2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2011.03.080
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Detection of chatter vibration in end milling applying disturbance observer

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
19
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
10

Relationship

2
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 73 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 6 publications
1
19
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A DOB [4,5] is available for cancellation of a disturbance and dramatic enhancement of the robustness in motor control. Disturbance force under a single-mass model of the linear motor driven stage is defined as the sum of an external load force F l [N]; friction force in guideways, F fric [N]; and fluctuating forces caused by variations of the thrust coefficient and mass variation.…”
Section: Position and Force Control Based On Dobmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A DOB [4,5] is available for cancellation of a disturbance and dramatic enhancement of the robustness in motor control. Disturbance force under a single-mass model of the linear motor driven stage is defined as the sum of an external load force F l [N]; friction force in guideways, F fric [N]; and fluctuating forces caused by variations of the thrust coefficient and mass variation.…”
Section: Position and Force Control Based On Dobmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, Kakinuma et al [7] experimentally showed that the chatterinduced fluctuation in the cutting torque in milling can be detected only from the servo information in a spindle control system. Furthermore, our previous work showed that fractureinduced fluctuations in drilling can also be detected from the servo information of ballscrew-driven stage control systems [8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The majority of available in-process methods for chatter identification rely on extracting certain features from the acoustic, vibration, or force signals and comparing them against some predefined markers of chatter [12,13,14,15,8,16,17,18,19,20,21,22]. They can be broadly categorized into two groups as shown in Fig.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%