International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291

www.elsevier.com/locate/ijmactool

Geometric and force errors compensation in a 3axis CNC milling machine

Chana Raksiri, Manukid Parnichkun
Asian Institute of Technology, School of Advanced Technologies, P.O. Box 4, Klong Luang, Pathumthani 12120, Thailand
Received 2 February 2004; received in revised form 26 April 2004; accepted 28 April 2004

Abstract
This paper proposes a new o line error compensation model by taking into accounting of geometric and
cutting force induced errors in a 3-axis CNC milling machine. Geometric error of a 3-axis milling machine
composes of 21 components, which can be measured by laser interferometer within the working volume.
Geometric error estimation determined by back-propagation neural network is proposed and used separately
in the geometric error compensation model. Likewise, cutting force induced error esti-mation by backpropagation neural network determined based on a flat end mill behavior observation is proposed and used
sep-arately in the cutting force induced error compensation model. Various experiments over a wide range of
cutting conditions are carried out to investigate cutting force and machine error relation. Finally, the
combination of geometric and cutting force induced errors is modeled by the combined back-propagation
neural network. This unique model is used to compensate both geo-metric and cutting force induced errors
simultaneously by a single model. Experimental tests have been carried out in order to validate the
performance of geometric and cutting force induced errors compensation model.
# 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: CNC machine tool accuracy; Geometric error; Cutting force induced error; Machining error; Error compensation
doi:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2004.0
4.016

1. Introduction
High accuracy CNC milling machines are required in
many manufactures because the demand of precision
components and consistency of quality are growing. The
most important factor of the precision components is the
accuracy of machine tools. Mainly, position errors are
originated from geometric, cutting force, dynamic loading,
etc. [1,2]. Ramesh et al. [1] analyzed various sources of
geometric errors that were usually encountered on
machine tools and the methods of error compensation
employed in machines.

Many researchers have developed geometric error

models. Geometric error is an important source of
inaccuracy of CNC milling machine. They measured 21
geometric error components and compensated the systematic errors in CNC milling machines [36].

Corresponding author. Tel.: +66-2-524-5229; fax: +66-2-524-5697.

E-mail address: manukid@ait.ac.th (M. Parnichkun).
0890-6955/$ - see front matter # 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Ehmann et al.
[3]
presented a method to
build a gen-eral error
model of a multi-axis
machine
of
arbitrary
configuration. It is based
on the assumption of rigid
body motion and utilizes
homogenous
transformation matrices.
Okafor et al.
[4]
presented derivation of a
general volumetric error
model, which synthesized
both
geometric
and
thermal errors of a
vertical milling machine
using
homogenous
transformation matrices
of slide axis. They
measured 21 geometric
error compo-nents and
compensated the error to
validate their error model.

displacement
Ahn et al. [6] included backlash error to a volu-metric diagonal
measurement
by
laser
error model.

inter-ferometer,
when
Chen et al. [7] proposed a method to obtain all 21 error
multiple
machine
axis
components
by
performing
simple
displacement
moved
simul-taneously,
measurement along 15 lines using laser interferometer.
with
automatic
optic
Chen et al. [8] developed a system which was capable of a

alignment. The results

showed that 21 geometric
errors of a 3-axis machine
could be quickly estimated
from the displacement

1284

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291
carried out in order to
of machining error
validate the performance
measurements of some determineddue to cut-ting force
of cutting force induced
is
measured
by
a
diagonal lines in the working volume.
errors compensation.

camera.
Various
The other major cause of inaccuracyexperiments over a
range
of
in CNC mill-ing machine is error due towide
conditions
cutting force. The error in workpiece is cutting
caused either by excessive deformatio-are carried out to
n at the tool and workpiece interfaceverify cutting force
due to cutting action or by deformation and machining error
of machine tool structure. Ikua et al. on a 3 axis milling
[9,10] proposed a theoretical model tomachine. The third
discusses
pre-dict cutting forces and machiningsection
error of convex and concave surfaces the combination of
and
in ball-end milling. The machin-inggeometric
force
errors resulted from force induced toolcutting
errors
deflections were calculated at variousinduced
by
the
parts of the machined sur-face. Kim etmodeled
combined
backal.
[15] presented a mathematicalpropagation neural
model to estimate cutting forces andnetwork. It is used
the resultant surface form errors into compensate both
ball-end milling in various cutting con-geometric
and
ditions. Cheng et al.
[16] studiedcutting
force
contour errors of a complete CNC induced errors simmachine system which covered allultaneously by a
groups
of
functions,
includingsingle
model.
trajectory planning, trajectory tracking,Experimental tests
cutting process and machine structure are
dynamics. Yun et al.
[11,12]
developed
a
new
method
that
calculated
cutting-condition-independent coecient and its forces over
a wide range of cutting conditions and
predicted
the
three-dimen-sional
machined surface errors generated
during the peripheral end milling
process.
This paper is organized into four
sections. The first section discusses
the geometric error model of a 3 axis
milling machine. The model presented
by Ahn et al. [6] is applied. A total of
21 geometric error components are
measured by laser interferometer. This
model is implemented in an ARDTB400 CNC milling machine. Geometric
error estimation determ-ined by backpropagation
neural
network
is
proposed and used in the geometric
error
compensation
model.
The
geometric error is compensated o-line
by mod-ifying the CNC command.
Laser interferometer mea-sures the
compensated results of two straight
lines moving on the x-y plane
simultaneously in both for-ward and
backward directions. The second
section discusses the cutting force
induced error model. It is estimated by
back-propagation
neural
network
determined based on a flat end mill
behavior obser-vation. The model is
used in the cutting force induced error
compensation model. A cutting force
sensor is developed and applied to
measure the cut-ting forces. The result

2. Geometric error
model
For
the
3-axis
milling
machine,
there are 21 error
components.
The
geometric
error
model
is
constructed
by
using a rigid body
model, small angle
approxi-mation
of
the
error,
and
homogeneous
transforma-tions. In
this
paper,
the
geometric
error
model of Ahn et al.
[6] is applied as
follows:
Px dxx dxy
dxz
ezxy
eyxz
eyyz
Sxyy

S z
xz
d e
yy zx
d e
yz zx
d e
yz zy
d e
zy yx

dzzeyx dzzeyy
exyezxz ezxSyzz
ezySyzz 1

d e

d e

d e

y yx yy
zz xx

d e

zy xx

zz xy

xy zx

e S y
zx xy

d e

xz zx

e S z
zx xz

d e

xz zy

ezySxzz dyz
Syzz exxz exyz
eyyezxz 2

P d d d e yd e d e
z

zx

d e

zy

d e

zz

xx

d e

yy xx

d e

xy yx

e e z

1 xz yx xz yy yz xx yz xy xx xy
2 eyxeyyz eyxSxyy exxSyzz eyySxzz
exysyzz eyxSxzz

where x, y, z are nominal positions, and

dxx;dyy;dzz are their respective positional
errors along x, y and z direc-tions,
respectively.
dyx;dzx;dxy;dzy;dxz;dyz
are
straightness errors, where the first
subscript refers to error direction and the
second refers to moving direction.
exx;eyx;ezx; exy;eyy;ezy;exz;eyz;ezz are angular
errors, where the first subscript refer to
axis of the rotation error, and the second
refers to moving direction. Sxy;Sxz;Syz are
squareness errors between each pair of
axes. Fig. 1

Fig. 1. Schematic of six degrees of freedom error

motion of a machine tool system.

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291
sinhtk

; B1

cosar

1285

Cutting force
components acting
on one flute at an
arbitrary cutter rotation angle can be calculated as:

coshh ; coshtk sin

angular position of the

cutter; ar is the rake
angle of the cutter; hk
is the helix angle; Kn,Kf
is the specific cutting
force; tc(i,j,k) is the
instantaneous
uncut
chip thickness; hc is the
chip flow angle; and,
Da is the height of the
z-axis disk element.

2
4

Fxi;j;k
Fy i;j;k

B1

3.1. Cutting force calculation

Yun [13] developed a cutting force model.
The three orthogonal force components in the
x, y and z axis can

and the

friction force dFr/ that are proportional to uncut

chip thickness as follows:

2
4

Fxi;j;k
Fy i;j;k

Fz i;j;k

3
5

2
B

21
4

A11
A31

A
A

A13

12

22

A33

32

i;j;k Kn i;j;k C3

i;j;k Kn i;j;k C4

Kf

3
5

A12 cos
where A11 C1cos/ artci;j;k;
i;j;k; A13 sin/ artci;j;k;
A21 C1sin
tci;j;k; A22 sin/tci;j;k; A23 cos/
artci;j;k;
A31 C2tci;j;k A32 cothhtci;j;k; A33 0;
coshh

sinhh

sinhtk

; C2 sinhtk

coshc

; C3 sinhhsinhC coshC coth

Da

A33

32

Kf

i;j;k Kn

Kf

i;j;k Kn

B1

XX

23

i;j;k C3

A21

A
A
A

A31

12

22

A13
A

23

A3

32

Kni;j;k
Kf

i;j;k C4

A11
4

3
5

i;j;k Kn i;j;k C3

Kf

i;j;k Kn i;j;k C4

One of the major

causes
of
the
machining error is
cutting deflection due
to cutting force. By
assuming the cutter as
a cantilever beam, the
cutting deflection can
be derived as [14]
F
3
3
2
d 6EI hzF zi hL zi 3hL zi hL zF i& 7

23

Kni;j;k
K

22

A
A31

Kni;j;k

Fz i;j;k

3.2. Cutting deflection

calculation

3. Mathematical model of
cutting force and machining
error

be derived from the normal force dFn /

Fxi;j;k
Fy i;j;k

A13

12

Cutting
force
components on x, y
and z direction at an
arbitrary cutter rotation
angle can be obtained
by summing up the
forces acting on each
flute at that
particular cutter rotation angle:

2
shows a schematic of six degrees of
freedom error motion of a machine system.
Fig. 2 shows squareness errors between
each pair of axis.

21
k

Fig. 2. Squareness errors between each pair of

axis.

Fz i;j;k

A11

where F is the cutting

force, I is the area
moment of inertia of
the cutter, E is Youngs
modulus, L is the
overhang, zF is zdirectional position of
the applied force, and
z is position of the
deflection. As shown in
Fig. 3, a flat end mill

cutter consists of two parts; the flute and the

shank parts which can be simplified as a two
step cylindrical cantilever beam. The
resultant
Fig. 3. End
mill cutter
structure.

1286

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291

cutter bending deflection is

dt ds df /sLf z
F

6EI L Lf 3L Lf L zF &
F

6EIf

Square) algorithm.
The algorithm is
provided
with
training set:

fp1;t1g; fp2;t2g;:::;
3
2
3
hzF zi Lf z 3Lf z Lf fpQ;tQg 9
2
L Lf 2L Lf L zF &Lfwhere pq and tq are the

input
and
target
output of the training
2EI 8
set.
The
algorithm
modifies the network
where ds is deflection of the shank, df ispara-meters in order
deflection of the flute, /s is deflectionto minimize the mean
angle of the shank, Lf is length of thesquare error:

flute, and If is the moment of inertial of

the flute. During flat end mill cuts FX EeT e& Et
material in x or y axis, the resultant
cutter bending deflection aects thewhere X is the
workpiece shape accuracy.
vector of network
weights and biases.
As with the LMS, the
algorithm
4. Function approximation by backapproximates
the
propagation neural network
mean square error
by
Back-propagation neural network is
T
one of the most commonly used neural ^
network structures. It is created by F X tk ak tk
generalizing the WidrowHo
[17]
the
learning rule to muti-layer networkswhere
and nonlinear dierentiable trans-ferexpectation of the
function. It is simple, eective, and square
error
has
found in a wide application such asbeen replaced by the
function
approximation.
Function
error
at
approximation applies a network ofsquare
k.
The
nodes arranged in two layers, theiteration
hidden and output layers. The hiddensteepest
descent
layer serves to provide means for inputalgorithm for the
relations to be represented in the
output. The output layers serve asapproximated mean
nodes to buer output for the model.square
Two-layer, 1-2-1 network, is shown inerror is
^
Fig. 4. There are two nodes in the
@F
m
m
hidden layer and one node in thewi ;j k 1 wi ;j k a
m
@w
output layer.
i;j
Transfer function for the first and
^
@F
second layers can be Log-Sigmoid, m
m
Hyperbolic Tangent Sigmoid, Positive bi ;j k 1 bi k a @bm
Linear, Saturating Linear, or other
i
functions depend-ing on shape of the
target. The back-propagation algorithmwhere wmi;j , bmi;j is
is a generalization of the LMS (Leastweight and bias of
Mean
network, a is the
learnig rate. During

network
training,
weights and bia-ses
are modified until
the
approximated
mean square error
is minimum.

5. Experiments and
results
5.1. Geometric error
5.1.1. Geometric error
determination

Three
positional
errors
(dxx;dyy;dzz),
6
angular
errors
(eyx;ezx;exy;ezy;exz;eyz),
6
straightness
errors
(dyx;dzx;dxy;
dzy;dxz;dyz)
and 3 squareness errors
(Sxy;Sxz;Syz)
were
measured
by
laser
interferometer.
3
angular
errors
(exx;eyy;ezz) were derived
from
vertical
straightness

Fig. 4. 12-1
Network.

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291

Fig. 5. Position and straightness error along x axis in

backward direction.

both
forward
and
backward
errors as referred in thedirections.
The
paper of Ahn et al. [6].geometric
All error components inerror of x, y
z axis
both
forward
andand
was
backward directions werecalculated
Eqs.
measured.
The
laserby
system consisted of the(1)(3) with
to
following
components:respect
the
ML10 measurement laser,measuring
EC10
environmentalposition x,
and z.
compensation
unit,yFunction
interferometer, reflectorapproximat
mirror set, and computer.ion
by
The error models asbackfunctions of positions in x,propagatio
n
neural
y and z axis were investi-network
gated.
Figs. 5 and 6was used
to
show some of the errorapproximat
compo-nents.
Fig. 5e
show the position andgeometric
error
straightness errors alongmodel. The
x
axis
in
backwardbackdirection. Fig. 6 show thepropagation
angular error along y axisneural
in backward direction.network
of
Esti-mation of the errorstructure
geometric
model at an intermediateerror model
position
between
thewas shown
measured
nodes
wasin Fig. 7.
determined
by
back-The
x,
propagation
neuralpositions
y and z of
network.
the
measuring
point were
5.1.2. Geometric error model the input of
the
A total of 21 errornetwork
components
wereand
measured
directly
by
laser interferometer in
Fig. 6.
Angular
error
along y
axis in
backwar

both
forward
and
backward
directions.
the
After
geometri training the
net-work,
c error inthe
x, y and zgeometric
axis wereerror could
be
the
determined
this
output ofusing
model.
the
network.
5.1.3.
The
transfer Geometric
function error
of
the
hidden compensation
layer was To
Hyperevaluate the
bolic
Tangent algorithm,
Sigmoid the
and
transfer geometric
function error of two
of
thestraight
output
layer waslines moving
Linear.
on x-y plane
The
both
number in
of nodesforward and
in
thebackward
hidden directions,
layer was
as
varied
until theillustrated in
approxim
Fig. 8, was
ated
mean
compensate
square d.
These
error was
lines
were
satisfied
at eightyrepresented
nodes for
d direction.

Fig. 8.

1287

Fig. 7. 3-80-3 Network

structure of geometric
error model.

by
parametric
equations.
The
compensati
on algorithm
modi-fied
the CNC Gcode
command
by
subtracting
the
expected
error
from
the nominal
position to
reduce the
error.
Laser
interferomet
er was used
to measure
position
errors of the
machine
following
a
straight line
from
point
Poxo;yo to
point
P1x1;y1.
Due
to
position
error,
the
dierence
between
nominal and
real
distances
was
identified by
laser
interferomet
er.
The
modified
Line 1
and line 2
in both
forward
and
backward
directions
.

1288

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291

Fig. 10. Position error

compensation of line 2 in
forward
and
back-ward
direction.
Fig. 9. Position error compensation of line 1 in forward
and back-ward direction.

CNC command could be represented by

Positionx;ymodified Positionx;ynominal
Error Position x;y
5.1.4. Geometric error compensation results
Fig. 9 shows results of the
compensated and uncom-pensated
position error of line 1 in forward and
back-ward directions of the ARDTB400. The average improvement of
line 1 is approximately 34 lm and 28
lm in forward and backward directions,
respect-ively. Fig. 10 shows results of
the compensated and uncompensated
position error of line 2 in forward and
backward directions of the ARD-TB400.
The improve-ment of line 2 is
approximately 44 lm and 40 lm in
forward and backward directions,
respectively.
5.2. Cutting force induced error
5.2.1. Cutting force error determination
In order to investigate the eect of
cutting force to machining error, slot
and hole in x-y plane were machined as
shown in Fig. 11. Edge A-A was the
refer-ence edge. Hole B represented
cutting without x-y plane cutting force
eect and slot C represented cutting
with x-y plane cutting force eect. The
dierent dis-tance between edge A-A
to end points of hole B and slot C was
the machining error due to cutting
force.

Fig. 11. Slot C and Hole B

cutting test along x axis in
forward direction.

Because the slot

cutting force was
proportional to tool
tip feedrate and tool
axial depth of cut,
to determine the
cutting
force
induced error, a set
of 12 cutting tests
were investigated.
Table 1 listed all the
cutting con-ditions.
The investigation of
cutting
force
induced error in x
forward
and
backward directions
and y forward and
backward directions
were carried out. All
the
tests
were
conducted by a high
speed steel end mill
cutter
with
four
flutes,
30vv
helix
angle,
11
rake
angle,
10
mm
diameter, and 30
mm tool overhang.
The workpiece was
steel
SS400.
A
cutting force sensor
was
used
to
measure force in the
slot
cutting
direction. Machining
error due to cutting
force was measured
by a camera.
Fig. 12 show
graphs of cutting
force average. Fig.
13 show graphs of
machining
error
compared to cutting
force.
5.2.2. Cutting force
induced error model
Similar
to
the
geometric
error
model,
function
approximation
by
back-propagation
neural network was

used to approximate cutting forced

induced error model. The cutting force
was proportional to tool tip
Table 1
Cutting conditions

Test no.

Spindle speed
(rpm)

Depth of
cut (mm)

Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
Test 4
Test 5
Test 6
Test 7
Test 8
Test 9
Test 10
Test 11
Test 12

835
835
835
835
835
835
835
835
835
835
835
835

1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3

Feed rate
(mm/min)
50
100
150
200
50
100
150
200
50
100
150
200

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291

Fig. 12. Cutting force along x and y axis in forward and

backward directions.

feedrate and tool axial depth of cut and the

machining error due to cutting force was
proportional to cutting force. Thus, the
machining error due to cutting force was
also proportional to cutting force tool tip
feedrate and tool axial depth of cut. The
back-propagation neural network structure of
cutting force induced error model was shown
in Fig. 14. Tool tip feedrate and tool axial
depth of cut were the input of the network,
and machining error due to cutting force
were the output of the network.

Fig. 13. Cutting force induced error compared to cutting

force along x and y axis in forward and backward
directions.

1289

Transfer function of
the hidden layer was
Hyperbolic
Tangent
Sigmoid and transfer
function of the output
layer was Linear. The
number of nodes in the
hidden
layer
was
varied
until
the
approximated
mean
square
error
was
satisfied
at
twenty
nodes for both forward
and
backward
directions.
After
training the network,
the geometric error
could be determined
using this model.
5.2.3. Cutting force
induced error
compensation
To
evaluate
the
algorithm, the machining
error of four straight line
slots cutting on x-y
plane moving from point
A to B to C to D and to
E, as illustrated in Fig.
15, was compensated.
The
compensation
algor-ithm
modified
CNC G-code command
by
subtracting
the
expected error from the
nominal
position
to
reduce error. A set of 4
cutting
tests
were
carried out. Table 2 lists
the cutting conditions.
All the tests were
conduc-ted with the

same cutter and workpiece material as in the from 347 to 24 lm for

cutting force error model determination.
test 3, and from 391 to
5.2.4. Cutting force induced error
compensation results

20 lm for test 4.
5.3. Error model
combination

Fig. 16 shows the results of the

compensated and uncompensated cutting Finally,
geometric
force induced error of tests 14. Theand
cutting
force
experimental results show that the average induced errors were
of machining error is improved from 237 to considered
together
function
8 lm for test 1, from 264 to 7 lm for test 2,using

approximation by backpropagation
neural
network. The backpropa-gation
neural
network structure of
the combined model is
shown in Fig. 17.
The x, y, z positions,
tool tip feedrate and
tool axial depth of cut
were the input of the
network. Geometric

Fig. 14. 4-20-3

Network of cutting
force induced error
model.

1290

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291

geometric

6. Conclusions

and

cutting
A

new

line

modeled

model

combined

and

taking

into

geometric

cutting

compensate

machine

was

geometric

this

cutting

in

Geometric

cutting

force

1
2
1.5
1

65
35
70
130

both
and
force

induced errors simultaneously

single

by

model.

a
The

experimental results
show

that

applying

the

geometric

error

compensation,
machine

by

the

accuracy

could be improved.

Estimation

835
835
835
835

neural

model was used to

nonlinear.

Test 1
Test 2
Test 3
Test 4

propagation

3-axis CNC milling

and cutting force induced errors were induced errors in

the output of the network. Transfer
function of the hidden layer wasflat end mill of slot
Hyperbolic
Tangent
Sigmoid
and
were
transfer function of the output layercutting
was Linear. The number of nodes in the
hidden layer node was varied until the estimated by the
approxi-mated mean square error was
model.
satisfied at 110 nodes for both forwardproposed
and backward directions. After training
the network, the resultant error couldThe geometric error
be determined using this model.
was found highly

Feedrate
(mm/min)

back-

network. The unique

and

Depth of
cut (mm)

the

induced errors in a

paper.

Spindle
speed (rpm)

by

force

Fig. 15. Cutting path from A to B to C to D and to

proposed
E.

Test No.

induced errors was

error compensation

account

Table 2
Cutting conditions

force

of

the

geometric error at
Cutting
force (kg)

From

the

experiment,

the

any locations in the

average

working
volume was
10.0

improvement of line

13.0
carried
15.0

out

of

was

separately by back-

approximately

propagation

and

network.

neural

Likewise,

estimation

of

cutting

force

induced
also

the

error

was

carried

out

28

lm

forward

backward directions,
respect-ively.

was

propagation

and

combination

The
of

The

improvement of line

approximately

network.

in
and

separately by backneural

34

40

forward

lm

44
in
and

backward directions,

respectively. The cutting force inducedtest 1, from 264 to

show

error experi-mental results show that7 lm for test 2, from

machine

accuracy

in slot cutting, the machin-ing error 347 to 24 lm for test

was

improved

was proportional to cutting force and3, and from 391 to

signifi-cantly.

the average of machining error could20 lm for test 4. The

be improved from 237 to 8 lm forexperimental results

Fig. 16. Error compensation of test 1, test 2,

test 3 and test 4.

that

the

C. Raksiri, M. Parnichkun / International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture 44 (2004) 12831291

1291

Fig. 17. 7-110-3 Network of error model combination.

Acknowledgements
This research project is financially
supported by Mitutoyo Association for
Science and Technology.
References

[1]

R. Ramesh, M.A. Mannan, A.N. Poo, Error

compesation in machine toolsa review Part
I: geometric, cutting-force induced and
fixture
dependent
errors,
International
Journal of machine tools & Manufacture 40
(2000) 12351256.

[2]

M.
Rahman,
J.
Heikkala,
K.
Lappalainene, Modeling measure-ment and
error compensation of multi-axis machine
tools. Part I: theory, International Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 40 (2000)
15351546.

[3]

K.F. Ehmann, B.T. Wu, M.F. Devries, A

generalized geometric error model for multiaxis machines, Annals of CIRP 36 (1) (1987)
253256.

[4]

A.C. Okafor, Y.M. Ertekin, Derivation of

machine tool error models and error
compensation procedure for three axes
vertical machining center using rigid body
kinematic, International Jour-nal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 40 (2000) 11991213.

[5]

C.D. Mize, J.C. Ziegert, Durability

evaluation of software error correction on a
machine center, International Journal of
Machine Tools & Manufacture 40 (2000)
15271534.

[6]

K.G. Ahn, D.W. Cho, Proposition for a

volumetric error con-sideration backlash in
machine tools, The International Jour-nal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology 15
(1999) 554561.

[7]

G. Chen, J. Yuan, J. Ni, A displacement

measurement
approach
for
machine
geometric assessment, International Journal
of Machine Tools & Manufacture 41 (2001)
149161.

[8]

J.S. Chen, T.W. Kou, S.H. Chiou, Geometric error calibration

of multi-axis machines using an auto-alignment laser interfer-

ometer, Journal of the

International Societies for
Precision Engineering and
Nanotechnology 23 (1999)
243252.

[9]

S.M. Wang, Y.L.

Liu, Y. Kang, An
ecient
error
compensation
system
for
CNC
multi-axis machines,
International Journal
of Machine Tools and
Manufacture
42
(2002) 12351245.

[10]

H.F.F. Castro, M.
Burdekin,
Dynamic
calibration
of
the
posi-tioning accuracy
of machine tools and
coordinate
measuring machines
using
a
laser
interferometer,
International Journal
of Machine Tools and
Manufacture
43
(2003) 947954.

[11]

W.S. Yun, J.H. Ko,

D.W.
Cho,
K.F.
Ehmann,
Development of a
virtual
machining
system, part 2 :
prediction
and
analysis
of
a
machined
surface
error,
International
Journal of machine
tools
and
Manufacture
42
(2002) 16071615.

[12]

J.H. Ko, W.S. Yun,

D.W.
Cho,
K.F.
Ehmann,
Development of a
virtual
machining
system,
part
1:
approximation of a
size eect for cutting
force
prediction,
International Journal
of Machine Tools and
Manufacture
42
(2002) 15951605.

[13]

Cho,

W.S. Yun, D.W.

An improved

cutting force model con-sidering the size

eect in end milling, ASME International
Mechanical
Engineering
Congress
and
Exposition, Orlando, FL, 510 November
(2000) 223229.

[14]

Estimation of cutter
deflec-tion and form
error
in
ball-end
milling
process,
International Journal
of Machine Tools and
Manufacture
43
(2003) 917924.

W.A. Kline, R.E. DeVor, I.A. Shareef, The

prediction of surface accuracy in end milling,
ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry 104 [16]
Y.M. Cheng, J.H.
(1982) 272278.
Chin,
Machining
errors
as
[15] G.M. Kim, B.H. Kim, C.N. Chu, contour
ensembles of cutting,

feeding and machine

structure
eects,
International Journal
of Machine Tools and
Manufacture
43
(2003) 10011014.

[17]

M.T. Hagan, H.B.

Demuth,
M.
Beale,
Neural Network Design,
PWS
Publishing
Company, UK, 1995.