JPH0832394B2 - Modular tool automatic combination system - Google Patents

Description

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION [Industrial field of application] The present invention relates to a so-called modular tool type tool for obtaining a cutting tool (hereinafter also simply referred to as a tool) used in a machining center or the like by combining basic parts. Regarding a modular tool automatic combination system that obtains the optimum combination of basic parts and optimum processing conditions such as cutting speed based on the processing data such as the processing shape and material of the work (work), and further, automatically assembles the tools based on the result It is a thing.

[Conventional technology]

A conventional technique for a modular tool type tool will be described by taking boring (boring) as an example.

Boring is the work of boring a prepared hole and finishing it to the required dimensional accuracy. This machining is one of the most difficult machining processes among the various machining processes, since it is highly dependent on the design and performance of the tool. In recent years, boring tools (boring bars) used in machining centers have been changed from the conventional micro-cartridge system in which the shank part and the head part are integrated to the tool tip setting (cutting edge fine adjustment) and tool wear correction in a short time. The use of built-up modular tools, which require only the shank to be replaced even when the machine is changed, has become popular.

Modular tools typically include shanks, accessories,
A large variety of basic parts such as heads and cutting tools are prepared, and a boring bar is formed by the optimum combination of these basic parts according to the machining shape and material of the workpiece. Be seen. An example of such a modular tool system is shown in FIG.

FIG. 9 (a) is an example of a boring bar assembled by a modular tool system. The boring bar 90 includes a shank 91, a head 92, accessories (extension 93, reduction 94), a bit 95, a throw-away tip 96, and a chamfer. It is assembled with basic parts such as tool 97. Hereinafter, each of these basic components will be described individually.

The length and taper of the portion 91a grasped by the machining center of the shank 91 (see FIG. 9 (b)) generally differ depending on the machining center used. In the modular tool system of the illustrated example, for example, five types of shanks having different shapes in this part are facilitated according to the MAS (Japan Machine Tool Manufacturers Association) standard and the like. Further, for each of these five types, the one having a different shaft diameter D _s is, for example, 6
There are several types, each with different neck length L _s . In this example, a total of 39 shanks are prepared.

The head 92 (see FIG. 9 (c)) is a portion for setting the cutting tool 95, and is roughly classified into roughing and finishing. There are rough holes for through holes and blind holes, and there are, for example, 8 kinds of shaft holes having different shaft diameters D _h . For finishing, for example, there are two kinds of small-diameter round tool bits used for drilling up to a diameter of 20 mm, for example, seven kinds of square tool bits used for drilling up to a diameter of 150 mm. Each head has a workable range by adjusting the cutting tool, and the ranges overlap each other between the heads. That is, a plurality of heads can be selected for a given processing diameter D.
The symbol L _{h in the} figure represents the effective length of the head.

The accessories are roughly classified into Extension 93 (No. 9).
Figure (d)) and reduction 94 (see Figure 9 (e))
There is. When the length of the boring bar 90 is insufficient, the extension 93 is used to extend the length of the boring bar 90 by inserting it between the shank 91 and the reduction 94 or between the head 92 and the reduction 94. Six types with different lengths and shaft diameters are available.
The code L _e represents the effective length.

Further, the reduction 94 is used by inserting it between the shank 91 and the head 92 when there is a step in the diameter of the machined hole of the workpiece and it is desired to reduce the diameter of the boring bar 90 in the middle. There are 24 types with different diameters. Code L _r and
L _rh represents the effective length of reduction and the length of a portion (thin portion) close to the head 92, respectively.

The bite 95 (see FIG. 9 (c)) is the part where the throw-away tip 96 is set. For example, 7 types of round bite are set in the small diameter round bite head for finishing, and the corners corresponding to each of the square bite heads. There are, for example, seven types of bytes.
As the rough cutting tool, a cartridge having a cutting edge is used instead of the cutting tool. In this example, eight kinds of blind holes and eight kinds of through holes are prepared corresponding to each roughing head.

The throw-away tip 96 is a cutting edge that is set on the cutting tool 95. In this example, two types are used for steel / cast iron and aluminum for rough machining through holes, and two for steel / cast iron and aluminum for blind machining blind holes. There are 3 types, steel, cast iron, and aluminum for finishing.

The chamfering tool 97 (see FIG. 9 (a)) has a ring shape, and in this example, six types having different inner diameters are prepared.

Among the basic parts of the modular tool system as described above, the shank, 91, head 92, extension 93, reduction 94, and chamfering tool 97 are connected to each other if the diameter of the connecting portion (outer diameter or inner diameter) does not match. I can't. Therefore, these basic parts are provided with numbers (hereinafter referred to as C numbers) that indicate the possibility of connection between the parts corresponding to the diameter of the connecting portion. For example, in the case of the boring bar in FIG. 9 (a). , C number on the head side of head 92 and reduction 94, shank 91 again
And the C number on the shank side of Extension 93 must match. In the example described above, the shank 91 has six types of shaft diameters D _s , so there are C numbers from 1 to 6, and in this example, the larger the shaft diameter D _s , the greater the C number.
The numbers are also large.

[Problems to be Solved by the Invention]

In a machine tool that uses a conventional modular tool system, the number of basic component types is large, and the number of combinations is enormous.Therefore, it takes a lot of time to select the optimal combination of basic components. However, there was a problem that the original advantage of the build-up method, such as setting up the tool and correcting the tool wear in a short time, was significantly diminished. For example, looking at the case of the boring bar above, about 470 standard combinations of head and shank, and 6000 or more combinations including accessories etc. are possible. It is not easy for a skilled person having considerable experience and knowledge to find the optimum combination in a short time.

The present invention has been made in view of the above circumstances, and an object thereof is to provide a modular tool automatic combination system capable of obtaining an optimum combination of tool basic parts for machining a workpiece in an extremely short time. is there.

[Means for solving the problem]

To achieve the above object, the modular tool automatic combination system of the present invention selects a combination of an input / output user interface unit for inputting machining data and outputting a processing result for the machining data; and a basic part forming a modular tool. A rule base that divides the production rules for each part selection, a meta-rule part that controls the selection of these rule blocks, a knowledge base consisting of a database that stores data on the shape of the basic parts of the tool, and a user interface. An inference engine that infers the optimal combination of basic parts of the tool while activating the knowledge base based on the processing data of the tool, and the inference result by the inference engine and a temporary hypothesis for the inference. Consists of memory and It was adopted formed.

[Action]

The inference engine (inference mechanism) in the modular tool automatic combination system of the present invention having the above configuration is
Basically, at the same time as a general production system, forward inference is performed by production rules, but when using a microcomputer, competing rules are constructed by matching the condition parts of all rules with the facts in working memory. , It takes a lot of time for inference, and it becomes difficult to construct a practical system.

That is, a general production system has a working memory for storing the result of inference, a production memory, and an inference engine, writes an externally given problem in the working memory, and the inference engine writes the contents of the working memory in this initial state. Find a rule in the production memory that has an IF part that matches Then, the fact of the THEN part of the found rule is written to the next state in the working memory, and the contents of the working memory are updated from the initial state to the next state. Furthermore, the updated contents of the working memory are repeatedly searched by the inference engine for a rule having an IF part that matches the contents of the working memory from the production memory, and the contents of the working memory are added to the rules in the production memory. When no match is found, the inference is performed by outputting the contents of the working memory at that time as a conclusion.

Therefore, the production system has to read the production memory from the beginning to the end in order to make a conclusion for one inference, and in the case of inference of a combination of modular tools, the combination of basic parts is huge, and the time required for the inference is large. Takes a long time, and it is difficult to construct a practical system when the inference is performed by a microcomputer having a slow processing speed.

Therefore, according to the present invention, a production rule for selecting a combination of basic parts forming a modular tool is divided into rule blocks for each selection of parts, and in the rule block, rules of parts that are not necessary for combination are included. By not performing block inference, unnecessary inference can be omitted and the processing speed can be improved.

For example, the modular tool has multiple extensions that extend the length of the boring bar as an accessory to accommodate drilling with different lengths and shaft diameters, but when drilling without accessories By controlling the production rule relating to the selection of extension parts not to be performed by the meta-rule, the processing speed can be improved and the description of the condition part can be simplified.

〔Example〕

An embodiment of the modular tool automatic combination system of the present invention will be described below with reference to the accompanying drawings with reference to FIGS. 1 to 8.

FIG. 1 shows a basic configuration of an embodiment of a modular tool automatic combination system of the present invention. The system shown in the figure is an input / output user interface unit 1, an inference engine (inference mechanism) 2, a working memory 3, and knowledge. The input / output interface unit 1 is composed of a base 4, and the input / output interface unit 1 is connected to the input unit (not shown) such as a keyboard. Information), chamfering information (whether chamfering or not, chamfering amount), an input routine 11 for processing other inputs such as machining data such as the type of machining center, and also for display means or tool assembly also connected to the input / output interface unit 1. Has an output routine 12 for processing output to a control unit (not shown) of a machine tool such as a mechanical unit or a machining center .

The inference engine 2, working memory 3 and knowledge base 4 constitute a production system, which is executed by a microcomputer.

The knowledge base 4 is composed of a database 41 and a rule base 42, and the rule base 42 is composed of a rule block section 43 and a metarule section 44. Knowledge Base 4 includes
A knowledge editor (not shown) including a database editor for facilitating data input to the database 41 and a rule base editor for facilitating update / change of rules of the rule base 42 is provided. The database unit 41 of the knowledge base 4 stores the data regarding the model number of the basic part of the tool and the dimensions of each part, the machining condition of the cutting speed, the relational database which stores the stock status of the basic parts and the default value of the working memory 3. It consists of fact-based.

Further, the meta-rule part 44 stores a rule group for controlling the selection of the meta-rule, that is, the rule block part 43 and the application order of the selected rule block part 43.

In this embodiment, the inference for obtaining the optimum combination of the tool basic parts (see, for example, FIGS. 9A to 9E described above) by the inference engine 2 of the production system is performed using the production rule. , This production rule corresponds to the rule for selecting a combination for each basic part, as shown in FIG.
It is divided into eight rule blocks (except 202 to 211, 204 and 206) and stored in the rule block section 43. The inference engine 2 starts from the head as shown in FIG. Each of these rule blocks is sequentially activated toward the shank through the meta-rule 44, and the optimal combination of basic parts is inferred by executing the rules of the activated blocks.

Hereinafter, each of these rule blocks will be described individually. Here, the modular tool automatic assembly system of the present invention will be described with reference to FIG.
It is assumed that the present invention is applied to the combination of the basic parts of 1., and the case where the depth L _W of the processed hole by the boring bar is 400 mm or less and the size and shape shown in FIG. 3 are processed (L _W1 part).

First, in the data input block (step 201), the shape, size, material, depth of cut, chamfer information of the workpiece,
Work interactively via a keyboard connected to the input / output user interface 1 such as the type of machining center. In addition, the entered values are compared with the maximum and minimum dimensional values that can be processed, and prohibition processing is performed.

In the head selection block (step 202), the information (machining data) entered in the data input block, that is, the size of the machining diameter D ₁ and the depth of cut, and whether the hole is a blind hole or a through hole in the case of rough machining The selection of the head 92 is inferred accordingly.

First, a head including a processing diameter D ₁ within the range of the processing diameter that is given in advance to each head is selected. Further, among them, a head is selected such that the following expression D _h + d _r ≦ D ₁ is satisfied between the machining diameter D ₁ and the empirical allowance value _dr (6 mm in this example) in the radial direction of the head D _h . At this time, a plurality of heads can be selected. In the case of finishing, the head with a small C number is used, and in the case of roughing, C is used.
The head with the higher number is selected. Further, generally, a plurality of heads having different axial lengths L _h can be selected.

In the standard grinding block (step 203), when the head 92 (see FIG. 4 (a)) is selected in the head selection block, first, a combination that does not use reduction (hereinafter,
Inference is made about the standard type).

That is, the grasping part that fits the machining center used
The shank 91 having 91a and the same C number as the C number of the head 92 previously selected is selected. Also in this case, a plurality of shanks having different under neck lengths L _s can be selected.

Next, the neck length of shank 91 selected in this way
Combinations of L _s and the effective length L _{h of the} head (see FIG. 4 (a)) satisfying the following equation L _W + d _a ≤L _s + L _h are listed as candidates, and among these combinations, L _s + L _The one with the smallest value of _h is the optimum combination, and if there is a candidate in the judgment of step 204, the inference of the rule block of steps 205 to 209 is not executed by the meta rule and the optimization block described later (step 206 )
Jump to. Therefore, the time taken to reach the conclusion of inference can be shortened. Note that d _a in the equation is an empirical allowance value (15 mm in this example) in the axial direction required for machining.

On the other hand, if it is judged by the metal rule of step 204 that the hole is too deep to satisfy the expression, the extension 93 to be inserted between the head 92 and the shank 91 selected above (see FIG. 4 (b)). ) Is inferred in the next standard extension selection block (step 205).

Extension selection block for standard type (Step 20)
In 5), the extension 93 has an effective length L _e satisfying the following formula L _W + d _a ≦ L _s + L _e + L _h , and the shank 91 and head already selected.
Those having a diameter of 92, that is, having the same C number, are selected. In this case as well, a plurality of extensions 93 having different lengths can be selected, and in that case, steps 207 to 209 are performed through the determination of step 206 by the metarule.
Without executing the inference of, a jump is made to an optimization block (step 210) described later. Therefore, the time until the conclusion is output can be shortened. Moreover, if not met one extension 93 at too short to expression, which is the number of the extension 93 to be filled but is added in this case, the L _e in the formula (9) the effective length of the extension 93 Shall represent the sum of the sa.

If the number of basic parts that make up the boring bar 90 increases, the combination accuracy deteriorates. Therefore, when a plurality of extensions 93 are selected, a large number of candidates are also selected in the optimization block (step 210) described later. The optimum combination is selected from among the above.

If no combination that meets the conditions is found in the standard type extension selection block (step 205), the reduction is performed in the non-standard type shank selection block (step 207) through the judgment in step 206. The combinations used, that is, the combinations that perform "to paragraph" are inferred. However, since the accuracy of the boring bar combination cannot be guaranteed when the number of normal paragraphs is three or more, combinations of up to two paragraphs are examined. Further, in order to adjust the length, not only reduction but also extension may be used at the same time.

When doing the paragraph, unlike the standard type, between the head 92 and the reduction 94, the shank 91 and the reduction
It is necessary to match each C number between 94. In other words, the C numbers of the head and shank do not match. Therefore, when selecting a shank, it has a grasping part that matches the machining used, and between the shank shaft diameter D _s and the workpiece diameter D ₂ and the margin value d _r , the following equation D _s + d _r ≤D _The one that satisfies ₂ is a candidate, but in order to further reduce chattering during machining of the boring bar due to rigidity, the shank having the largest C number among these candidates is selected.

Once the head 92 and shank 91 have been selected, then the reduction 94 that matches their respective C numbers is selected. Of course, multiple reductions can be selected. The C numbers on the head side and shank side of the reduction 94 are represented by _Crh and _Crs , respectively.

In this example, one paragraph is selected block (step 20).
In the case of 8), four types of combinations shown in FIGS. 5A to 5D can be considered depending on the number of the extension 93 and the insertion position. However, if the combination accuracy of the boring bar 90 and the processing accuracy are taken into consideration, the combination can be used. It is better to have fewer basic parts
FIG. 5 (a) → (b) → (c) → (d) is inferred in the order named. For example, if there is at least one combination satisfying the conditions by inferring the combination of (b), then (c) Inference is omitted for the combination of.

That is, when the reduction 94 is selected as described above, it is first examined whether or not the head-side length L _rh of the reduction 94 satisfies the following equation L _W1 + d _{a ≤L rh} + L _h ( Fig. 5 (a)). If the formula is not satisfied, the extension 93 to be inserted between the reduction 94 and the head 92 is selected so as to satisfy the following formula L _W1 + d _a ≦ L _rh + L _e1 + L _h (see FIG. 5 (b)). If).
However, L _e1 is the effective length of the extension 93 _1.
If one extension 93 ₁ does not satisfy the above equation, one or more extensions 93 ₁ are further inserted. In that case, the symbol L _e1 in the equation is also valid for each extension 93 ₁ . It shall represent the sum of the lengths.

When the above formula or is satisfied, each θ of the cutting edge shown in FIG. 6 (the head 92 is the outer end circle and the reduction 94 is the outer end circle (on the head side) in consideration of the degree of cutting oil applied to the cutting edge.
It is examined whether or not the apex angle of the cone including) satisfies the following equation θ ≦ 60 °. If the above formula is not satisfied, the extension 93 is further added to satisfy the above formula.

If the above expressions and are satisfied, it is further examined whether the following expressions are satisfied.

L _W + d _a ≤L _s + L _r + L _h where L _W is the depth of the machined hole shown in FIG.

If the above equation is satisfied, whether or not the following equation is satisfied is examined.

L _W + d _a ≤L _s + L _r + L _e1 + L _{h When the} above expression or is satisfied, the combination is a candidate for inference. If the above equation or cannot be satisfied, the extension 93 ₂ inserted between the reduction 94 and the shank 91 is selected. That is, when the above equation is not satisfied (in the case of FIG. 5 (c)) of the extension 93 ₂ satisfying the following equation is selected.

_{L W + d a ≦ L s} + L e2 + L r + L h Also, if the expression is not satisfied (in the case of FIG. 5 (d)) of the extension 93 ₂ satisfying the following equation is selected.

L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _e2 ＋ L _r ＋ L _e1 ＋ L _h However, in the above formula, L _e2 is an extension 93 ₂
, But if one extension 93 ₂ cannot satisfy the expression, L _e2 of each expression represents the sum of the effective lengths of a plurality of extensions 93 ₂ .

Regarding the selected block (step 209) having two paragraphs, in this example, eight kinds of combinations shown in FIGS. 7A to 7H are considered. In either case, first head
Reduction 94 ₁ closer to 92 is selected. The reduction 94 ₁ has a C _rh number (C number of shank _91-1 ) or less.

Then, C _rh number is equal to C number of shank 91, C _rh number reduction equal to C _rh number of reduction 94 ₁ is selected as the reduction 94 ₂ closer to the shank 91. In this case, generally, there can be a plurality of sets of reductions 94 ₁ and 94 ₂ .

Further, assuming that the length of the portion of the reduction 94 ₁ close to the head 92 is L _rh1 , and the following equation L _W1 + d _a ≦ L _rh1 + L _h is not satisfied, the extension 93 ₁ to be inserted between the reduction 94 ₁ and the head 92 is It is selected to satisfy the following formula. However, L _e1 is the effective length of the extension 93 _1.

L _W1 + D _a ≦ L _rh1 + L _e1 + L _{h When the} above equation or is satisfied, it is examined whether or not the condition of the cutting edge angle θ in the above equation is satisfied. If the formula is not satisfied, another extension 93 is added between the reduction 94 ₁ and the head 92 so as to satisfy this formula. 7A to 7H show the case where one extension 93 is present between the reduction 94 ₁ and the head 92, the same as in the case of one paragraph.
A plurality of extensions 93 may be inserted.

If the above equation or is satisfied, it is examined whether or not the under-neck length of the boring bar 90 is larger than L _W + d _a. However, since it is the same as the case of 1 paragraph, FIG. (A)
Only the conditional expressions in the case of (h) to (h) are shown below (these expressions are collectively described).

In the case of (a) L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _r2 ＋ L _r1 ＋ L _{h In} the case of (b) L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _r2 ＋ L _r1 ＋ L _e1 ＋ L _{h In} the case of (c) L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _r2 ＋ L _e2 ＋ L _e1 ＋ L _h (d) L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _r2 ＋ L _e2 ＋ L _r1 ＋ L _e1 ＋ L _h (e) L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _e3 ＋ L _r2 ＋ L _r1 ＋ L _h In case of (f) L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _e3 ＋ L _r2 ＋ L _r1 ＋ L _e1 ＋ L _h (g) L _W ＋ d _a ≦ L _s ＋ L _e3 ＋ L _r2 ＋ L _r1 ＋ L _h (h) L _W ＋ d _a ≤ L _s + L _e3 + L _r2 + L _e2 + L _r1 + L _e1 + L _{h In the} optimization block (block 201), the combination accuracy of the boring bar 90 is considered to deteriorate as the total number of basic parts increases. When there are two or more combinations of the selected basic parts, first, the combination that minimizes the total number of extensions 93 and reductions 94 is inferred.

Further, when there are two or more combinations, the combination that minimizes the effective depth of the boring bar 90 (the length from the under neck of the shank 91 to the tip of the bar) is selected. In addition, if there are more than two such combinations, the ratio of the neck length L of the boring bar 90 to the shaft diameter D (L / D ratio) should be within the specified range in order to select one with less vibration due to rigidity. Select the combination that is the minimum or less (L / D ≦ 7 in this example). If there are two or more combinations that satisfy all of the above conditions, all of them are determined as optimum combinations and output.

In the chamfering tool and the throw-away tip selection block (step 211), when the optimal combination of the basic parts that make up the boring bar 90 is selected through the above blocks, the chamfering amount input in the data input block (step 201) Is not zero, bowling bar 90
A chamfering tool 97 (see FIG. 9 (a)) adapted to the shaft diameter of the head, that is, a chamfering tool having the same C number as the C number of the head 92 is inferred. In addition, the throw-away tip 96 suitable for the material and processing conditions of the workpiece is also inferred.

As described above, in this embodiment, the production rules for selecting the combination of the basic parts are the parts (91 to 97).
Since the data is divided for each reason, the inference can be performed by jumping as shown in FIG. For this reason, inference can be simplified and the time required for inference can be shortened compared with the case where inference is performed for all rules without dividing the production rules. The system can be configured.

In the cutting speed calculation block (step 212),
When the optimal combination of basic parts is selected through each of the above blocks and the shape of the boring bar 90 is completely determined,
The cutting amount, cutting speed, feed amount, etc. are determined according to the type of machine tool such as a machining center that drives the boring bar 90, the material of the work piece, the neck length of the boring bar 90, and the like.

In recent years, due to improvements in materials, more and more chips can be machined at a cutting speed of about 200 m / min.
As long as the rigidity and horsepower of the machine allow, machining at the optimum cutting speed for such insert materials will not cause any problems. However, in the case of machining with a cantilever bar such as a machining center, when the boring bar 90 has a longer neck length, chatter increases and it is not possible to cut with the cutting strength recommended by the chip maker, that is, the cutting speed is higher than the recommended speed. It may have to be lowered.

FIG. 8 shows that the bar of the machining center is vertical and the shank 91 and the head 92 of the boring bar 90 (see FIG. 9 (a)).
3 is a graph showing the relationship among the neck length of the boring bar 90, the machining diameter, and the optimum cutting speed when empirically obtained for carbon steel (S45C) cutting with respect to various combinations of. Similar data is shown for nickel chrome steel, stainless steel,
Cast iron, aluminum, etc. have also been obtained, and in the present invention, the cutting speed in these data is referred to as the standard cutting speed.

When using the extension 93 or reduction 94, this number or shank should be
The cutting speed must be reduced according to the diameter of 91. Therefore, the cutting speed calculation block of this embodiment calculates the cutting speed as follows.

First, when the bar of the machining center is horizontal, the cutting speed is reduced by 5% from the standard cutting speed. Next, when the extension 93 is included in the combination of the basic parts, the cutting speed is further reduced by the reduction rate shown in Table 1 per piece according to the C number.

Further, when the reduction 94 is included and the difference ΔC between the C _rs number and the C _rh number is 1, the cutting speed is further reduced by the reduction rate shown in Table 2 per reduction 94 according to the C _rs number. When the difference ΔC is 2 or more, the cutting speed is further reduced by the reduction rate shown in Table 2 for 941 reductions according to the C _rs number. These Table 1 and 2
The values in the table are empirical values.

The tool determined by the production system through each of the above blocks (in this example the boring bar 9
0) The optimum combination of basic parts and the optimum machining conditions such as cutting speed are displayed on the display screen through the output routine of the input / output user interface 1, and the data of the optimum combination is displayed. The tool is automatically supplied to the machined parts that have been cut to assemble the tools by the optimum combination, and the optimum machining condition data can be supplied to the control part of the machine tool such as a machining center and set. The tool thus assembled is automatically mounted on the tool holder of the machine tool, and the machine tool processes the workpiece according to the machining conditions set as described above.

〔effect〕

The present invention is configured as described above, and a production rule for selecting a combination of basic parts forming a modular tool is divided into rule blocks for each selection of parts, and a rule block of parts not required for combination is inferred. Since it is not performed, the time required for inference can be shortened and the combination of the basic parts of the tool can be determined in a short time.

Further, since the inference can be simplified by avoiding the inference of unnecessary parts, it is possible to make an inference for combining the parts of the modular tool with a microcomputer having a low processing speed.

Therefore, in the conventional modular tool of the build-up method, the obstacle that the determination of the optimum combination of the tool basic parts and the optimum machining conditions requires considerable knowledge and experience and a great deal of time is overcome. Full automation is possible and productivity can be significantly improved.

[Brief description of drawings]

FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a basic configuration of an embodiment of a modular tool automatic combination system according to the present invention, and FIG.
FIG. 4 is a flow chart for explaining the operation, FIG. 3 is a sectional view showing an example of a hole for boring processing, FIGS. 4 (a) and 4 (b) are side views of an example of a boring bar, and FIG. a) to (d) and FIGS. 7 (a) to (h) are side views showing examples of combinations of basic parts of a boring bar, FIG. 6 is an explanatory view of cutting angles, and FIG. 8 is based on empirical values. The neck length of the boring bar, FIG. 9 (a) is a side view of an example of the boring bar, and FIGS. 9 (b) to (e).
[Fig. 4] is a detailed view of each basic part constituting the boring bar of Fig. 9 (a). 1 ... input / output user interface, 2 ... inference engine, 3 ... working memory, 4 ... knowledge base, 11
...... Input routine, 12 …… Output routine, 41 …… Database, 42 …… Rule base, 43 …… Rule block part, 44 …… Metarule part, 90 …… Boring bar (tool), 91 …… Shank, 92 …… Head, 93 …… Extension, 94 …… Reduction, 95 …… Bite, 96 ……
Throw-away tip, 97 ... Chamfering tool.

 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────── ─── Continuation of the front page (56) Bibliography Proceedings of the 33rd National Convention of Information Processing Society of Japan (▲ II ▼), (Sho 61-10-1), Nagata, Teramoto, “Branding using meta-knowledge , "P. 1579-1580

Claims (1)

[Claims] 1. A production rule for selecting a combination of an input / output user interface unit 1 for inputting machining data and outputting a processing result for the machining data; and basic components 91 to 94 forming a modular tool. ~ 94 divided rule blocks for each selection, a meta-rule section 44 for controlling the selection of these rule blocks 43, a knowledge base 4 consisting of a database 41 storing the shapes of the basic parts 91 to 97 of the tool, and a user An inference engine 2 that infers an optimum combination of the basic parts 91 to 97 of the tool while activating the knowledge base 4 based on the machining data from the interface 1 and an inference result by the inference engine 2 and inference A production system comprising a working memory 3 for storing a temporary hypothesis; Modular tool automatic combination system, characterized in that it was.