Method for the Optimization of Kinematic and Dynamic Properties of Parallel Kinematic Machines

R. Neugebauer1 (1), W.-G. Drossel1 (3), C. Harzbecker1 (3), S. Ihlenfeldt1, S. Hensel1 1 Fraunhofer Institute for Machine Tools and Forming Technology IWU, Chemnitz, Germany

Abstract The following paper introduces an approach, which allows the consideration of the kinematic as well as the dynamic properties of parallel kinematic machines. Based on the results of a preceding kinematic optimization, a FEM-model with arbitrary input parameters is designed. The full kinematic functionality of struts and joints used is ensured. By coupling the FEM-model to the GNU Octave numerical program system, a variety of movements including machining forces can be simulated. A Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno optimization algorithm, using GNU Octave, was written and coupled to the FEM-system. Now, this algorithm is able to influence the models arbitrary input parameters during the optimization process. Thus, the model is optimized automatically for a certain machining process and/or dynamic behavior. This procedure is demonstrated using the example of a delta robot structure originally designed by Raymond Clavel [7]. Keywords: Optimization; Kinematic; Dynamic

1 INTRODUCTION Both kinematic variables (such as the quality of transmission) and stiffness behavior towards static and dynamic loads have a share in the optimization of parallel kinematic machines. Therefore optimization processes can not be limited to kinematics only. A second optimization run based on such a kinematic optimization is required to approximate the actual behavior of the structure to be designed in the optimum way (see Figure 1).

2-Phase PKM-Optimization (simplified)

Geometric requirements
Experience Workspace size Number of DOF... Type of PKM Initial geom. dimensions Drive types (rot./ transl.)

Initial value
Vectorized model

properties (e.g. stiffness characteristics, eigenfrequencies, thermal behavior) of the PKM to be expected, and to improve them. This article introduces a method to perform a FEM optimization based on a preceding kinematic optimization. Thus, the dynamic properties of the parallel kinematic machine to be designed will be improved fully optimized and predicted in advance. For this purpose, an algorithm is introduced that allows to couple a script-enabled FEM-system with a mathematical and numerical system that is script-enabled likewise. This coupling is to enable the mathematical system to improve a PKM model independently based on given dynamic processes. This process is demonstrated on a drilling/ milling machine to be designed on the basis of a Clavel tripod structure (see Figure 2).

Kinematic optimization

Global Performance Index

Changed vectorized model

Collisions within workspace?

FEM-model

FEM-optimization

Min. distances: - strut/ strut - strut/ tool - strut/ base - tool/ base Stiffness Eigenfrequencies Thermal behavior

STOP

Figure 1: Diagram of a two-step optimization process. An initial value is created based on the minimum requirements of the structure to be designed. This starting point contains information on the types and number of struts, degrees of freedom of joints, and macrostructure. Kinematic optimization improves the macrostructure. This can be done under various aspects such as high dynamics or high stiffness. After a collision study and subsequent review of the structure, a second optimization step can be required to give an actual reflection of the physical

Figure 2: Sketch of Clavels tripod (US patent No. 4,976,582).

Annals of the CIRP Vol. 55/1/2006

2 KINEMATIC OPTIMIZATION The dimensions of the workspace and the degree of freedom that the parallel kinematic machine should achieve are the basis of all optimization processes of parallel kinematic machine tools. Various approaches can be selected for this first step. However, there are two main strategies that can be distinguished: Firstly, there are the multiple-criteria methods. The target function is stated in multiple dimensions, and at the same time calculated and analyzed in all these dimensions. The result is a set of optimum solutions (Pareto front) that will be analyzed subsequently. Secondly, single-criterion strategies define a target function that summarizes all relevant criteria and must be minimized during the optimization process. The advantages and disadvantages of both methods are still being studied. A number of publications is available, e.g. [1], [2]. Methods that do not exclude singularities per se but elude them are special strategies in this context. For instance it is possible to calculate the TCP trajectories in a way that these singularities are avoided [3]. To guide the structure over singularities by adding redundant axes is another option [4]. This does not optimize the structure itself but its handling. Redundancies make manufacturing more expensive and can make closed-loop control of the mechanism considerably more complex. The single-criterion approach selected here is based on the quality of transmission as defined by Angeles [5] that again is based on evaluating the Jacobi matrix at points of interest in the workspace [6]. The rationale is that manipulation potential and stiffness of the structure should be raised above a required minimum across the whole workspace. In the example of a milling/ drilling machine based on Clavel's delta kinematic [7], kinematic optimization was completed after 31 target function runs. The calculation time with a 3 GHz Pentium PC was about 4 days. The frame and platform diameter, the dimensions of each strut and the height of the mechanism in initial position at the center of the workspace were the variables released for optimization. 3 OPTIMIZATION USING FEM 3.1 Prerequisites Kinematic modeling and optimization of parallel mechanisms is excellently suited for predicting [3] detecting, and avoiding singularities. There are various approaches [8] which enable to predict the behavior of the fully designed machine as accurately as possible. The disadvantage of all these methods is, that they do not provide specific information about the mechanism. Such information can only be obtained by using the completed design such as a model or prototype of the machine. Though, any intervention in the design is difficult at this point. The presented approach, which is to directly include FEM into the optimization process, improves this situation. The FEM models of the components used must be parameterized for usage in an automatic optimization process and must be capable to tie the degrees of freedom associated with them. The optimization algorithm must be able to change dimensions that are released as optimization variables without affecting the failure-free assembly of the FEM model. Joints must be rotatable, and the length of struts should optionally be longitudinally adjustable. Otherwise, traversing of the structure in the workspace would be impossible. To achieve efficient optimization, the ANSYS FEM system was coupled with the GNU Octave

mathematical and numerical system. The implemented interface is capable to read out FEM results and to transfer calculated changes of the optimization variables. It was taken into consideration, that open-loop and closedloop control parameters can be transferred on the basis of the calculated and planned traversing movements. 3.2 Implementation Clavel's Delta tripod (see Figure 2) is a simple structure that has become widely used in industrial applications. Companies like SIG, INDEX, Hitachi-Seiki are utilizing this structure for machines for the packaging industry, for healthcare facilities, or for mechanical engineering (see Figure 3).

Figure 3: Automatic drilling machines by Hitachi-Seiki The structure's platform-side struts designed as parallelograms bind all rotational degrees of freedom. So the working platform can only move parallel to its initial position. Therefore it is the ideal structure for drilling or three-axis milling operations. In the first run presented here, the FEM model is created from simple pipe elements (see Figure 4). The outer and inner diameters are parameterized as optimization variables. The degrees of freedom of the joints are only created by binding degrees of freedom, so that elements could be saved here.

Figure 4: Simple FEM model of delta kinematic. The shapes of the frame and the working platform were unknown before model design. So both influences had to be discounted. This was achieved by using boundary conditions for the frame. The influence of the platform was removed by using differentially stiff material parameters at this point. For spindle weight, 200 kilograms was estimated. This mass point was implemented at the platform center. The target function is a circle test across the dimensions of the workspace. Thereby, the points of the path regarded partly are located closely to singular positions. Thus, the effects of the executed optimization are easy to recognize. The straight traversing path is not taken into account for the analysis (see Figure 5).

Figure 5: Circle test: curve to be traveled. The deviation of the TCP from the ideal path has to be minimized on the condition, that the structure accelerates at 0.5 g to a final value of 2,000 mm/s. For this purpose, the area between ideal and actual paths is calculated. If the optimization process should be based on more than one criterion, the other criteria have to be calculated additionally and have to be related to the area value. This is commonly done by a weighted summary of all relevant values. The optimization algorithm as well as the FEM model are prepared for this purpose, but it were not included into this example used to present the general concept. Controlled traversing movement takes place in a transient FEM calculation. A secondary condition is that the weight should not increase. The optimization variables are self-contradictory. Reinforcing the platform-side strut components results in improved platform parallelism. Concurrently, the resulting weight increase causes more problems in keeping the path in the circle test. The interface with the GNU Octave numeric mathematical system ensures control of the structure as well as its optimization (see Figure 6). It was implemented to run on all common operating systems. Run times of the optimization processes range between some days and some weeks. Therefore, importance was attached to high flexibility in the optimization process. Advance compilation into executable codes was not a possibility. A shared data exchange file is the drop-in center to which both programs have reading and writing access. It must have a format that can be used by both systems.

GNU Octave performs an optimization step based on this result, i.e. it changes the optimization parameters. These changed parameters are transferred to ANSYS. A new model is created and traversed. This process is iterated until a minimum is found. The traversing movement is generated by manipulation of the rotational drives. For the simple example being presented, this is done by using boundary conditions at the frame-side struts. As this movement is not under closed-loop but open-loop control, the required drive positions were calculated in advance for each time step and transferred to ANSYS using the shared interface. The number of target function runs is critical: one call takes approximately 15 minutes of calculation time. The Broyden-Fletcher-Goldfarb-Shanno-method [9] implemented is similar to the Newton-method, but can do without derivations and converges relatively fast. Unfortunately, it also inherits the limited convergence radius of that method, so a stochastic method with a greater radius had to be added upfront. 4 RESULTS The inner and outer diameters of all struts were given as optimization variables to the algorithm. Basically, as many as you like optimization variables are possible and could be implemented, but the solution space increases dramatically with each variable added. No more than six variables should be selected for acceptable calculation times. As a secondary condition, weight should be reduced or at least not be increased. Larger outer diameters of the platform-side struts increase stability and parallelism of the working platform, but also cause higher centrifugal forces as mass inertia values are increased. The optimization algorithm being presented reduced the outer and inner diameters of the platform-side struts by about 20% and increased the dimensions of the frameside struts by about the same measure (see Figure 7). The achieved results are, slight weight reduction of about 6% and a reduction of the required and actual difference of about 50%.

Figure 6: ANSYS-GNU Octave interface. The calculated TCP shifting values are calculated by the FEM program and transferred to Octave. This software compares the data with the reference curve and calculates the target function. For the example being presented, it is the area of the space between reference and actual circles.

Figure 7: Optimized delta kinematic design. Figure. 8 shows the TCP paths to be traveled in original (Figure 8a) and optimized design (Figure 8b). As differences are hard to make out, the deviations between actual trajectory and ideal circle trajectory of the TCP were shown once again in Figure 9. Red line marks the deviation of the optimized mechanism from the circle, green line marks that of the original model.

(a)

(b) Figure 8: TCP traversing movement: original (a) and optimized (b) designs.

Figure 9: Difference between the circle and TCP paths: Original and optimized designs. 5 SUMMARY The paper shows, that the optimization of parallel kinematic structures should not stop at kinematics. Analysis with a FEM or MKS system [10] is imperative to make useful predictions of the dynamic behavior of the structure to be designed. To make reliable statements of improvement potentials of single components, an optimization process using a FEM system is required. To exhaust the whole potential of the method presented, structures can be improved in which passive couplings influence the static and dynamic properties. The StarragHeckert Kinematik SKM milling machine, in which a four-member parallel guidance gear ensures parallelism of the main spindle, is an example for it. The fields of application of the interface presented can be widely extended. Control parameters can be tested and optimized like the physical dimensions of a PKM structure. Different target functions which can be used include tool parallelism, reaction to acting process forces or indexing movements.

6 REFERENCES [1] Weidermann, F.: Strukturoptimierung von Werkzeugmaschinen, Technische Universitt Chemnitz, Diss., 2001. [2] Kirchner, J.: Mehrkriterielle Optimierung von Parallel-kinematiken, Technische Universitt Chemnitz, Diss., 2000. [3] Hesselbach, J.; Maa, J.; Bier, C.: Singularity Prediction for Parallel Robots for Improvement of Sensor Integrated Assembly. In: Manufacturing Technology CIRP Annals 2005. Wabern: Technische Rundschau, August 2005. [4] Kim, J.; Cho, Y. M.; Park, F. C.; Lee, J. M.: Design of a Parallel Mechanism Platform for Simulating Six Degrees Of Freedom General Motion Including Continuous 360 Degree Spin. In: Manufacturing Technology CIRP Annals 2003. Uetendorf: Technische Rundschau, August 2003. [5] Angeles, J.; Lpez C., Carlos S.: Kinematic isotropy and the conditioning index of serial robotic manipulators. In: International Journal of Robotics Research 11 (1992), Nr. 6, pp. 560-571. [6] Milutinovic, D. S.; Glavonjic, M.; Kvrgic, V.; Zivanovic, S.: A New 3DOF Spatial Parallel Mechanism for Milling Machines with Long X Travel. In: Manufacturing Technology CIRP Annals 2005. Wabern: Technische Rundschau, August 2005. pp. 345-348. [7] Clavel, R.: Delta, a fast robot with parallel geometry. In: Proceedings of the 18th International Symposium on Industrial Robots, 1988, pp. 91-100. [8] Molinari, L.; Fassi, I.; Legnani, G.: Kineto Static Optimisation of PKMs. In: Manufacturing Technology CIRP Annals 2003. Uetendorf : Technische Rundschau, August 2003. S. 337-341. [9] Asaithambi, N. S.: Numerical Analysis Theory and Practice. 1. Fort Worth: Saunders College Publishing, 1995. [10] Fleischer, J.; Schmidt-Ewig, J. P.; Weule, H.: Innovative Machine Kinematics for Combined Handling and Machining of Three Dimensional Curved Lightweight Extrusion Structures. In: Manufacturing Technology CIRP Annals 2005. Wabern: Technische Rundschau, August 2005. pp. 317-320.