technique for evaluating and quantifying the influence
estimation from the individual signals has a better of any workpiece can constitute a complement to this
performance but the difference is not significant. study [25].
 ARTICLE IN PRESS
L. Ricardo Castro et al. / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 46 (2006) 1707–1715
8. Conclusions
This paper presents a method for correcting the
dynamometer force measurements which significantly
improves their accuracy. It allows to correct the force
measurements in the studied frequency domain with
errors smaller than 20%, in contrast to the measurements
without correction that reach 5000% close to the resonance
frequency.
The method developed to correct the dynamical force
measurements uses the FRF known as Transmissibility.
This method increases the frequency bandwidth of the
measurement system, limited only by the maximum work-
shaker frequency or by the reference force transducer’s
bandwidth. In this work the bandwidth was increased from
650 to 4000 Hz.
Since the correction uses the modulus and the phase of
the FRF, the method permits measurements at frequencies
greater than the system’s resonance value. Additionally, the
correction method can be implemented on a specific band
frequency of interest, minimizing the number of tests and
the amount of processing.
References
[1] Y. Altintas, Prediction of cutting forces and tool breakage in milling
from feed drive current measurement, ASME, Journal of Engineering
for Industry 114 (1992) 386–392.
[2] T.Y. Kim, J. Kim, Adaptive cutting force control for a machining
centre by using indirect cutting force measurements, International
Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 36 (1996) 926–937.
[3] T.Y. Kim, J. Woo, D. Shin, J. Kim, Indirect cutting force in multi-
axis simultaneous NC milling processes, International Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 39 (1999) 1717–1731.
[4] Y.H. Jeong, D.W. Cho, Estimating cutting force from rotating and
stationary feed motor currents on a milling machine, International
Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 42 (2002) 1559–1566.
[5] S. Auchet, P. Chevrier, M. Lacour, P. Lipinski, A new method of
cutting force measurement based on command voltages of active
electro-magnetic bearings, International Journal of Machine Tools &
Manufacture 44 (2004) 1441–1449.
[6] A. Albretch, S.S. Park, Y. Altintas, G. Pritschow, High frequency
bandwidth cutting force measurement in milling using capacitance
displacement sensors, International Journal of Machine Tools &
Manufacture 45 (2005) 993–1008.
[7] C. Scheffer, P.S. Heyns, An industrial tool wear monitoring system
for interrupted turning, Mechanical Systems and Signal Processing 18
(2004) 1219–1242.
[8] I. Korkut, A dynamometer design and its construction for milling
operations, Materials & Design 24 (2003) 631–637.
View publication stats
1715
[9] U. Seker, A. Kurt, I. Ciftci, Design and construction of
a dynamometer for measurement of cutting forces during
machining with linear motion, Materials & Design 23 (2002)
355–360.
[10] P.O.H. Sturesson, L. Hakansson, I. Claesson, Identification of
statistical properties of cutting tool vibrations in a continuous
turning operation-correlation to structural properties, Mechanical
Systems and Signal Processing 11 (3) (1997) 459–489.
[11] J. Kim, D. Kim, Development of a combined-type tool dynamometer
with a piezo-film accelerometer for an ultra-accuracy lathe, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 71 (1997) 360–366.
[12] W.L. Jin, P.K. Venuvinod, X. Wang, An optical fibre transducer
based cutting force measuring device, International Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 35 (6) (1995) 877–883.
[13] Y.L. Chung, S.A. Spiewak, A model of high performance dynam-
ometer, Journal of Engineering for Industry 116 (1994) 279–288.
[14] S.A. Spiewak, Acceleration based indirect force measurement in
metal cutting processes, International Journal of Machine Tools &
Manufacture 35 (1) (1995) 1–17.
[15] K.A. Risbood, U.S. Dixit, A.D. Sahasrabudhe, Prediction of surface
roughness and dimensional deviation by measuring cutting forces and
vibrations in turning processes, Journal of Materials Processing
Technology 132 (2002) 203–214.
[16] D.A. Axinte, W. Belluco, L. De Chiffre, Evaluation of cutting
uncertainty components in turning, International Journal of Machine
Tools & Manufacture 41 (2000) 719–730.
[17] S. Sastry, S.G. Kapoor, R.E. DeVor, Compensation of progressive
radial run-out in face-milling by spindle speed variation, Interna-
tional Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 40 (2000)
1121–1139.
[18] F. Lapoujolade, Measuring of cutting forces during fast transient
periods, 1ier French and German Conference on High Speed
Machining, June, 1997, pp. 372–376.
[19] F. Lapoujoulade, G. Coffignal, J. Pimont , Cutting forces evaluation
during high speed milling, 2ième Conf. Int. IDMME’98 Compiègne
France, 27–29 May, 1998.
[20] N. Tounsi, A. Otho, Dynamic cutting force measuring, International
Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 40 (2000) 1157–1170.
[21] N. Tounsi, A. Otho, Identification of machine-tool-workpiece system
dynamics, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 40
(1999) 1367–1384.
[22] S. Chen, Q. Luo, P.W. Wagstaff, J.C. Henrio, Caractérisation des
forces dynamiques de coupe en usinage a l’aide des mesures
indirectes, Actes de 4ième Congres Franc- ais d’Acoustique, Marseille,
14–18 Avril, 1997, pp. 1331–1334.
[23] M.T. Hayajneh, V.P. Astakhov, M.O.M. Osman, An analytical
evaluation of the cutting forces in orthogonal cutting using a dynamic
model of the shear zone with parallel boundaries, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 82 (1999) 61–77.
[24] I. Minis, B.S. Berger, Modeling, analysis, of characterization of
machining dynamics, in: F.C. Moon (Ed.), Dynamics and Chaos in
Manufacturing Processes, Wiley, New York, 1998.
[25] S.S. Park, Y. Altintas, M. Movahhedy, Receptance coupling for end
mills, International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 43
(2003) 889–896.