Optimising Tool Sequences for Rough Machining

Alex Churchill, Andy Philippides and Phil Husbands

Abstract
An investigation was carried out into finding optimal tool sequences that successfully complete a rough milling operation on a realistic component using a set of industrially used tools. For the first time, a thorough analysis of the search space was carried out by simulating every valid sequence under constrained conditions. The results from this analysis challenge assumptions made in previous research about the composition of optimal tool combinations. A second investigation was made into using search techniques to find optimal tool sequences using a low number of evaluations. A hybridised Genetic Algorithm was found to perform best.

1. The Tool Sequence Problem

A workshop will use a sequence of tools to cut a block of metal until it closely resembles the final shape of a component. This is called the roughing stage, and once completed the part is 'finished' by using tools to create a smooth, consistent surface. At a typical workshop, there will be many tools available for roughing, with different sizes, shapes and cutting speeds. A planner will have to find the best combination of these tools which will cut the component to within the maximum surface tolerance required to start the finishing process, in the shortest amount of time.

2. The Tool Sequence Experiment

The task was to rough the pictured component using a sequence of up to 5 tools in length out of a library of 18 industry standard tools [1]. These tools were different types and sizes and operated at different cutting speeds. The component was cut out of a cuboid metal stock and had to have a final surface tolerance under 1mm in all places. The aim was to find the sequence that could reach this in the shortest amount of time.

3. Analysing the Search Space

Every possible sequence, from 1 to 5 tools in length, was simulated using Vero Software's Machining Strategist. There are a number of rules that need to be adhered to for a sequence to be valid. This led to there being 39607 valid combinations. This was the first time that this type of analysis has been carried out. A surface plot of all two tool sequences is show below.

4. Results
The best tool sequence found used a 12mm endmill tool followed by a 6mm toroidal, which took 116 minutes in total. This is show below.

Stock remaining after the 12mm endmill tool is used

Stock remaining after the 6mm toroidal follows the 12mm endmill tool

6. Comparing Search Methods 5. Challenging Assumptions

Two interesting features were seen in the results that challenged assumptions seen in previous work. 1. The last tool in a sequence should be fixed to the largest able to reach the required surface tolerance. This is seen in [2] and [3]. The best result we found used a smaller tool at the end, a 6mm toroidal rather than an 8mm. 2. The profile left by a larger tool is the geometrical subset of a smaller tool. This is seen in [3] and [4]. We found that this is true if only endmill tools are used but when using different tool types, they are able to achieve a lower surface tolerance together than any one tool in the sequence can individually. The task investigated here is a difficult combinatorial problem. For these reasons stochastic search methods were employed. Stochastic Hill Climbing, a Genetic Algorithm, Random Restart Stochastic Hill Climbing and a hybrid Genetic Algorithm were compared on the number of times the optimum was hit and the median evaluations used over 10,000 trials. The hybrid method was found to be the most successful.

References:
[1] Product Catalogue Issue 8, Industrial Tooling Corporation [2] Ahmad, Z., Rahmani, K. & DSouza, R.M., 2008. Applications of genetic algorithms in process planning: tool sequence selection for 2.5-axis pocket machining. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 21(4), pp.461-470. [3] Lim, T. et al., 2001. Optimizing tool selection. International Journal of Production Research, 39(6), pp.1239-1256. [4] D'Souza, R., 2004. Automated tool sequence selection for 3-axis machining of free-form pockets. Computer-Aided Design, 36(7), pp.595-605.

Median Evaluations