| Literature DB >> 35336377 |
Ayman Mohamed1, Mahmoud Hassan2, Rachid M'Saoubi3, Helmi Attia1,2.
Abstract
In the era of the "Industry 4.0" revolution, self-adjusting and unmanned machining systems have gained considerable interest in high-value manufacturing industries to cope with the growing demand for high productivity, standardized part quality, and reduced cost. Tool condition monitoring (TCM) systems pave the way for automated machining through monitoring the state of the cutting tool, including the occurrences of wear, cracks, chipping, and breakage, with the aim of improving the efficiency and economics of the machining process. This article reviews the state-of-the-art TCM system components, namely, means of sensing, data acquisition, signal conditioning and processing, and monitoring models, found in the recent open literature. Special attention is given to analyzing the advantages and limitations of current practices in developing wireless tool-embedded sensor nodes, which enable seamless implementation and Industrial Internet of Things (IIOT) readiness of TCM systems. Additionally, a comprehensive review of the selection of dimensionality reduction techniques is provided due to the lack of clear recommendations and shortcomings of various techniques developed in the literature. Recent attempts for TCM systems' generalization and enhancement are discussed, along with recommendations for possible future research avenues to improve TCM systems accuracy, reliability, functionality, and integration.Entities:
Keywords: feature extraction; machine learning; milling process; sensor fusion; signal processing; tool condition monitoring
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35336377 PMCID: PMC8950983 DOI: 10.3390/s22062206
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Tool condition monitoring in machining processes.
Figure 2Arbitrary tree for data fusion levels.
Figure 3Wireless sensor node structure.
Figure 4Universal wireless tool-embedded sensor node in the milling process.
Figure 5Various concepts of thin film placements as indicated by the blue spots: (a) on the tool [93,94], (b) under the insert [102], (c) on a reduced diameter of the tool holder [106], and (d) on an integrated flexible body [91].
Comparison of several wireless TCM tool-embedded sensor nodes.
| Author | Forces | Vibrations | Temperature | Wireless Protocol | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Axis 1 | Design | Sensors | Axis | (Data Rate) | ||
| Zhou et al. [ | - | - | - | - | Wi-Fi | |
| Luo et al. [ | Under inserts | PVDF |
| - | Wi-Fi | |
| Xie et al. [ | Modified tool | Capacitive |
| - | Wi-Fi | |
| SPIKE [ | Unknown | Unknown | - | - | Wi-Fi | |
| Wu et al. [ | Modified tool | Strain gauge |
| - | Wi-Fi | |
| Nguyen et al. [ |
| On the tool holder | PVDF |
| - | Bluetooth |
| iTENDO [ |
| - | - |
| - | Bluetooth |
| Qin et al. [ | Flexible element | MEMS |
| - | Zigbee | |
| Rizal et al. [ | Flexible element | Strain gauge |
| √ | Telemetry | |
1 F, F, and F are cutting forces and M, M, and M are moments in x, y, and z-directions, respectively.
Specifications of wireless communication protocols for TCM sensor nodes.
| Technology | Data Speed | Data Speed | Latency | Range | Trans. | Sleep | Author |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wi-Fi n/g | 75 | 54 | 1.5 | 50 | 350 | 300 | [ |
| Bluetooth | 1–3 | 0.7–2.1 | 6 | 30 | - | - | [ |
| Bluetooth LE | 0.125–2 | 0.27–1.37 | 2.5 | 10 | 60 | 8 | [ |
| Zigbee | 0.25 | 0.15 | 140 | 30 | 72 | 4 | [ |
Characteristics of rechargeable batteries.
| Technology | Lead Acid | Nickel–Cadmium | Nickel–Metal Hydride | Lithium-Ion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Energy density (Wh/kg) | 35–50 | 30–60 | 60–80 | 80–180 |
| Self-discharge/month | 2–8% | 5–15% | 15–25% | 2–10% |
| Fast-charge time (hour) | 8–16 | 1 | 2–4 | 1–4 |
| Charge/discharge cycles | 250–1000 | 1000–50,000 | 300–600 | 3000 |
Figure 6Filter techniques framework used for feature selection.
Figure 7Wrapper technique framework used for feature selection.
Figure 8Hybrid technique framework used for feature selection.