International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

Research on the influence of robot structural mode on regenerative chatter

in milling and analysis of stability boundary improvement domain
Shihao Xin a, Fangyu Peng a, b, Xiaowei Tang a, *, Rong Yan a, Zepeng Li a, Jiawei Wu a
a
School of Mechanical Science and Engineering, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430074, China
b
State Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacturing Equipment and Technology, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, 430074, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Regenerative chatter is an important factor affecting the efficiency and quality of robot milling of large and
Robotic milling complex curved parts, especially when the weak rigid posture is forced to be selected under geometric inter­
Robotic structure mode ference. And the regenerative chatter in robotic milling is not only related to the tool-spindle mode but also
Tool-workpiece engagement state
affected by the tool point low-frequency vibration caused by robot structure mode. At some specific spindle
Regenerative chatter
Stability boundary improvement domain
speed, the tool point low-frequency vibration interrupts the occurrence process of chatter, increases the critical
cutting depth, and generates a stability boundary improvement domain (SBID). This phenomenon makes it
possible to avoid the adverse effects of the weak rigidity of the robot structure, and ensure and even improve
machining efficiency. In order to reveal the mechanism of low-frequency vibration improving the stability
boundary, a tool-workpiece engagement state considering the tool point low-frequency vibration caused by robot
structure mode is analyzed, and radial and tangential tool-workpiece separation models, time-varying process
damping model, and axial cutting depth modulation model are established to describe the mechanism of tool-
workpiece engagement state. And then the time delay coefficient dependent on the cutting state is proposed.
Finally, the stability prediction model considering the tool point low-frequency vibration caused by robot
structure mode is established and verified by experiments with different postures. Through simulation and
experiment with different postures, a set of evaluation indexes is proposed to evaluate the affection of the low-
frequency vibration, and it is found that different robotic postures will lead to different SBIDs, thus proving the
effectiveness of posture optimization on stability improvement. The results show that the proposed robotic
milling stability model can effectively characterize the effect of low-frequency vibration on the stability
boundary, and provide a theoretical basis for accurate positioning of SBID and efficient robotic milling.

1. Introduction influence of low-frequency vibration. Relevant studies in the field of

Robotic milling with large working space and high flexibility has
great advantages in the processing of large and complex structural parts,
such as marine propellers, hydro turbines, etc. [1]. However, large and
complex structural parts usually have significant geometric interference
zone characteristics, resulting in limited available configurations in ro­
botic processing and significant weak rigidity, as shown in Fig. 1.
Therefore, it is generally considered that the machining stability
boundary is low under restricted posture with weak rigidity, and it is
difficult to carry out efficient machining. However, it is found through
experiments that there are also some spindle speeds under this weakly
rigid posture, that can produce a higher critical cutting depth due to the
machine tools also show that the additional steady state vibration at
some process parameters not only does not reduce the stability boundary
but improves the stability boundary [2–5], these studies provided a
novel way for stability optimization. Based on this, this paper further
analyzes the characteristics of vibration of the robot structure, studies its
influence on the stability boundary of high-frequency chatter, explores
the stability boundary improvement domain (SBID) with stabilizing ef­
fect, and sums up the SBID change rule of the different postures, and put
forward a set of evaluation index to analyze the effect of low-frequency
vibration on the stability boundary. The results show that the proposed
model can effectively reveal the improvement effect of low-frequency
vibration on the stability boundary, and provide a theoretical basis for

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: shxinengine@126.com (S. Xin), zwm8917@263.net (F. Peng), tangxw@hust.edu.cn (X. Tang), yanrong@hust.edu.cn (R. Yan), lzpeng11@qq.
com (Z. Li), d202080296@hust.edu.cn (J. Wu).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2022.103918
Received 25 February 2022; Received in revised form 1 July 2022; Accepted 3 July 2022
Available online 7 July 2022
0890-6955/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
S. Xin et al.
the high efficiency of robotic milling.
The existing stability prediction of robotic milling mainly includes
regenerative chatter [6,7] and mode coupling chatter [8,9]. Zhu et al.
[10] concluded in the review report that regenerative chatter mainly
occurs in the spindle-tool mode in high-speed machining, and the
excitation frequency of low-speed machining is similar to the modal
frequency of the robot structure, which is more likely to cause the mode
coupling chatter of the robotic structure. Thus, in the regenerative
chatter of high-speed machining, the existing researches on regenerative
chatter of robotic milling mainly focus on the influence of spindle-tool
mode on stability boundary, which is similar to the chatter study of
the machine tool. However, the stiffness of the robot body is usually
lower than that of the spindle-tool, which is different from the machine
tool system in that the machine tool structure can be considered as a
rigid body with respect to the spindle-tool [7,11]. The robotic milling
system is composed of the robotic structure system and the spindle-tool
system in series. The vibration characteristics of the tool point are
determined both by the structural modes of the robot and the
spindle-tool, and affect the tool-workpiece engagement state. Thus, the
influence of the structural mode of the robot body on the tool end
regenerative chatter cannot be ignored, and in the experiments of robot
milling chatter, it is also found that the frequency component of robot
body structure mode will appear in the regenerative chatter signal of
tool end at some specific spindle speed region, and the critical cutting
depth is higher than the predicted stability boundary considering only
the spindle-tool mode. Therefore, some larger cut depths at certain
speeds may be not detected when the structural mode of the robot body
is ignored.
In terms of regenerative chatter in robotic milling, Chen et al. [12]
established a method to predict the stability of regenerative chatter in
robotic milling under arbitrary posture by rapidly predicting tool end
frequency response function (FRF). Sun et al. [13] studied the processing
stability of robot rotary ultrasonic milling, and established a regenera­
tive chatter stability analysis model based on the analysis of dynamic
chip thickness to achieve the prediction of regenerative chatter stability.
Based on the regenerative chatter model, Cordes et al. [14] calculated
the stability boundaries of each mode of the robot and adopted an
aluminum high-speed milling experiment and titanium low-speed mill­
ing experiment respectively to verify the stability prediction results. The
experimental results showed that the stability prediction accuracy was
good in high speed machining. Therefore, the main type of chatter in
high speed machining was regenerative chatter. Hao et al. [15] verified
the rationality of the application of regenerative chatter theory in the
robotic milling process through a large number of high-speed milling
experiments. It was further verified that the dominant mode of regen­
erative chatter in high speed machining is the spindle-tool mode.
Fig. 1. Robotic machining conditions for large and complex parts with geometric interference zones. (a) Robotic machining of large marine propellers. (b) In-place
robotic machining of a hydro turbine.
2
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
Mousavi et al. [16] established a multi-body dynamic model of a serial
robot by using a beam element. Based on experimental identifications,
the geometry, elasticity, and damping parameters were adjusted to
predict the dynamic behavior. Based on the established regenerative
chatter stability model and the prediction results of dynamic behavior,
the stability prediction of robotic milling was realized. Li et al. [17]
analyzed regenerative chatter in high-speed robotic milling of aluminum
alloys by using acoustic emission technology, root mean square value,
and the fast Fourier transform method.
In some research reports, low-frequency vibration components of the
robotic structure are classified as mode coupling chatter. and related
studies on stability prediction [18–20] and chatter suppression [21,22]
are carried out. Pan et al. [8,20] establish the two-DOF mode coupling
dynamics equation of the robot and took the eigenvalue as the stability
criterion to predict the mode coupling chatter of the robotic milling.
Based on the Conservative Congruence Transformation (CCT) stiffness
model, Cen et al. [18,19] established a prediction model for mode
coupling chatter and proposed a method to avoid mode coupling chatter
without changing the tool feed direction or the workpiece orientation.
Gienke et al. [9] proposed an extended mode coupling chatter theory
suitable for robot kinematics. The occurrence of mode coupling chatter
was determined according to the changing kinematic parameters of the
robot and practical considerations. Yuan et al. [21] adopted magneto­
rheological elastomer, designed and produced a kind of magneto­
rheological elastomer absorber with frequency shift property, through
the semi-active controller to control the vibration absorber to track the
mode coupling chatter frequency, and realized the mode coupling
chatter suppression. Vinh et al. [22] proposed a pose-dependent optimal
control methodology and realized the robot pose-dependent vibration
suppression by solving the Linear Quadratic Regulator optimal control
problem. This method can effectively reduce the low-frequency mode
coupling chatter of the robot.
In previous studies, the mode of robot structure and the mode of
spindle tool were studied separately in mode coupling and regenerative
chatter. In the research of regenerative chatter under high speed milling,
the mode of robot structure was ignored. However, Celikag et al. [23]
found low-frequency vibration components with high amplitude in the
vibration spectrum of high-speed milling. Similarly, Chen et al. [24] and
Wang et al. [25] also have low-frequency vibration components with
high amplitude in their robotic high-speed milling experiments. For
robot milling, the mechanism of low-frequency vibration caused by
weak stiffness on milling stability still needs to be revealed and explored.
At present, it is typical for Mohammadi et al. [26] to study the influence
of robotic axial vibration on regenerative chatter in milling. They found
that the modulation of cutting depth leads to additional stiffness-like
terms in the equation of chatter, and this term could have both
S. Xin et al.
stabilizing and destabilizing effects at different spindle speeds. Howev­
er, since only the axial vibration was studied, the prediction results of
the model differ little from previous models.
In the research on the milling stability of machine tools, some
scholars considered the influence of vibration on the tool-workpiece
engagement and analyzed the milling stability of machine tools [2,3,
5]. Bachrathy et al. [2] established a state-dependent delay model
considering the forced vibration of large amplitude in machine tool
processing, accurately calculated the instantaneous cutting thickness
under the forced vibration of large amplitude, and improved the stability
prediction accuracy. Totis et al. demonstrated the effect of steady-state
forced vibration on stability analysis through preliminary experi­
mental studies in 2018 [4], and further proposed symmetry breaking
mechanism for milling dynamics in 2019 [5]. The research showed that
when a non-ideal cutting tool was used and the amplitude of the steady
state vibration was comparable to the instantaneous chip thickness, the
engagement state of the tool-workpiece will change significantly. The
proposed symmetry breaking mechanism well characterizes the above
effects, and the established stability has better universality and accuracy
than the traditional model. Ma et al. [3] studied the milling stability
under the coupling of multiple modes and cutting tool runout. Experi­
mental and numerical simulation results showed that chatter will cause
cutting tool runout, which will increase or decrease milling stability
locally.
The above research revealed the evolution law of machining stability
under the influence of severe chatter or large-amplitude steady state
vibration in machine tool milling, which generally has a significant
impact when cutting with a large cutting depth and a small feed rate and
with non-ideal cutting tools [5]. Compared with the machine tool
milling system, the robot has a more flexible structure (The stiffness is
generally lower than 1/50 of the machine tool [8]), and leads to the
emergence of low-frequency vibration (about 10–30 Hz) in robotic
milling. Moreover, the mechanism of low-frequency vibration in robotic
milling is significantly different from that of steady vibration in machine
tool processing. For example, the change period of instantaneous cutting
thickness is much higher than that of a tooth pass frequency, and the
large vibration amplitude leads to the obvious change of passing
damping indented area, and so on. Therefore, it is necessary to consider
the influence of low-frequency vibration in robotic milling.
To sum up, the existing research on the influence of low-frequency
vibration of the robot on regenerative chatter at the tool end only
consider the axial vibration with little influence, while the radial and
tangential vibration with great influence on instantaneous cutting
thickness should be further studied.
Therefore, a regenerative chatter stability model considering the
low-frequency modal characteristics (low-frequency vibration) of the
robot structure is proposed in this paper to reveal the phenomenon that
the critical cutting depth will be improved at certain spindle speeds due
to the influence of low-frequency vibration under some weak rigid
postures. Through precise parameter selection, the low-frequency vi­
bration caused by the weak rigid structure of the robot is used to
improve the stability boundary, thus providing a new way to guarantee
the robotic milling machining efficiency under the weak rigid posture.
In Section 2, the modal characteristics of the robot are analyzed and
the low-frequency vibration of the robot is solved and verified experi­
mentally. In Section 3, the tool-workpiece separation model, time-
varying process damping model, and axial cutting depth modulation
model are established, and the time delay coefficient related to the tool-
workpiece engagement state is proposed. Based on this, the influence of
tool point low-frequency vibration caused by robotic structure mode on
regenerative chatter is analyzed. Combined with the analysis of Section
3, a milling stability prediction model considering tool point low-
frequency vibration caused by robot structure mode is established in
Section 4. In section 5, stability prediction, analysis, and experimental
verification are carried out according to the robotic machining postures
of large marine propellers. Combined with the posture-dependent of the
3
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
tool point low-frequency vibration caused by robot structure mode, the
feasibility of optimizing SBID by changing the posture to further
improve milling efficiency is analyzed.
The main contributions of this study are as follows:
● It is found that the critical cutting depth will be improved observably
at certain spindle speeds due to the influence of robotic low-
frequency vibration.
● In order to reveal this phenomenon, the influence mechanism of the
tool point low-frequency vibration caused by robot structure mode
on the tool-workpiece engagement state is analyzed, and the tool-
workpiece separation model, time-varying process damping model,
and axial cutting depth modulation model are established.
● Considering the low-frequency vibration of the tool point caused by
the robotic mode, a prediction model of the stability lobe diagram is
established to characterize the effect of the low-frequency vibration
on the stability boundary.
● The SBID change rule of the different postures are summarized, and a
set of evaluation index is proposed to analyze the effect of low-
frequency vibration on the stability boundary.
2. Modal testing and low-frequency vibration analysis
To analyze the dynamic characteristics of tool point in the robot
milling system, the modal test of the robot-spindle-tool system is carried
out. The research is carried out on ABB IRB6660 robotic milling plat­
form, and the modal test experiments are carried out with a 3D scanning
laser Doppler vibrometer (Polytec PSV-500-3D-H). The parameters of
the robot are shown in Table 1. The modal test setup is shown in Fig. 2.
The test results are shown in Fig. 3, and the modal parameters are shown
in Table B.1 in Appendix B.
The test results are similar to those in Ref. [14], the dynamic char­
acteristics of tool point in the robot milling system include the robot
structure mode and spindle-tool structure mode. For the robotic milling
system used in this research, the modes of robot structure are concen­
trated within 150 Hz, while the dominant modes with high flexibility are
concentrated below 30 Hz, which is consistent with the low-frequency
vibration observed in the experiment. As shown in Fig. 3, the flexi­
bility of the robot structure is mainly concentrated at 0–30 Hz, and the
low-frequency vibration is also concentrated at 0–30 Hz. Therefore, the
frequency range of the tool point low-frequency vibration in this paper is
0–30 Hz. The modes of the spindle-tool structure are greater than 500 Hz
and the amplitude is below the robot mode. It demonstrates that the
dynamic stiffness of the robot body structure is lower than that of the
spindle-tool structure, which is different from the machine tool system
in that the machine tool structure can be considered as a rigid body with
respect to the spindle-tool. Thus, the influence of tool point vibration
produced by the robotic structure mode on regenerative chatter domi­
nated by the spindle-tool mode cannot be ignored. For convenience, in
this study, the tool point vibration generated by robot structure mode is
called tool point low-frequency vibration.
To analyze the mechanism of robotic structure mode on the regen­
erative chatter, the Newmark integration method [27] is used to solve
the tool point low-frequency vibration in milling. See Appendix A for the
specific solving process. The low-frequency vibration displacement of
the tool point is expressed as xrv(t), yrv(t), and zrv(t). Firstly, the
low-frequency vibration is solved by using the modal parameters of the
robotic posture shown in Fig. 2. The bull-nosed tool (600-025A25-10H)
is selected as a cutting tool, the radial cutting depth is 8 mm,
nickel-aluminum bronze is selected as the experimental material, and
Table 1
The specific parameters of the robot ABB IRB6660.
Weight (kg) Handing capacity (kg) Reach (m)
1730 205 1.93
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Fig. 2. Modal test setup and robotic milling system. (a) The modal test of the robot is carried out with a 3D scanning laser Doppler vibrometer (Polytec PSV-500-3D-
H). (b) Robotic milling system (ABB IRB6660).

Fig. 4. Tool point low-frequency vibration chromatogram (Y-direction). The

Fig. 3. Direct FRFs and cross FRFs of the robotic milling system. The robotic
low-frequency vibration amplitude of the posture with better dynamic stiffness
modes with higher flexibility are concentrated below 30 Hz, while the tool
is less than 20 μm. When the robot is in a more flexible posture, the low-
mode around 800 Hz has the maximum dynamic stiffness.
frequency vibration amplitude will be significantly increased.

the cutting parameters are shown in Table 2. The cutting force co­
vibration has the characteristics of large amplitude (0–20 μm) and low-
efficients in Table 2 are identified by cutting experiments [28]. Ac­
frequency (10–30 Hz). Large amplitude may affect the tool-workpiece
cording to the solution results, the vibration displacement is expressed
engagement state, and cause the phenomenon of tool-workpiece sepa­
as an amplitude-dependent chromatogram, as shown in Fig. 4. It can be
ration, change of process damping, and the modulation of axial cutting
seen that the amplitude can be more than 15 μm, which is on the order of
depth, which will further affect the machining stability.
magnitude of the uncut chip thickness.
In order to verify the accuracy of the low-frequency vibration solu­
3.1. Tool-workpiece engagement state analysis
tion method, milling experiments are carried out. The cutting parame­
ters in Table 2 are still adopted, and a 1.8 mm axial cutting depth is
In the classical regenerative chatter stability model, the chip thick­
selected for experimental verification. The verification results and
ness h (t) is generally expressed as a function of the current amplitude r
simulation comparison are shown in Fig. 5. The maximum error is
(t) and the amplitude r (t - T) of the workpiece surface cut by the pre­
±3.1013 μm, the minimum error is ±0.0267 μm, and the average error
vious cutter tooth [29,30]:
is ±0.6157 μm. The experimental errors may be caused by some random
disturbances during milling, and the average error is only ±0.6157 μm. h(t) = h0 (t) + δh(t) = h0 (t) + [r(t) − r(t − T)] (1)
The prediction results are generally accurate. To sum up, the Newmark
integration method can be used as a solution method for low-frequency where, h0(t) is nominal chip thickness, δh(t) is the regenerative chip
vibration in subsequent studies. thickness. The cutting force is generally expressed as the sum of each
differential cutting force δFij (δFij = f (h(t), dz, …)), and the basic form of
3. Tool-workpiece engagement mechanism modeling the expression is as follows:
considering robotic structure mode N ∑
∑ M
F= δFij (2)
As shown in Figs. 3 and 4 of Section 2, the tool point low-frequency j=1 i=1

Table 2
Cutting parameters for illustration.
Kt (N/mm2) Kr (N/mm2) Ka (N/mm2) Axial cutting depth (mm) Spindle speed (rpm) Diameter (mm) Tool teeth number Helix angle (deg)

4940.2 5680.1 315.8 1–3 3000–6000 25 3 7

4
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Fig. 5. Experimental and theoretical low-frequency vibration prediction results and displacement spectrum. The experimental results show that the solution of low-
frequency vibration is relatively accurate, with an average error of ±0.6157 μm. The experimental vibration displacement spectrum at 3050 rpm, 4650 rpm, and
5900 rpm are listed in this figure.

where, N is the number of tool teeth, M (M = ap/dz) represents the
number of differential elements of axial cutting depth, ap is the axial
cutting depth, dz is the differential element thickness.
When considering the low-frequency vibration caused by the robotic
structure mode, the chip thickness is expressed as follows:
hrv (t) = h0 (t) + δh(t) + hlv (t) (3)
where, hlv (t) (hlv (t) = f (xrv(t), yrv(t), …)) represents the additional chip
thickness changes caused by low-frequency vibration of the robot, as
shown in Fig. 6.
In this figure, point P0 is the tool center of the previous moment,
while P1 and P1’ are the real tool center with low-frequency vibration
considered and the nominal tool center without low-frequency vibration
considered respectively. Correspondingly, the chip thickness will
change with the occurrence of low-frequency vibration. The gray shaded
part in this figure is the nominal chip thickness, and the green grid part is
the real chip thickness. It is noted that the influence of low-frequency
vibration on chip thickness is very complex. Fig. 6. (c) only one of the
influence results is drawn for the convenience of illustration. It can be
seen that the X and Y directions of low-frequency vibration mainly affect
the change of chip thickness.
On the other hand, when low-frequency vibration is considered, the
axial cutting depth will be modulated under the influence of low-
frequency vibration, and the cutting force expression will also change,
as shown below:

Fig. 6. Tool-workpiece engagement state is affected by the low-frequency vibration of the robot. (a) Robotic milling system. (b) Schematic diagram of tool-workpiece
engagement. (c) Influence of radial tool point low-frequency vibration (xrv (t), yrv (t)) on tool-workpiece engagement. (d) Influence of axial (zrv (t)) tool point low-
frequency vibration on tool-workpiece engagement.

5
S. Xin et al.
∑N ∑M+δM
Frv = δFij,rv
j=1 i=1
where, δFij,rv (δFij,rv = f (hrv(t), dz, …)) represents the differential cutting
force considering the influence of vibration in the X and Z directions,
δM(δM = ⌈ − zrv (t) /dz⌉) (The symbol "⌈ ⌉" represents the upward
rounding operation, that is, taking a contiguous integer greater than
itself) represents the change of differential elements number of axial
cutting depth caused by zrv(t) modulation of axial low-frequency vi­
bration, as shown in Fig. 6. (d).
In this figure, point P0 is the tool center of the previous moment,
while P1 and P1’ are the real tool center with low-frequency vibration
considered and the nominal tool center without low-frequency vibration
considered respectively. Correspondingly, the chip thickness will
change with the occurrence of low-frequency vibration. The gray shaded
part in this figure is the nominal chip thickness, and the green grid part is
the real chip thickness. Different from low-frequency vibration in the X
and Y direction, low-frequency vibration in the Z direction mainly af­
fects the change of axial cutting depth.
To sum up, low-frequency vibration xrv (t) and yrv (t) mainly affects
the change of chip thickness, while zrv (t) mainly affects the change of
axial cutting depth. According to the above analysis, a tool-workpiece
engagement mechanism model for robotic milling is established in
Section 3 considering low-frequency vibration (xrv (t), yrv (t), and zrv (t)).
On this basis, the influence of milling regenerative vibration (δh(t)) is
considered in Section 4, and a stability model is established considering
low-frequency vibration and regeneration effect.
3.2. Tool-workpiece separation
According to the different directions tool point low-frequency vi­
bration, the tool-workpiece separation can be divided into radial tool-
workpiece separation (RTWS) and tangential tool-workpiece separa­
tion (TTWS). Since tool-workpiece separation occurs in the XY plane (As
shown in Fig. 6. (c)) and is independent of Z direction vibration, only xrv
(t) and yrv (t) are considered in the analysis of tool-workpiece separation
in this section. Firstly, the possibility of the above two types of tool-
workpiece separation is analyzed.
As shown in Fig. 7, RTWS occurs in the radial direction of the cutter
tooth and is mainly affected by the feed per tooth and radial vibration rrv,
ij(t). The tool point low-frequency vibration has a larger vibration
amplitude (0–20 μm, Fig. 4), which results in a larger vibration of the
cutter tooth in the radial direction. Since the feed per tooth is in the same
order of magnitude as the radial vibration amplitude, RTWS may occur
in robotic milling.
TTWS occurs in the tangential direction of the cutter tooth and is
mainly affected by the tangential velocity of the cutter tooth Vctp and the
tangential vibration velocity Vcrv(t). As the tangential vibration velocity
Vcrv(t) of a tooth comes from the tool point low-frequency vibration,
according to the modal analysis of the robot in Fig. 3 of Section 2, its
vibration frequency is about 10–150 Hz. The amplitude observed in the
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of tool-workpiece separation. (a) Radial tool-
workpiece separation. (b) Tangential tool-workpiece separation.
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
(4) experiment is generally not more than 20 μm. Therefore, the tangential
vibration velocity Vcrv(t) is not more than 0.019 m/s (Max(dt(20*sin
(150*2πt))) = 20*300πμm/s = 0.019 m/s). The tooth tangential velocity
Vctp is related to the spindle speed n and the tool radius R. Vctp = 2πRn/
60. When R = 12.5 mm and n = 1200–12000 rpm, the tooth tangential
velocity Vctp is 1.57–15.7 m/s. Therefore, the tool point low-frequency
vibration will not cause TTWS at conventional spindle speed. In addi­
tion, the high-frequency regenerative chatter amplitude of the tool that
appeared in the experiment only diverges to the micron level and stops,
far less than the feed per tooth ft = 0.05mm/rev/tooth. Therefore, the
chatter will not cause RTWS. The chatter frequency is about 801.9 Hz,
and the vibration speed at this time is not greater than 0.005 m/s (Max
(dt(1*sin(801.9*2πt))) = 1*1603.8πμm/s = 0.005 m/s). Therefore, the
chatter also does not cause TTWS. The expression of the tangential ve­
locity of the cutter tooth Vctp and the tangential vibration velocity Vcrv(t)
is as follows:
Vctp = 2πnR/60 (5)
Vcrv (t) = ẋrv (t)sin φij (t) + ẏrv (t)cos φij (t) (6)
To sum up, the tool-workpiece separation in robotic milling is mainly
RTWS. RTWS will be analyzed and modeled in detail below.
The vibration period of tool point low-frequency vibration is longer
than that of tooth passing. There will be multiple tooth passing periods
(Ttp) within a single low-frequency vibration period (Trv), and the in­
fluence of tool point low-frequency vibration on the dynamic chip
thickness in each tooth passing period is quite different. Therefore,
considering the tool point low-frequency vibration, the stability analysis
should take the low-frequency vibration period as the unit time.
Fig. 8. (a) shows the schematic diagram of chip thickness under the
influence of tool point low-frequency vibration. The abscissa is the tool
rotation angle (or time history), the ordinate is the chip thickness, and
the number of tool teeth is three. Due to the influence of the cutting
process, the cutting delay time, i.e. the tooth passing period (Ttp), should
be considered when calculating the chip thickness. Since the ratio of tool
point low-frequency vibration period to tooth passing period may not be
an integer, the last remainder in the figure will generally appear, the
stability changes in the whole vibration period need to be completely
analyzed. Therefore, the last remainder needs to be extended to a
complete tooth passing period for calculation. The final number of teeth
passing periods to be analyzed and calculated is shown as follows:
⌈ / ⌉
n = Trv Ttp (7)
where the symbol "⌈ ⌉" represents the upward rounding operation.
In addition, the tool details of the first spindle rotation period (i.e.
three teeth passing periods) in Fig. 8. (a) are described. As shown in
Fig. 8. (b), when the spindle rotation angle θ is 0◦ –120◦ , the cutter tooth
1st is in the cutting state. Similarly, when θ is 120◦ –240◦ or 240◦ –360◦ ,
the 2nd or 3rd cutter tooth is in the cutting state. The cutting time of
each cutter tooth is a tooth passing period time (Ttp), that is, delay time.
The influence of tool point low-frequency vibration on each tooth
passing period is different. Under the influence of immersion angle φij (t),
the radial vibration of cutter tooth caused by the tool point low-
frequency vibration can be expressed as:
rrv,ij (t) = xrv (t)sin φij (t) + yrv (t)cos φij (t) (0 ≤ t < Trv ) (8)
the chip thickness change caused by radial vibration can be expressed as:
( )
hrv,ij (t) = rrv,ij (t) − rrv,ij t − Ttp (0 ≤ t < Trv ) (9)
When the tool point low-frequency vibration is not considered, the
change of chip thickness is the same in each tooth passing period, and
the chip thickness at any time can be expressed as a function of the feed
per tooth ft and immersion angleφij (t):
6
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Fig. 8. Schematic diagram of chip thickness considering tool point low-frequency vibration. (a) Global description at low-frequency vibration period. (b) Detail
description of one rotation.

{ h (t) = f cos φ (t) ( )

0 ≤ t < Ttp
Table 3
ij t ij
( ) ( ) (10)
hij (t) = ft cos φij t\Ttp Ttp ≤ t < Trv Parameters setting for the example to represent the tool-workpiece engagement
state.
where the notation ’\’ is modular arithmetic. When tool point low- Vibration Vibration Spindle Feed per Tool teeth
frequency vibration is considered, the chip thickness will change, and frequency of amplitude of speed Tooth number
the formula is as follows: robotic structure robotic structure (rpm) (mm/
(Hz) (μm) tooth)
hdy,ij (t) = hij (t) + hrv,ij (t) (0 ≤ t < Trv ) (11) 20 15 3600 0.01 3
When the extra chip thickness (hrv,ij (t)) caused by the tool point low-
frequency vibration is negative and its absolute value is greater than the
tool-workpiece engagement state with different tooth pass periods, as
current chip thickness (hij(t)), the tool-workpiece engagement state is
shown in Fig. 9. The vertical axis is the cutting time history, the hori­
RTWS. RTWS is mainly affected by the tool point low-frequency vibra­
zontal axis is the spindle rotation angle (θ). By recording the change of
tion and the feed per tooth, as shown in Eq. (9) and Eq. (10). When the
chip thickness during different tooth passing periods in the one low-
tool-workpiece engagement state is RTWS, the cutting force is zero and
frequency vibration period, the tool-workpiece engagement state
the cutter tooth has not been cut. The RTWS can be expressed by the unit
considering the tool point low-frequency vibration is analyzed and
step function as follows:
modeled. It is worth noting that the tooth passing frequency set in
( )
( )
{
1, with hij (t) + hrv,ij (t) > 0 Table 3 is an integer multiple of the low-frequency vibration frequency.
g2 φij = ( ) (12) In fact, the remainder as shown in Fig. 8 will generally occur. When the
0, with hij (t) + hrv,ij (t) ≤ 0
remainder occurs, the upward rounding method in Eq. (7) will be used
Based on the above analysis, this paper divides the tool-workpiece for processing, so as to ensure that the chip thickness change caused by
engagement state into RTWS state and cutting state. In the cutting low-frequency vibration is fully considered. For ease of expression and
state, it can be further subdivided by judging whether the RTWS has understanding, the subsequent legends in this chapter will be drawn
occurred in the previous cutter tooth and how many consecutive RTWS based on the parameters set in Table 3, but the case of the remainder will
has occurred. The cutting state without radial tool-workpiece separation be considered in the establishment of the model.
occurring in the previous cutter is called single time delay cutting Fig. 9 (b) ~ Fig. 9 (e) respectively represent the changes in flute
(STDC), and the cutting state with radial tool-workpiece separation trajectory and chip thickness at t = Ttp ~ 4Ttp, corresponding to the
occurring in the previous cutter or continuous radial tool-workpiece cutting area 1–4 in Fig. 9. (a). In this figure, the solid black line and
separation occurring in the previous several cutter teeth is called mul­ dotted black line respectively represent the actual and nominal flute
tiple time delay cutting (MTDC). trajectory, the dashed black line represents the flute trajectory at the
The parameters in Table 3 are taken as an example to represent the historical moment, the dashed orange line represents the workpiece

7
S. Xin et al.
surface, the shaded part represents the cut area at the past moment, and
the grid part represents the cutting area at the current moment. In Fig. 9
(b) ~ Fig. 9 (e), the cut in point and cut out point of the same cutter tooth
are represented by points of the same color, and different colors repre­
sent different cutter teeth respectively. When not in the RTWS state, the
tool-workpiece engagement state is in the cutting state, and the flute
trajectory of the two cutter teeth forming the cutting area is marked
below the cutting state annotation in figure. As shown in Fig. 9. (c), the
chip thickness at this time is formed by the flute trajectory of green and
purple cutter teeth.
Cutting area 1 is the STDC state, and the chip thickness model is
shown in Fig. 9. (b). Tooth k and Tooth k+1 have no radial tool-
workpiece separation, the cutting force is not zero, the chip thickness
is affected by the vibration of two adjacent cutter teeth (Tooth k and
Tooth k+1), and the time delay is one-time tooth passing period.
Cutting area 2 has two cutting states, namely STDC and RTWS. The
chip thickness model is shown in Fig. 9. (c). Tooth k+2 occurs radial
tool-workpiece separation in the second half of the cutting process, at
this time the cutting force is zero.
Cutting area 3 is the RTWS state, and the chip thickness model is
shown in Fig. 9. (d). Tooth k+3 occurs radial tool-workpiece separation,
at this time the cutting force is zero.
{ ( ( ) )
1, with hdy,ij t − Ttp > 0
τ= (( ( ) ) ( ( ) ) (
n, with hdy,ij t − nTtp > 0 & hdy,ij t − (n − 1)Ttp < 0 &⋯& hdy,ij t − Ttp < 0
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
Fig. 9. Influence of structure radial vi­
bration of the robot on tool-workpiece
engagement state. (a) Global descrip­
tion at low-frequency vibration period.
(b) Cutting area 1. (c) Cutting area 2.
(d) Cutting area 3. (e) Cutting area 4. It
is noted that hij is actually a variable
related to immersion angle as shown by
the dotted line in Fig. 9. (b)–(e). In
Fig. 9. (a), in order to facilitate the
illustration of the influence of low-
frequency vibration, it is drawn as a
constant. For ease of reading, the
beginning and end of the same tool flute
trajectory in the figure are marked with
dots of the same color. (For interpreta­
tion of the references to color in this
figure legend, the reader is referred to
the Web version of this article.)
Cutting area 4 is the MTDC state, and the chip thickness model is
shown in Fig. 9. (e). Tooth k+4 does not occur RTWS. In the first half,
the former cutter tooth (Tooth k+3) occurs RTWS, and the cutting sur­
face of tooth k+4 is left by the nearest cutter tooth (Tooth k+2) that does
not occur RTWS. At this time, the chip thickness is affected by tooth k+4
and tooth k+2 vibration, and the time delay is ((k+4) - (k+2))*Ttp =
2Ttp。In the second half, the former teeth (Tooth k+3 and Tooth k+2)
occur RTWS, the cutting surface of tooth k+4 is left by the nearest cutter
tooth (Tooth k+1) that does not occur RTWS. At this time, the chip
thickness is affected by tooth k+4 and tooth k+1 vibration, and the time
delay is 3Ttp。In this way, when RTWS does not occur in tooth j but
occurs in tooth j-1 ~ tooth j-n, the cutting force is not zero, the chip
thickness is affected by the vibration of tooth j and tooth j-n-1, and the
time delay becomes (j - (j-n-1)) Ttp = (n+1) Ttp.
To sum up, if the phenomenon of radial tool-workpiece separation
continuously occurs in the n (n ≥ 1) tooth passing periods, the workpiece
surface of this cutting is caused by the cutting process with an interval of
n+1 periods, and the time delay is n+1 times tooth passing period, that
is, (n+1) Ttp. The ratio of the current cutting time delay to the tooth
passing time is expressed as the time delay coefficient τ, and the corre­
sponding judgment function is shown as follows:
( ) )) (13)
8
S. Xin et al.
According to Eq. (12) and Eq. (13), when g2 = 0, radial tool-
workpiece separation occurs and the cutting force is zero. When g2 =
1 and τ = 1, stability modeling method is equivalent to conventional
method. When g2 = 1 and τ > 1, the dynamic chip thickness is deter­
mined by the flute trajectory between the current tooth and the closest
tooth that does not occur radial tool-workpiece separated. In this case,
the time delay is determined by Eq. (13), and the corresponding stability
modeling and solving process are detailed in Section 4.
3.3. Time-varying process damping
Process damping is the damping force generated when the cutting
surface is in contact with the tool flank face, and it is generally man­
ifested as suppression of machining vibration [31,32]. Therefore, similar
to the tool-workpiece separation, process damping also occurs in the XY
plane. The analysis of process damping in this section will ignore the
vibration in the Z direction and only consider xrv(t) and yrv(t).
In robot milling, the tool point low-frequency vibration displacement
exists in robotic milling, which will affect the indented area of process
damping and change the magnitude of process damping. Therefore, the
tool point low-frequency vibration may improve the influence range and
effect of the process damping phenomenon.
In the process damping model, the process damping force is modeled
as a function of the indented area, and the radial and tangential process
damping force formulas are as follows:
⎧
⎨ Fd (t) = αKd Sd,ij (t)
r,ij
(14)
d
⎩ Ft,ij d
(t) = μFr,ij (t)
where Sd,ij (t) is an overall indented area, Kd is material dependent
indentation coefficient, α is a proportion factor to represent the actual
indented. The calibration method of correlation coefficients is based on
the relevant researches [31,32].
The indented area Sd,ij is divided into a static indented areaSst (t) and
a dynamic indented areaSdy,ij (t), as shown in Fig. 10, and both regions
will influence milling stability. When tool point low-frequency vibration
is not considered, the separation point (SP) is only determined by the
vibration produced by tool structure mode. The calculation formula of
static and dynamic indented areas is as follows:
Fig. 10. Classical process damping model. The blue part of the figure is the
dynamic indented area, and the yellow part is the static indented area. (For
interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is
referred to the Web version of this article.)
9
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
( 2 ) ( 2 )
rh βs rh2 sin βs cos βs r γ r2 cos 2 βs tan γ
Sst = − + h − h
2 2 2 2
( )2
rh cos βs 1
+ rh − (15)
cos γ 2 tan γ
L2pd
Sdy,ij (t) = rv,ij (t) (16)
2Vctp
Sd,ij = Sst + Sdy,ij (17)
where rv,ij represents the radial vibration velocity of the cutter tooth and
Lpd represents the indented length, as shown in Fig. 10. The specific
calculation formula is as follows:
rv,ij (t) = ẋ(t)sin φij + ẏ(t)cos φij (18)
Lpd = rh [sin βs + sin γ + (cos γ − cos βs ) / tan γ] (19)
where rh is the edge radius of the cutting tool, βs is the separation angle
to define the separation point (SP), and γ is the clearance angle of the
tool.
Considering the tool point low-frequency vibration, the SP will
change with the change of the separation angle. At this time, the
indented area will change dynamically and have different changes in
different tooth passing periods. As shown in Fig. 11, vibration trajectory
in the whole low-frequency vibration period is described. Based on this,
the influence of tool point low-frequency vibration on SP and indented
area in different tooth passing periods is described. The gray dashed line
represents the flute trajectory without considering the tool point low-
frequency vibration, the black solid line represents the flute trajectory
considering the tool point low-frequency vibration, and the orange
dashed line represents the tool point low-frequency vibration trajectory.
Three typical cutting areas A, B, and C are selected for analysis, and the
details are shown in Fig. 11. (b) ~ Fig. 11. (e). It is noted that if the low-
frequency vibration period is not an integer multiple of the tooth passing
period, the processing method of the remainder is consistent with the
processing method in Fig. 8, that is, the upward rounding method is
adopted to ensure the integrity of the low-frequency vibration influence
consideration in the model.
In cutting area A, the tool point low-frequency vibration leads to the
tooth pressing into the workpiece surface, the separation angle βs in­
creases, the SP moves up, and the indented area increases accordingly.
At this point, the process damping increases, and the indented model
comparison is shown in Fig. 11. (b) and Fig. 11. (c). In cutting area B, the
tool point low-frequency vibration amplitude is small, which has little
influence on the area of the indented area. At this point, the process
damping can be approximately considered unchanged, and the indented
model comparison is shown in Fig. 11. (b) and Fig. 11. (d). In cutting
area C, the tool point low-frequency vibration causes the tooth to move
away from the workpiece surface, the separation angle βs decreases, the
SP moves down, and the indented area decreases accordingly. At this
point, the process damping decreases, and the indented model com­
parison is shown in Fig. 11. (b) and Fig. 11. (e).
The parameters in Table 3 are used to calculate the indented area
with and without tool point low-frequency vibration under the unit
radial vibration velocity. The calculation results are shown in Fig. 12.
(a). The figure shows the change process of the indented area within a
low-frequency vibration period (Trv). Corresponding to Fig. 11. (a), in
the first half of Trv, the tool point low-frequency vibration induces the
tool to press into the workpiece surface, which increases the indented
area and processes damping. In the second half of Trv, the tool point low-
frequency vibration causes the tool to be far away from the workpiece
surface, which decreases the indented area and processes damping.
When the amplitude of low-frequency vibration decreases to 5 μm, the
influence of low-frequency vibration on the indented area also
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Fig. 11. Time-varying process damping model

considering tool point low-frequency vibration. (a)
Global description at low-frequency vibration period.
(b) Without tool point low-frequency vibration. (c)
With tool point low-frequency vibration (A). (d) With
tool point low-frequency vibration (B). (e) With tool
point low-frequency vibration (C). With the change of
low-frequency vibration, the process damping
indented area changes significantly, the static inden­
ted area changes with the low-frequency vibration,
and the dynamic indented area changes with the time
and low-frequency vibration.

Fig. 12. Area comparison of process damping indented region under unit radial vibration velocity. (a) xrv = yrv = 15 μm. (b) xrv = yrv = 5 μm. The time-varying
process damping is related to the amplitude of the tool point low-frequency vibration. When the amplitude of the low-frequency vibration is larger, the time-
varying process damping is larger and has a more significant impact on the stability boundary.

10
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

decreases, as shown in Fig. 12. (b). Therefore, the time-varying process

L2rpd,ij (t)
damping is related to the amplitude of the tool point low-frequency Srdy,ij (t) = rv,ij (t) (23)
vibration. When the amplitude of the low-frequency vibration is 2Vctp
larger, the time-varying process damping is larger and has a more sig­
nificant impact on the stability boundary. Srd,ij (t) = Srst,ij (t) + Srdy,ij (t) (24)
In conclusion, the separation angle βs and the indented length Lpd will
where Srdy,ij (t) represents time-varying dynamic indented area, Srst,ij (t)
change according to the tool point low-frequency vibration. Dynamic
represents time-varying static indented area, Srd,ij (t) represents time-
separation angle βrs,ij (t) and dynamic indented lengthLrpd,ij (t) are
varying total indented area. rv,ij (t) represents radial vibration velocity
calculated as follows:
[ ] of cutter tooth, Vctp represents the tangential velocity of cutter tooth as
rh cos βs + rrv,ij (t) shown in Eq. (5). Therefore, the time-varying process damping calcu­
βrs,ij (t) = arccos (20)
rh lation formula considering the tool point low-frequency vibration is as
[ ( ) ( ( )) / ] follows:
Lrpd,ij (t) = rh sin βrs,ij (t) + sin γ + cos γ − cos βrs,ij (t) tan γ (21) ⎧
⎨ Fd (t) = αKd Srd,ij (t)
(25)
rr,ij
where rrv,ij (t) represents radial vibration of cutter tooth caused by low- d
⎩ Frt,ij d
(t) = μFrr,ij (t)
frequency vibration, as shown in Eq. (8).
The influence of tool point low-frequency vibration on damping in
the milling process is related to the magnitude of radial vibration. 3.4. Axial cutting depth modulation
Considering the low-frequency vibration, the time-varying process
damping indented area is expressed as follows: The axial low-frequency vibration of the tool end (zrv(t)) will cause
(
rh βrs,ij rh2 sin βrs,ij cos βrs,ij
) ( 2 ) the modulation of the axial cutting depth, thus increasing or decreasing
r γ r2 cos 2 βrs,ij tan γ
Srst,ij (t) = − + h − h the axial cutting depth and the number of differential elements of axial
2 2 2 2
( ) cutting depth. The change of the number of differential elements will
rh cos βrs,ij 2 1 directly affect the size of the cutting force, and to a certain extent,
+ rh − (22)
cos λ 2 tan γ magnify or reduce the influence of tool-workpiece separation and time-
varying process damping caused by low-frequency vibration in X and Y
directions. Since the vibration in the X and Y directions does not affect
the axial cutting depth, only zrv(t) is considered in the analysis of the

Fig. 13. Axial cutting depth modulation. (a) Change of axial cutting depth during a low-frequency vibration period. (b) Axial cutting depth modulation at region A.
(c) Axial cutting depth modulation at region B.

11
S. Xin et al.
axial cutting depth modulation in this section.
When axial low-frequency vibration of tool end is considered, as
shown in Eq. (4), the additional cutting force due to axial cutting depth
modulation is expressed as follows:
⎧ depth.
⎪ ∑N ∑M+δM
⎪
⎨ − sgn(zrv ) j=1 δFij,rv if(zrv < 0)
(26)
i=M
Frv z = ∑ ∑
⎪
⎪ N M
⎩ − sgn(zrv ) j=1 i=M+δM
δFij,rv if(zrv ≥ 0)
When zrv(t) is negative (the coordinate system is shown in Fig. 6), the
tool is close to the workpiece, and the axial cutting depth becomes larger
under the influence of low-frequency vibration. When zrv(t) is positive,
the tool is far away from the workpiece, and the axial cutting depth
becomes smaller under the influence of low-frequency vibration. As
shown in Fig. 13, the solid gray line is the nominal tool path, and the
solid black line is the real tool path considering low-frequency vibration.
It is noted that since xrv(t) and yrv(t) do not affect the axial cutting depth,
low-frequency vibrations in the X and Y directions will not be considered
in the schematic. To facilitate the description, two typical regions, A and
B, are selected for analysis. As shown in Fig. 13. (b), when zrv(t) is
negative, the tool is close to the workpiece, and the axial cutting depth
increases, so does the number of differential elements. Since zrv is usu­
ally not divisible by dz, the upward rounding method is used to calculate
the differential elements number of cutting force to ensure that the
calculated cutting force is greater than or equal to the real cutting force.
Because the error is within one differential cutting force, the impact on
the total cutting force can be ignored (the conventional calculation of
cutting force up to thousands of differentials cutting force), so the up­
ward rounding method is feasible at this time. At this time, the incre­
ment number of differential elements is δM, and the expression of δM is
shown as follows:
δM = ⌈ − zrv (t) / dz⌉ (27)
where the symbol "⌈ ⌉" represents the upward rounding operation, that
is, taking a contiguous integer greater than itself. In region B, as shown
in Fig. 13. (c), zrv(t) is positive and the tool is far away from the work­
piece. At this time, the axial cutting depth decreases, the number of
differential elements also decreases, and the reduced number is δM.
To sum up, the low-frequency vibration of the tool end in the Z di­
rection will modulate the axial cutting depth, thus increasing or
decreasing the number of differential elements and influencing the size
of the cutting force. On the other hand, as the low-frequency vibration in
the X and Y directions finally manifests itself as the influence on each
differential cutting force, the low-frequency vibration of the tool end in
the Z direction will also indirectly strengthen or weaken the effect of the
low-frequency vibration in the X and Y directions. At present, the axial
cutting depth (1–3 mm) is too large for the axial low-frequency vibration
(5–15 μm). Therefore, in terms of the degree of influence on stability, the
axial cutting depth modulation effect caused by zrv (t) is relatively weak
Fig. 14. Cutting force model.
12
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
compared with the chip thickness change caused by xrv (t) and yrv (t).
However, in some special working conditions, the axial cutting depth
modulation phenomenon will be magnified and become not negligible,
such as the working conditions of large cutting width and small cutting
4. Stability modeling considering the robotic structure mode
In this section, based on the analysis in Section 3, a stability pre­
diction model considering the tool point low-frequency vibration is
established. It is noted that in Section 3, vibration in three directions (xrv
(t), yrv (t), and zrv (t)) is considered when analyzing the influence of low-
frequency vibration on stability. This is because low-frequency vibration
depends on the structural modes of the robot, and the dynamic flexibility
of the structural modes of the robot in all directions is similar, which
cannot be ignored. When modeling stability in Section 4, only consider
the regenerative vibration of X and Y directions, and ignored the Z di­
rection regenerative vibration. This is due to the regenerative vibration
depending on the tool mode, the dynamic flexibility of the tool mode in
the X and Y directions is much higher than the Z direction.
4.1. Dynamic cutting force modeling
As shown in Fig. 14, when the tool point low-frequency vibration is
not considered, the dynamic chip thickness model is as follows:
( ( )) ( ( ))
dhij (t) = x(t) − x t − Ttp sin φij + y(t) − y t − Ttp cos φij (28)
where φij is immersion angle, x(t) and y(t) represent the dynamic
displacement in the X and Y directions respectively. Ttp represents tooth
passing period time. The physical significance of this item is equivalent
to the regenerative chip thickness δh(t) in Eq. (1).
As analyzed in Section 3.1, the appearance of tool-workpiece sepa­
ration will change the calculation method of dynamic cutting force.
When there is tool-workpiece separation, the current disk element cut­
ting force is zero. Simultaneous Eq. (12), the dynamic cutting force
formulas of radial and axial disk elements are as follows:
{ ( ) ( )
dFt,ij = g1 φij g2 φij Kt dhij (t)dz
( ) ( ) (29)
dFr,ij = g1 φij g2 φij Kr dhij (t)dz
where g1 (φi,j ) is the unit step function, which is used to indicate whether
the current disk element participates in cutting. Kt and Kr are tangential
and radial cutting force coefficients respectively. The formula is as
follows:
{ 1, with( φ ≤ φ ≤ φ )
( ) st ij ex
g1 φij = ( ) (30)
0, with φij < φst ‖ φij > φex
On the other hand, the influence of the time delay coefficient
dependent on the cutting state should be considered when calculating
dynamic chip thickness. Substituting Eq. (13) into Eq. (28), the dynamic
chip thickness formula considering the tool point low-frequency vibra­
tion is as follows:
( ( )) ( ( ))
dhrv,ij (t) = x(t) − x t − τTtp sin φij + y(t) − y t − τTtp cos φij (31)
where τ is the time delay coefficient, the judgment function is shown in
Eq. (13). In conclusion, the formula of disk element dynamic cutting
force considering tool point low-frequency vibration is shown as follows:
{ ( ) ( )
dFt,ij = g1 ( φij )g2 ( φij )Kt dhrv,ij (t)dz
(32)
dFr,ij = g1 φij g2 φij Kr dhrv,ij (t)dz
As analyzed in Section 3.2, the time-varying process damping will
change with the tool point low-frequency vibration. Considering the
damping force brought by time-varying process damping as shown in
Eq. (25), the formula of radial and axial disk element dynamic cutting
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

force in Eq. (32) is modified as follows: ( ( ))

{ ( ) ( )( ) Mq̈(t) + (C − B) ̃ q(t) − q t − τTtp
̃ q̇ + Kq = A (43)
dFt,ij = g1 φij g2 φij Kt dhrv,ij (t) + αKd Srd,ij (t) dz
( ) ( )( ) (33)
dFr,ij = g1 φij g2 φij Kr dhrv,ij (t) + μαKd Srd,ij (t) dz where q(t) = [ x(t) y(t) ]T , M, C, and K are the modal mass, damping,
Through coordinate transformation, the dynamic cutting force and stiffness matrices, the modal parameter matrices contain direct
components in the cartesian coordinate system can be obtained as terms and cross terms, and τ is the time delay coefficient.
follows: Rewrite the dynamic equation into the form of state space, and
consider the τ times time delay phenomenon caused by the tool-
[ ] ∑ N [ ][ ]
Fx
M ∑
− cos φij − sin φij dFt,ij workpiece separation. Eq. (43) can be rewritten as the following form:
= (34)
Fy sin φij − cos φij dFr,ij ( )
i=1 j=1 ẋ(t) = A0 x(t) + A(t)x(t) − A(t)x t − τTtp (44)
Considering the axial cutting depth modulation of zrv(t), as shown in
Eq. (26) and Eq. (27), the dynamic cutting force in Eq. (34) can be where:
rewritten as follows: [
̃ 2
− M− 1 (C − B)
/
M− 1
]
[ ] M+δM A0 = / / (45)
∑ ∑ N [ ][ ] ̃ − 1 (C − B)
(C − B)M ̃ 4− K ̃ −1 2
− (C − B)M
Fx − cos φij − sin φij dFt,ij
= (35)
Fy sin φij − cos φij dFr,ij ⎡ ⎤
i=1 j=1
0 0 0 0
⎢0 0⎥
Combined Eq. (31), Eq. (33), and Eq. (35), the dynamic cutting force A(t) = ⎢
0 0 ⎥ (46)
⎣ αxx αxy 0⎦
can be expressed as follows: 0
αyx αyy 0 0
[ ] M+δM
∑ ∑ N { [ ( )] [ ]}
Fx ( ) x(t) − x( t − τTtp ) ẋ(t)
= G φij Aij + Cpd,ij (t)Bij dz
Fy i=1 j=1
y(t) − y t − τTtp ẏ(t) x(t) = [ q(t) Mq̇ + Cq/2 ]Τ (47)
(36) [ ] M+δM
αxx αxy ∑ ∑ N
( )
= ̃
G φij Aij dz = A (48)
where G(φij ) is the unit step function representing the tool-workpiece αyx αyy i=1 j=1
engagement state, Cpd,ij (t) is the equivalent process damping coeffi­
By discretizing the dynamics equation and using direct integration
cient, Aij is the dynamic cutting force coefficient, andBij is the dynamic
and linear approximation, the formula of xk+1 can be obtained as fol­
process damping coefficient. The formula is as follows:
lows:
( ) ( ) ( )
G φij = g1 φij g2 φij (37)

{ ) 1(
F0 +F0,1 xk − [I− Fk+1 ]− 1 Fm− 1 xk+1− m − [I− Fk+1 ]− 1 Fm xk− m , with(τ =1)
[I− Fk+1 ]−
xk+1 = ( ) (49)
[I− Fk+1 ]− 1 F0 +F0,1 xk − [I− Fk+1 ]− 1 Fτm− 1 xk+1− τm − [I− Fk+1 ]− 1 Fτm xk− τm , with(τ ≥2)

αL2rpd,ij (t)Kd
Cpd,ij (t) = (38) Since A(t) is a periodic function, i.e. A(t) = A(t - Ttp) = A(t - τTtp), the
2Vctp
equations Fm-1 = Fτm-1 and Fm = Fτm exist in this equation. According to
[ ] [ ] Eq. (49), the discrete map is defined as:
αxx,ij αxy,ij − kt sinφij cosφij − kr sin 2 φij − kt cos 2 φij − kr sinφij cosφij
Aij = =
kt sin 2 φij − kr sinφij cosφij kt sinφij cosφij − kr cos 2 φij (50)
αyx,ij αyy,ij τT
yk+1 = Dk tp yk
(39)
T τT
[ ] [ ] where Dk tp denotes discrete map of STDC state and theDk tp denotes
2 2
Bij =
βxx,ij βxy,ij
=
− sin φij cos φij − μsin φij − cos φij − μ sin φij cos φij discrete map of MTDC state. The corresponding formula is as follows:
βyx,ij βyy,ij sin 2 φij − μ sin φij cos φij sin φij cos φij − μcos 2 φij
(40)
Eq. (36) can be rewritten as the following form for easy expression:
[ ] [ ( )] [ ]
Fx
=Ã x(t) − x( t − τTtp ) + B
̃ ẋ(t) (41)
Fy y(t) − y t − τTtp ẏ(t)

where:
⎧ ∑ ∑
M+δM N
( )
⎪
⎪ ̃=
A G φij Aij dz
⎪
⎨
(42)
i=1 j=1
⎪
⎪ ∑ ∑
M+δM N
( )
⎪
⎩B̃= G φij Cpd,ij (t)Bij dz
i=1 j=1

Fig. 15. The stability calculation considering tool point low-frequency vibra­
4.2. Stability modeling tion. In actual processing, there may be a remainder in the division of the low-
frequency vibration period and tooth passing period. In this case, the con­
The dynamics equation considering the tool point low-frequency struction period of the transition matrices Φη should be calculated by upward
vibration is shown below: rounding, as shown in Fig. 8.

13
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

yk = col(xk xk− 1 ⋯ xk+1− m xk− m ⋯ xk+1− 2m xk− 2m ⋯ xk+1− τm xk− τm ) structure mode, the transition matrices Φη of all the tooth passing pe­
(51) riods in the low-frequency vibration period should be calculated ac­
cording to Eq. (54), and the system stability should be judged according
to the eigenvalues of all the transition matrices.

⎡ 1( ) ⎤
[I − Fk+1 ]− F0 + F0,1 0 ⋯ 0 − [I − Fk+1 ]− 1 Fm− 1 − [I − Fk+1 ]− 1 Fm 0 ⋯ 0 0 0
⎢I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢⋮ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ ⎥
(52)
Ttp
Dk = ⎢
⎢0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥⎥
⎢0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢⋮ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎣0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0⎦
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0

⎡ 1( ) ⎤
[I − Fk+1 ]− F0 + F0,1 0 ⋯ 0 0 0 0 ⋯ 0 − [I − Fk+1 ]− 1 Fτm− 1 − [I − Fk+1 ]− 1 Fτm
⎢I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢⋮ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
(53)
τTtp
Dk = ⎢⎢0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
⎥
⎢0 0 0 I 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢⋮ ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎣0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0 0 ⎦
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0

5. Numerical simulation and experimental verification

Through a series of discrete maps, the transition matrix Φ within a In this section, the stability model in Section 4 is solved and simu­
single tooth passing period is constructed, and the stability of the system lated, and the evolution law of SBID with stabilizing effect is analyzed
in the current tooth passing period is judged by judging whether the under different postures. According to the prediction results, milling
moduli of all the eigenvalue of the transition matrix are less than unity experiments are carried out to verify the accuracy of the proposed
[33]. The transition matrix Φ is expressed as follows:
Table 4
(54)
τT τT τT τTtp
Φ = Dm−tp1 Dm−tp2 ⋯D1 tp D0 (τ = 1, 2, 3, ⋯, n)
Robot joint configuration.
As shown in Fig. 8, since the period time of tool point low-frequency Posture Joint 1 Joint 2 Joint 3 Joint 4 Joint 5 Joint 6
vibration is larger than the tooth passing period time, the transition (◦ ) (◦ ) (◦ ) (◦ ) (◦ ) (◦ )
matrix of a single tooth passing period cannot reflect the influence of the 1 28.06 − 7.41 47.99 36.40 − 54.05 − 23.37
tool point vibration produced by the robot structure mode on the milling 2 7.51 15.86 46.53 11.03 − 47.04 − 7.55
stability. Therefore, as shown in Fig. 15, when considering the robot 3 − 23.33 45.88 34.11 − 36.75 − 40.18 29.72

Fig. 16. The experimental setup of the three postures. (a) Posture 1. (b) Posture 2. (c) Posture 3. The robot with posture 1 has a tight structure and the dynamic
stiffness is greater than that of postures 2 and 3, while the robot with posture 3 has a looser structure and has maximum dynamic flexibility.

14
S. Xin et al.
Fig. 17. Direct FRFs and cross FRFs of the robotic propeller machining. (a) Posture 2. (b) Posture 3. It is obvious from the figure that the dynamic flexibility of
posture 3 is greater than that of posture 2.
Fig. 18. Stability prediction results with and without the tool point low-
frequency vibration. The flexible structural mode of the robot brings obvious
low-frequency vibration. After considering the influence of low-frequency vi­
bration, the stabilizing effect appears at partial speed, while the destabilizing
effect appears at partial speed. Accurately locating the SBID region with sta­
bilizing effect is helpful to improve the efficiency of robotic milling.
Fig. 19. SLD comparison of different postures considering low-frequency vi­
bration. Compared with posture 1 with large dynamic stiffness, posture 3 with
the worst dynamic stiffness has more SBIDs and allows a larger stable axial
cutting depth, but the stable spindle speed region of large axial cutting depth
is narrower.
model. The influence of different postures on SBID is verified according
to the machining stability state of different postures under the same
cutting parameters.
15
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
Table 5
Comparison of SLD characteristics of each posture.
Posture Wave Effective wave Effective Maximum
crest crest number spindle speed critical cutting
number (Critical cutting range (rpm) depth (mm)
depth > 2.4 mm)
1 18 4 156.25 2.52
2 19 8 87.50 2.64
3 19 15 63.33 2.92
5.1. Stability analysis and prediction at different postures
The dynamic characteristics of the robot structure are significantly
posture-dependent [34]. When the robot is in a flexible posture, more
severe low-frequency vibration will occur in the milling process of the
robot, and its effect on stability will be more obvious. The dynamic
characteristics of robots differ significantly in different working condi­
tions or in different postures and the same working condition. In order to
avoid the model uncertainties and the influence of some unconsidered
factors, according to the robotic processing requirements of the geo­
metric interference zone characteristics of the large and complex parts
shown in Fig. 1, two postures are selected for the experiment. In addi­
tion, the posture with better dynamic stiffness in Fig. 2 without
considering the influence of the geometric interference zone charac­
teristics is selected as a contrast. The experimental setup of the three
postures is shown in Fig. 16. The relevant information of the selected
three joint configurations is shown in Table 4.
Posture 1 has better dynamic stiffness because the influence of
geometric interference zone characteristics is not considered, and its
FRF is shown in Fig. 3. However, postures 2 and 3 have poor dynamic
stiffness due to the influence of geometric interference zone character­
istics, and their FRF is shown in Fig. 17. According to the comparison of
FRF, posture 3 has the largest dynamic flexibility, followed by posture 2,
and posture 1 has the largest dynamic stiffness. It is noted that the tool
mode with a higher frequency almost does not change with the robot
posture [14,35]. In order to avoid interference caused by measurement
error, the tool mode parameters in Table B.1 are still adopted in posture
2 and posture 3.
The low-frequency robot structure mode and high-frequency tool
mode are substituted into the stability model of Section 4 to predict the
stability. It is noted that the low-frequency vibration in this paper is
solved by the modal parameters of the robot at the corresponding
posture, while the stability is calculated by the low-frequency vibration
and the modal parameters of the tool. Nickel-aluminum bronze is
selected as the experimental material, which is a common material for
naval propellers. The cutting force coefficients are identified by cutting
experiments [28]. And bull-nosed tool (600-025A25-10H) is selected as
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

a cutting tool, the radial cutting depth is 8 mm, the feed per tooth is
0.05mm/rev/tooth, and the other cutting parameters are shown in
Table 2. When the spindle speed is too low (below 3000 rpm), there will
be chatter dominated by the robotic mode [14,36]. The focus of this
paper is that the chatter dominated by the tool mode is affected by
low-frequency vibration, so the speed range is set to 3000–6000 rpm.
The stability simulation analysis is carried out, and the corresponding
stability lobe diagram (SLD) is drawn. Taking posture 3 as an example,
the stability prediction results with and without the tool point
low-frequency vibration are shown in Fig. 18. Fig. 19 shows the SLDs of
the three postures considering the influence of low-frequency vibration.
As shown in Fig. 18, when tool point low-frequency vibration is
considered, the stability boundary is greatly improved over certain
spindle speed ranges, which is called the “stability boundary improve­
ment domain (SBID)" in this paper. Taking posture 3 as an example, the
critical cutting depth increases by 20%–50% in the SBID region. How­
ever, the consideration of low-frequency vibration can also reduce the
stability boundary in some other spindle speed ranges, such as the
destabilized region in Fig. 18. Therefore, the influence of low-frequency
vibration in robotic milling on regenerative chatter is not simply “good”
or “bad”. It changes the distribution of the SLD, improves the stability
boundary at some spindle speeds, and also reduces the stability

Fig. 20. Experimental and theoretical stability prediction results and acceleration spectrum (Y direction). (a) SLD and experimental result. (b) The acceleration
spectrum and cutting force of Point A. (c) The acceleration spectrum and cutting force of Point B. (d) The acceleration spectrum and cutting force of Point C.

16
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Fig. 21. Experimental and theoretical stability prediction results and acceleration spectrum at different postures (Y direction). (a) SLD and experimental result. (b)
The acceleration spectrum and cutting force of Point D. (c) The acceleration spectrum and cutting force of Point E. (d) The acceleration spectrum and cutting force of
Point F.

Table 6 Table 7
The parameters of the DYTRAN accelerometer. The parameters of the ATI force sensor.
Model Reference Reference Reference Range Model Sensing range (Fx) Sensing range (Fy) Sensing range (Fz)
Sensitivity (X) Sensitivity (Y) Sensitivity (Z) (g) (N) (N) (N)
(mv/g) (mv/g) (mv/g)
Omega 1500 1500 3750
3263A2 28.06 − 7.41 47.99 50 160

boundary at some other spindle speeds. Thus, the SBID with a stabilizing this result. On the one hand, as shown in Fig. 9, when the tool point low-
effect needs to be precisely located for high efficiency machining. frequency vibration is large, tool-workpiece separation will interrupt the
According to the analysis in Section 3, there are two main reasons for formation process of chatter, making the vibration energy unable to

17
S. Xin et al.
Fig. 22. Workpiece surface morphology and surface roughness. (a) Posture3,
axial cutting depth = 3.0 mm, spindle speed = 5575 rpm, Sq = 2.534 μm. (b)
Posture3, axial cutting depth = 2.6 mm, spindle speed = 5575 rpm, Sq =
1.092 μm.
accumulate, which will result in the local improvement of the stability
boundary. Furthermore, as shown in Eq. (44), the continuous radial tool-
workpiece separation results in a change of time delay in subsequent
cutting, resulting in the appearance of additional lobes in the SLD, which
will lead to the stability boundary to rise in some regions and drop in
some regions. On the other hand, as shown in Fig. 11, the tool point low-
frequency vibration will cause the indented area to change, which will
affect the process damping and improve the stability boundary globally
to some extent.
In order to better compare and analyze the characteristics of the SLD
considering low-frequency vibration and select a reasonable spindle
speed range, the characteristics of the wave crest of the SLD considering
low-frequency vibration are analyzed. When the robot is in different
processing positions or different postures, the SLD considering low-
frequency vibration also has a significant difference. As shown in
Fig. 16, the three postures are selected, and the comparison of SLDs is
shown in Fig. 19. Compared with posture 1 with large dynamic stiffness,
posture 3 with the worst dynamic stiffness has more SBIDs and allows a
larger stable axial cutting depth, but the stable spindle speed region of
large axial cutting depth is narrower. For example, at 5575 rpm, the
critical axial cutting depths of posture 1–3 are 2.20 mm, 2.48 mm, and
2.92 mm, respectively. Table 5 shows the comparison and summary of
SLD characteristics between three postures. In Table 5, the stability
wave crest with a critical cutting depth greater than 2.4 mm (the 2.4 mm
is artificially set for the convenience of analysis, and can be modified
according to the actual cutting depth requirements.) is called the
effective wave crest, and the average optional spindle speed range of the
effective wave crest is called the effective spindle speed range.
Fig. 23. Three-dimensional view of surface topography (Posture3, axial cutting
depth = 3.0 mm, spindle speed = 5575 rpm, Sq = 2.534 μm).
18
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
It can be seen from Table 5 that the robotic posture with higher
flexibility will have more obvious structural vibration, resulting in more
effective wave crests, smaller effective spindle speed range, and larger
critical cutting depth. As the effective spindle speed range decreases, the
speed sensitivity of milling stability increases, and the stable spindle
speed range becomes smaller. In other words, a more flexible robot
posture may lead to a greater critical cutting depth, but at the same time
will put forward higher requirements on the accuracy of spindle speed
selection. In the machining of large and complex parts, geometric
interference may lead to the poor dynamic stiffness of the robot. This
kind of working condition has obvious low-frequency vibration, but due
to the lack of stability prediction model considering low-frequency vi­
bration, the cutting efficiency is reduced to ensure the machining sta­
bility. However, as shown in Fig. 19, the proposed model tells us that
there are still many stable and efficient machining parameters at this
time, but it is necessary to locate the efficient cutting parameters by
clarifying the influence of low-frequency vibration on the stability
boundary.
In conclusion, the tool point low-frequency vibration has a signifi­
cant impact on stability. Although the relatively weak rigidity of the
robot structure could reduce the stability boundary at some spindle
speeds, it can also effectively improve the stability boundary at other
spindle speeds. Therefore, clarifying the action mechanism of low-
frequency vibration on the stability boundary can avoid the adverse
effect of weak rigidity of robot body structure, and play its positive role,
effectively improving the efficiency of robotic milling processing.
5.2. Experimental verification
In order to verify the correctness of the theory, an experimental study
on the stability of robot milling is carried out, and assumes that the
structural modal of the robot in the experimental cutting path with 70
mm does not change due to the small changes of the robotic posture. The
experiment is divided into two parts. In experiment 1, a large number of
cutting experiments are carried out with the most flexible posture 3 to
verify the accuracy of the stability prediction model proposed in this
paper, as shown in Fig. 20. Experiment 2 is conducted for SBID within
the same spindle speed range of three postures to verify the influence of
posture changes on SBID, as shown in Fig. 21. In the experiment,
DYTRAN accelerometer installed on the spindle was used to collect vi­
bration signals, and ATI force sensor was used to collect cutting force
signals. The detailed parameters of the accelerometer and six-
dimensional force sensor are shown in Table 6 and Table 7. In addi­
tion, the surface morphology and surface roughness of workpiece sur­
face in stable state and chatter state are evaluated respectively, as shown
in Fig. 22.
Experiment 1 is carried out at posture 3, and the experimental pa­
rameters are consistent with the parameters used in stability prediction
in Section 5.1. According to the distribution of stability wave crests and
troughs, 14 experimental speeds are selected from 4000 rpm to 6000
rpm, and each speed started the cutting experiment with an axial cutting
depth of 1.5 mm, and the cutting depth increased with an interval of 0.2
mm–0.3 mm until chatter occurred. The occurrence of high-frequency
chatter is mainly concentrated in the middle and high-speed region
[14], while the research in this paper focuses on the influence of the
low-frequency vibration dominated by the modal of the robot structure
on the high-frequency chatter dominated by the modal of the tool
structure, so the experiment focuses on the middle and high-speed
region.
The comparison between experimental and predicted stability results
is shown in Fig. 20. (a). Acceleration spectrum signals and cutting force
signals are displayed for the SBID with a spindle speed of 5575 rpm and
the stability wave trough region with a spindle speed of 5450 rpm and
cutting depth of 2 mm, as shown in Fig. 20. (b) ~ Fig. 20. (d). It is noted
that in the acceleration spectrum, in addition to the spindle rotation
frequency, tooth passing frequency, and their multiples, there are also
S. Xin et al.
sideband frequency signals, which is due to the modulation phenome­
non between the low-frequency vibration signal and the above signal,
which often appears in the bearing and gear fault diagnosis [37]. Hilbert
envelope analysis is used to demodulate the original signal, and fast
Fourier transform is used to extract the frequency domain features of the
demodulated signal as a reference for modulation phenomena. Point A is
shown in Fig. 20. (b). The speed is 5450 rpm, and the axial cutting depth
is 2.0 mm. At this time, obvious chatter and energy concentration
appeared, and the chatter frequency is 788.6 Hz. Point B is shown in
Fig. 20. (c). The spindle speed is 5575 rpm, and the cutting depth is 2.8
mm. According to the vibration spectrum and cutting force signal, the
stable cutting state can be judged synthetically. Point C is shown in
Fig. 20. (d), where the axial cutting depth is 3.0 mm and the spindle
speed is 5575 rpm. By observing the frequency spectrum and cutting
force, it can be judged that obvious chatter occurs at this time, and the
chatter frequency is 782.4 Hz. In addition, an obvious low-frequency
modulation phenomenon can be observed after the Hilbert envelope
analysis.
The surface morphology and surface roughness are measured by
Zeiss confocal microscope (Smartproof 5) as shown in Fig. 22. Fig. 22.
(a) shows the workpiece surface morphology of Point C in Figs. 20, and
Fig. 22. (b) shows the workpiece surface morphology of Point F in
Fig. 21. The average surface roughness of Point F with a stable state is
1.092 μm, while that of Point C with a chatter state is 2.534 μm. In
addition, the three-dimensional view of the surface morphology of Point
C is shown in Fig. 23. The feed rate is 13.9 mm/s, obvious low-frequency
vibration marks can be observed, and the vibration frequency is about
12 Hz.
As a supplement to Experiment 1, Experiment 2 verifies the accuracy
of the proposed method under different robotic postures, and also proves
the feasibility of improving the processing efficiency at a specific spindle
speed through robotic postures selection. In the experiment, the typical
SBID within 5000–6000 rpm is selected to verify the stability of the same
cutting parameters with different postures. Experimental and predicted
stability results are shown in Fig. 21. (a) and the acceleration spectrum
and cutting force signals of different postures are shown in Fig. 21. (b) ~
Fig. 21. (d).
When the spindle speed is 5450 rpm, the stability results of the three
postures have little difference. On the contrary, when the speed is 5575
rpm, as shown in Fig. 21. (a), posture 1 with the best dynamic stiffness
appears chatter when the axial cutting depth is 2.4 mm, while more
flexible posture 2 and most flexible posture 3 appear chatter when the
axial cutting depth is 2.6 mm and 3.0 mm, respectively. This is due to the
change of the robotic structure mode caused by the change of the
posture, which then affects the magnitude of the low-frequency vibra­
tion, while the tool mode almost does not change with the posture. Thus,
the most flexible posture 3 has greater low-frequency vibration than the
other postures, while the tool dynamic stiffness is the same as the other
postures. This results in a more flexible posture 3 with more tool-
workpiece separation and greater time-varying process damping with
the same tool stiffness. So that this posture can achieve more stable
machining. However, as shown in Table 5, low-frequency vibration also
brings significant speed sensitivity in the stability domain, and more
stable processing requires more accurate spindle speed positioning. It
can be seen that this method has a wider application prospect in the
processing of large and complex parts.
6. Conclusion
The relatively weak rigid dynamic characteristics of the robot
structure will lead to significant low-frequency vibration at the tool end,
which will affect the tool-workpiece engagement state in the milling
process, and then change the mechanism of the regenerative chatter
dominated by the spindle-tool structure mode, and affect the stability
critical cutting depth. In this paper, the influence of tool point low-
frequency vibration on tool-workpiece engagement state is analyzed,
19
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
the tool-workpiece separation model, time-varying process damping
model, and axial cutting depth modulation model are established, a
cutting state-dependent time delay coefficient is proposed, and a sta­
bility prediction model considering tool point low-frequency vibration is
established. Simulation analysis and experimental verification are car­
ried out, and the relationship between the SBID and robotic posture is
studied. Some conclusions can be summarized as follows:
1. The tool point low-frequency vibration caused by the robot structure
mode has a significant impact on the engagement area of the tool-
workpiece at the magnitude of vibration amplitude, resulting in
the tool-workpiece separation, time-varying process damping, and
axial cutting depth modulation.
1) The feed per tooth (0–50 μm) is in the same order of magnitude as
the tool point low-frequency vibration (20 μm), which can cause
the occurrence of RTWS.
2) The tool point low-frequency vibration velocity Vcrv(t) is gener­
ally not more than 0.019 m/s, and the high-frequency vibration
velocity caused by the chatter is generally not more than 0.005
m/s, which is far less than the cutter tooth tangential velocity Vctp,
which is 1.57–15.7 m/s. Therefore, TTWS will not occur under
the working condition of this paper.
3) The amplitude of the tool point low-frequency vibration increases
3 times (5–15 μm), and the indented region area increases about
3.584 times.
4) When the axial cutting depth is larger, the axial cutting depth
modulation effect will be significantly weakened. For example,
the change of axial cutting depth caused by this effect is about
0.167%–1.5% under the working condition of this paper.
2. The tool-workpiece separation will create an engagement state-
dependent time delay. As a result, the analysis of regenerative
chatter in robotic milling needs to locate the teeth that have been cut
before according to the tool-workpiece engagement state and
analyze the dynamic chip thickness determined by it.
3. The weak rigidity of the robot body structure reduces the stability
critical cutting depth at some spindle speeds (− 23%), but signifi­
cantly improves the stability boundary at other spindle speeds
(+50%). By accurately predicting the speed range of the SBID, the
adverse effects of the weak rigid structure can be avoided to ensure
and even improve the milling efficiency of the robot.
4. The robotic posture change can significantly change the modal
characteristics of the robot structure, and then affect the tool point
low-frequency vibration, and realize the change of the SBID. By
optimizing the robotic posture, the stable critical cutting depth can
be significantly increased within a narrow range of specific speed,
and the milling efficiency of the robot can be further enhanced. For
example, the maximum critical axial cutting depth of the three
postures adopted in this paper is 2.20 mm, 2.48 mm, and 2.92 mm
respectively, with a maximum increase of 32.73%.
Based on the above conclusions, the future work can be carried out at
the aspects: (1) The robotic posture and cutting parameters are
comprehensively optimized based on the proposed method. (2) External
excitation can be applied to the robotic structure to produce more ideal
low-frequency vibration, which replaces the passive vibration generated
by the robotic structure mode and acquire better SBID.
CRediT author statement
Shihao Xin: Conceptualization, Methodology, Experiment, Investi­
gation, Writing – Original Draft. Fangyu Peng: Supervision, Writing –
Review & Editing, Funding acquisition. Xiaowei Tang: Conceptualiza­
tion, Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing, Funding acquisition.
Rong Yan: Supervision, Writing – Review & Editing, Funding acquisi­
tion. Zepeng Li: Investigation, Experiment. Jiawei Wu: Investigation,
Experiment.
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Declaration of competing interest Acknowledgements

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Data availability
This research is supported by the National Natural Science Founda­
tion of China under Grant No. U20A20294, National Natural Science
Foundation of China under Grant No. 52175463, and National Natural
Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 52188102.

No data was used for the research described in the article.

Appendix A

Suppose the differential equation of vibration of the system is:

MẌ + CẊ + KX = F (A-1)

where M, C, and K are the modal mass, damping, and stiffness matrices, Ẍ, Ẋ, X are the acceleration, velocity, and displacement vectors of the system,
F is the cutting force vector.
The integral step is ε, according to the Newmark-β method, the following expression is obtained:
[ ]
Ẋt+ε = Ẋt + (1 − β)Ẍt + βẊt+ε ε (A-2)

[ ]
Xt+ε = Xt + Ẋt ε + (0.5 − γ)Ẍt + γẌt+ε ε2 (A-3)

where Ẍt+ε , Ẋt+ε , Xt+ε represent the acceleration, velocity, and displacement vectors of the system at time t+ε, Ẍt , Ẋt , Xt represent the acceleration,
velocity, and displacement vectors of the system at time t, β and γ are constants that determine the stability and integration accuracy of the calculation.
When the values of parameters β and γ satisfy Eq.(A-4), the Newmark-β method is unconditionally stable. At this time, the value of ε can be adjusted
according to the requirements of calculation accuracy.
{
β ≥ 0.5 / (A-4)
γ ≥ (0.5 + β)2 4

Using the average acceleration method, β and γ are 0.5 and 0.25 respectively. Simultaneous Eq.(A-2) and Eq.(A-3), Ẍt+ε , Ẋt+ε can be written as the
following expressions:
/
Ẍt+ε = 1 γε2 (Xt+ε − Xt ) − 1 / γεẊt − (1 / 2γ − 1)Ẍt (A-5)

Ẋt+ε = β / γε(Xt+ε − Xt ) + (1 − β / γ)Ẋt + (1 − β / 2γ)εẌt (A-6)

At the time t+ε, the vibration differential equation of the system is as follows:
MẌt+ε + CẊt+ε + KXt+ε = Ft+ε (A-7)
Substituting Eq.(A-5) and Eq.(A-6) into Eq.(A-7), the following expression can be obtained:
̃ t+ε = F
KX ̃ t+ε (A-8)

where K,
̃ F̃ t+ε respectively represent effective stiffness matrix and payload vector, expressed as follows:

̃ =K+ 1 M + β C
K (A-9)
γ ε2 γε
[ ( ) ] [ ( ) ( ) ]
̃t+ε = Ft+ε + M 1 Xt + 1 Ẋt + 1 − 1 Ẍt + C β Xt + β − 1 Ẋt + β − 1 εẌt
F (A-10)
γε2 γε 2ε γε γ 2γ
Simultaneous Eq.(A-8) and Eq.(A-10), Xt+ε can be calculated. By substitutingXt+ε into Eq.(A-5) and Eq.(A-2), the velocity and acceleration at the
time t+ε can be calculated. The numerical solution of vibration is obtained by iteration, and the surface update is considered.

Appendix B
Table B. 1
Modal parameters of robotic structure for illustration.

Mode Frequency (Hz) Damping (%) Residue

1 Hxx 17.11 1.55 − 1.7957E-06 - 2.0425E-05j

Hyx − 1.0641E-06 - 7.8094E-06j
Hzx − 1.8402E-06 - 1.9301E-05j
(continued on next page)

20
S. Xin et al. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918

Table B. 1 (continued )
Mode Frequency (Hz) Damping (%) Residue

Hxy 17.18 1.54 − 5.9928E-07 - 8.3971E-06j

Hyy − 2.6909E-06 - 5.5686E-06j
Hzy − 1.0182E-06 - 8.5163E-06j
Hxz 17.11 1.67 − 5.8810E-07 - 2.1541E-05j
Hyz − 2.3612E-06 - 7.8434E-06j
Hzz − 8.6390E-07 - 1.9966E-05j
2 Hxx 20.13 3.58 − 2.4068E-06 - 9.6883E-06j
Hyx − 2.2787E-06 - 1.1150E-05j
Hzx − 1.6889E-06 - 8.0637E-06j
Hxy 20.21 3.25 − 2.8423E-06 - 1.1173E-05j
Hyy − 6.3423E-06 - 2.3034E-05j
Hzy − 6.7196E-07 - 5.6194E-06j
Hxz 20.48 3.67 − 2.0618E-06 - 6.5514E-06j
Hyz − 1.6901E-06 - 5.8098E-06j
Hzz − 1.7242E-06 - 5.7689E-06j
3 Hxx 38.16 5.78 1.3670E-06 - 1.2439E-05j
Hyx − 2.8108E-06 - 4.6594E-06j
Hzx 8.4076E-07 - 9.0383E-06j
Hxy 37.60 6.42 9.3619E-07 - 5.3239E-06j
Hyy 1.2502E-06 - 1.2037E-05j
Hzy 1.0275E-06 - 3.1071E-06j
Hxz 37.83 6.51 7.9665E-07 - 8.0691E-06j
Hyz 1.4126E-08 - 3.4336E-06j
Hzz 6.7051E-07 - 4.6544E-06j
4 Hxx 47.32 5.77 7.0448E-07 - 2.7906E-05j
Hyx 1.0948E-06 - 1.0412E-05j
Hzx 6.6134E-07 - 1.5470E-05j
Hxy 48.17 4.30 − 2.1938E-07 - 8.9888E-06j
Hyy − 8.0413E-07 - 1.0073E-05j
Hzy − 1.1739E-07 - 3.1579E-06j
Hxz 47.48 5.72 − 7.4617E-07 - 1.5860E-05j
Hyz 1.1205E-06 - 3.9289E-06j
Hzz − 1.1650E-06 - 7.8030E-06j
5 Hxx 76.12 9.24 5.4421E-06 - 6.0453E-06j
Hyx − 1.0365E-06 - 1.7561E-05j
Hzx 2.4782E-06 - 5.3489E-06j
Hxy 75.02 6.59 4.2199E-07 - 2.3917E-05j
Hyy 1.8050E-06 - 1.1456E-04j
Hzy 1.2772E-07 - 8.3232E-06j
Hxz 78.02 5.22 − 1.0954E-07 - 2.5057E-06j
Hyz − 1.6325E-06 - 4.8151E-06j
Hzz − 2.3520E-07 - 3.3891E-07j
6 Hxx 139.09 6.64 − 2.3190E-05 - 3.8343E-05j
Hyx − 7.8855E-06 - 8.7565E-06j
Hzx − 2.3576E-06 - 4.7988E-06j
Hxy 132.07 6.24 − 2.4800E-06 - 1.1643E-05j
Hyy − 2.7814E-06 - 1.6213E-05j
Hzy 3.2197E-07 - 5.4664E-07j
Hxz 139.09 7.62 − 4.4669E-06 - 2.8340E-06j
Hyz − 1.1386E-07 - 7.1206E-08j
Hzz − 8.7858E-08 - 1.2046E-07j
7 Hxx 788.16 5.419 4.0363E-05 - 1.4901E-04j
Hyx 4.0325E-05 - 2.7204E-05j
Hzx − 1.7864E-07 - 1.0321E-05j
Hxy 790.96 5.245 8.9440E-06 - 2.3367E-05j
Hyy 4.4112E-06 - 1.3151E-04j
Hzy − 2.9177E-06 - 1.4824E-05j
Hxz 807.49 5.39 − 2.7902E-06 - 9.8237E-06j
Hyz − 1.3616E-05 - 1.5840E-06j
Hzz 3.5022E-06 - 8.3480E-06j

References [5] G. Totis, T. Insperger, M. Sortino, G. Stépán, Symmetry breaking in milling

dynamics, Int. J. Mach. Tool Manufact. 139 (2019) 37–59.
[6] A. Verl, A. Valente, S. Melkote, C. Brecher, E. Ozturk, L.T. Tunc, Robots in
[1] I. Iglesias, M.A. Sebastián, J.E. Ares, Overview of the state of robotic machining:
machining, CIRP Ann. - Manuf. Technol. 68 (2019) 799–822.
current situation and future potential, Procedia Eng. 132 (2015) 911–917.
[7] L.D. Zhu, C.F. Liu, Recent progress of chatter prediction, detection and suppression
[2] D. Bachrathy, G. Stepan, J. Turi, State dependent regenerative effect in milling
in milling, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 143 (2020).
processes, J. Comput. Nonlinear Dynam. 6 (2011).
[8] Z.X. Pan, H. Zhang, Z.Q. Zhu, J.J. Wang, Chatter analysis of robotic machining
[3] Y. Ma, M. Wan, W. Zhang, Effect of cutter runout on chatter stability of milling
process, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 173 (2006) 301–309.
process, Procedia CIRP 56 (2016) 115–118.
[9] O. Gienke, Z. Pan, L. Yuan, T. Lepper, S. Van Duin, Mode coupling chatter
[4] G. Totis, T. Insperger, G. Stepan, M. Sortino, Stability analysis in milling by taking
prediction and avoidance in robotic machining process, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
into account the influence of forced vibrations on the actual tool-workpiece
Technol. 104 (2019) 2103–2116.
engagement conditions, in: 8th CIRP Conference on High Performance Cutting,
[10] Z. Zhu, X. Tang, C. Chen, F. Peng, R. Yan, L. Zhou, Z. Li, J. Wu, High precision and
Budapest, HUNGARY, 2018, pp. 453–456.
efficiency robotic milling of complex parts: challenges, approaches and trends,
Chin. J. Aeronaut. 35 (2021) 22–46.

21
S. Xin et al.
[11] C.X. Yue, H.N. Gao, X.L. Liu, S.Y. Liang, L.H. Wang, A review of chatter vibration
research in milling, Chin. J. Aeronaut. 32 (2019) 215–242.
[12] C. Chen, F. Peng, R. Yan, Z. Fan, Y. Li, D. Wei, Posture-dependent stability
prediction of a milling industrial robot based on inverse distance weighted method,
in: 28th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent
Manufacturing (FAIM) - Global Integration of Intelligent Manufacturing and Smart
Industry for Good of Humanity, Columbus, OH, 2018, pp. 993–1000.
[13] L. Sun, K. Zheng, W. Liao, J. Liu, J. Feng, S. Dong, Investigation on chatter stability
of robotic rotary ultrasonic milling, Robot. Comput. Integrated Manuf. 63 (2020).
[14] M. Cordes, W. Hintze, Y. Altintas, Chatter stability in robotic milling, Robot.
Comput. Integrated Manuf. 55 (2019) 11–18.
[15] D. Hao, W. Wang, Z. Liu, C. Yun, Experimental study of stability prediction for
high-speed robotic milling of aluminum, J. Vib. Control 26 (2020) 387–398.
[16] S. Mousavi, V. Gagnol, B.C. Bouzgarrou, P. Ray, Dynamic modeling and stability
prediction in robotic machining, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 88 (2017)
3053–3065.
[17] M. Li, D. Huang, X. Yang, Chatter stability prediction and detection during high-
speed robotic milling process based on acoustic emission technique, Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. 117 (2021) 1589–1599.
[18] L. Cen, S.N. Melkote, CCT-based mode coupling chatter avoidance in robotic
milling, J. Manuf. Process. 29 (2017) 50–61.
[19] L. Cen, S.N. Melkote, J. Castle, H. Appelman, A method for mode coupling chatter
detection and suppression in robotic milling, J. Manufact. Sci. Eng. -Transact. Asme
140 (2018).
[20] Z.X. Pan, H. Zhang, Ieee, Analysis and suppression of chatter in robotic machining
process, in: International Conference on Control, Automation and Systems, Seoul,
SOUTH KOREA, 2007, pp. 2874–2879.
[21] L. Yuan, S. Sun, Z. Pan, D. Ding, O. Gienke, W. Li, Mode coupling chatter
suppression for robotic machining using semi-active magnetorheological
elastomers absorber, Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 117 (2019) 221–237.
[22] N. Vinh, J. Johnson, S. Melkote, Active vibration suppression in robotic milling
using optimal control, Int. J. Mach. Tool Manufact. 152 (2020).
[23] H. Celikag, N.D. Sims, E. Ozturk, Chatter suppression in robotic milling by control
of configuration dependent dynamics, in: 17th CIRP Conference on Modelling of
Machining Operations (CIRP CMMO), AMRC, Sheffield, ENGLAND, 2019,
pp. 521–526.
22
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 179 (2022) 103918
[24] Q. Chen, C. Zhang, T. Hu, Y. Zhou, H. Ni, T. Wang, Online chatter detection in
robotic machining based on adaptive variational mode decomposition, Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. 117 (2021) 555–577.
[25] Y. Wang, M. Zhang, X. Tang, F. Peng, R. Yan, A kMap optimized VMD-SVM model
for milling chatter detection with an industrial robot, J. Intell. Manuf. 33 (2021)
1483–1502.
[26] Y. Mohammadi, K. Ahmadi, Effect of axial vibrations on regenerative chatter in
robotic milling, in: 17th CIRP Conference on Modelling of Machining Operations
(CIRP CMMO), AMRC, Sheffield, ENGLAND, 2019, pp. 503–508.
[27] N.M. Newmark, E. Mechanics, A Method of Computation for Structural Dynamics,
1959, p. 85.
[28] Y. Altintas, Manufacturing automation : metal cutting mechanics, machine tool
vibrations, and CNC design, in: 2nd, Manufacturing Automation : Metal Cutting
Mechanics, Machine Tool Vibrations, and CNC Design/2nd, 2012.
[29] S.A. Tobias, W.J.E. Fishwick, Theory of regenerative machine tool chatter, 205,
1958, pp. 199–203.
[30] Y. Altintas, G. Stepan, E. Budak, T. Schmitz, Z.M. Kilic, Chatter stability of
machining operations, J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 142 (2020).
[31] J. Feng, M. Wan, Z.-Y. Dong, W.-H. Zhang, A unified process damping model
considering the varying stiffness of the milling system, Int. J. Mach. Tool Manufact.
147 (2019), 103470.
[32] X.W. Tang, F.Y. Peng, R. Yan, Z.R. Zhu, Z.P. Li, S.H. Xin, Nonlinear process
damping identification using finite amplitude stability and the influence analysis
on five-axis milling stability, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 190 (2021).
[33] Y. Ding, L.M. Zhu, X.J. Zhang, H. Ding, A full-discretization method for prediction
of milling stability, Int. J. Mach. Tool Manufact. 50 (2010) 502–509.
[34] S. Mousavi, V. Gagnol, B.C. Bouzgarrou, P. Ray, Stability optimization in robotic
milling through the control of functional redundancies, Robot. Comput. Integrated
Manuf. 50 (2018) 181–192.
[35] W. Ji, L.H. Wang, Industrial robotic machining: a review, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 103 (2019) 1239–1255.
[36] J. Munoa, X. Beudaert, Z. Dombovari, Y. Altintas, E. Budak, C. Brecher, G. Stepan,
Chatter suppression techniques in metal cutting, CIRP Ann. - Manuf. Technol. 65
(2016) 785–808.
[37] L.M. Wang, Y.M. Shao, Z. Cao, Optimal demodulation subband selection for sun
gear crack fault diagnosis in planetary gearbox, Measurement 125 (2018) 554–563.