Optimizing dynamic measurement accuracy for machine tools and industrial robots with unscented Kalman filter and particle swarm optimization methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The telescoping ballbar is widely utilized for diagnosing accuracy and identifying faults in machine tools and industrial robots. Currently, there are no established standards for determining the optimal feed rate for ballbar tests. This lack of clear guidelines results in time inefficiency in measurements and inconsistencies in dynamic measurements, which complicates the comparison of ballbar test results under various conditions or across different machine platforms. To mitigate dynamic variations in ballbar results, an updated ballbar data processing method that integrates the unscented Kalman filter (UKF) and particle swarm optimization (PSO) was developed and validated using real ballbar data measured at multiple feed rates and simulated data with varying vibration magnitudes generated through the Renishaw ballbar simulator. Experimental results revealed that the dynamic components extracted from the ballbar results were observed to increase in correlation with the vibration measured at different feed rates and from the simulations. Moreover, the variations in the results measured at different feed rates after PSO-UKF processing were significantly reduced. The findings confirm the effectiveness of the proposed method in minimizing the dynamics of the ballbar results. Ultimately, this approach enhances the efficiency and accuracy of ballbar testing and offers a general method for improved diagnostics.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".