ISSN 1068�798X, Russian Engineering Research, 2013, Vol. 33, No. 8, pp. 468–470. © Allerton Press, Inc., 2013.Original Russian Text © S.N. Grigor’ev, A.A. Gribkov, D.V. Zakharchenko, 2013, published in STIN, 2013, No. 1, pp. 2–4.

468

In quantitative terms, the Russian machine�toolindustry significantly lags that of China, Japan, Ger�many, Italy, and South Korea, the global leaders [1]. In2011, Russian output of metal�cutting machine toolswas worth no more than $164 million (according toRosstat data), as against (according to Gardner data)$27.7 billion for China (except Taiwan), $18.4 billionfor Japan, $13.5 billion for Germany, $6.2 billion forItaly, and $5.6 billion for South Korea.

In engineering quality, Russian machine tools alsolag those of other countries [2]. Numerically con�trolled machine tools account for only 9% of the total(in cost terms, 2010 data), as against 53% for China,83% for Japan, 44% for Germany, and 42% for Italy.The unit price of exported machine tools is $2.1/kg inRussia, as against $4.6/kg for China, $27.3/kg forJapan, $26.4/kg for Germany, and $20.3/kg for Italy.

An objective assessment of global trends is neededin order to improve Russia’s output of machine toolsand their competitiveness internally and internation�ally [3, 4].

Analysis of the characteristics of machine toolsproduced in the past 10–15 years by leading compa�nies such as Makino, Sodick, Okuma, MAG, Kugler,EMCO, Camozzi, and AgieCharmilles reveals the fol�lowing trends.

1. The use of new materials [4, 5].2. The use of special systems for thermal and vibra�

tional stabilization [6, 7].3. Flexible, universal, and multifunctional systems [8].4. Increase in the number of simultaneously con�

trollable axes [9].5. Expansion of nonmechanical machining.The use of new ceramics for structural components

and guides in metal�cutting machine tools is animportant means of improving their precision anddurability. In particular, ceramics (including thosebased on corundum) corresponding to artificial gran�ite are increasingly in use. For example, the UltraNANO 1000 high�precision machine tool (Sodick,Japan) employs FineXCera(R) ceramic, while theguide pieces are made of aerostatic ceramics. A worldleader in the use of new materials is MAG (United

States), one of the first to mass�produce aerostaticceramic guides.

With sharp increase in the precision requirements,it is necessary to use special stabilization systems. Suchsystems are employed in all precision metal�cuttingmachine tools (without exception). A leader in ther�mal stabilization is Makino (Japan), which employsthermal insulation of the linear guides and internal liq�uid cooling of the helical pairs and rotation pairs (forexample, the D500 vertical�milling center). Currently,vibrational stabilization mainly involves increasing therigidity of the guides (for example, in the AP1L elec�trospark coordinate�piercing system produced bySodick, Japan); special systems for vibration compen�sation (for example, the MA�500P and MA�600NPhorizontal machining centers produced by Okuma,Japan); and self�adjusting shock�absorbing systems(for example, the TS five�axis horizontal machiningcenter produced by Makino, Japan).

With more frequent product changes in industryover the past 15–20 years, mass production has tendedto be replaced by series production. That, in turn,increases the demand for universal, flexible (easilyadjusted), and multifunctional machine tools. There�fore, flexible machining centers are increasing beingproduced. For example, in Germany, machining cen�ters account for 24% of all metal�cutting machinetools produced (in terms of cost).

Innovation increasingly focuses on machining cen�ters. In particular, Makino (Japan), the world’s largestmachine�tool producer, developed a whole series ofmachining centers with qualitatively new featuresbetween 2001 and 2011: the A65 horizontal machiningcenter (2001); the V99 vertical milling center (2005);the D500 vertical milling center (2008); the T2 five�axis horizontal machining center (2010); and theD300 five�axis vertical machining center (2011).

Significant developments here include the creationof two�spindle systems (including systems with a spin�dle and a counterspindle); bidirectional machiningsystems; and systems for automatic replacement oftools and pallets.

For example, Okuma (Japan) now producesmachining centers with two spindles (the MULTUS

Global Trends in Machine�Tool DesignS. N. Grigor’ev, A. A. Gribkov, and D. V. Zakharchenko

Stankin Moscow State Technical University, Moscow

DOI: 10.3103/S1068798X13080108

RUSSIAN ENGINEERING RESEARCH Vol. 33 No. 8 2013

GLOBAL TRENDS IN MACHINE�TOOL DESIGN 469

B300II and B400II systems and the MULTUS B300�Wsystem with a counterspindle). These systems includea store with 20 replaceable tools.

The MAG (United States) VTC machining centers(VTC 1000–3500 and VTC 5000–8000), with storesfor 26–200 tools, permit four�axis machining by twoheads and also bidirectional machining and measure�ment of components. They may be equipped withautomatic pallet�replacement systems.

Stricter requirements on the quality and precisionof complex components have prompted the creation ofmetal�cutting machine tools with three or more axes.The demand for such equipment was relatively small15–20 years ago and predominantly associated withthe aerospace industry. Today, the situation is funda�mentally different: equipment with more than fiveaxes is produced around the world (in Japan, theUnited States, Germany, Switzerland, and elsewhere).As before, the aerospace industry is the major cus�tomer, but there is also demand from the power andauto industries.

Machine tools with five or more axes are currentlyproduced by Makino (Japan; the D300, D500, T2,and other models), Sodick (Japan; the Ultra NANO�100 model), Okuma (Japan; the MULTUS and VTM�1200YB machine tools, the Twin Star and LT2000 EXlathe systems), MAG (the United States; theNMC100 and PTM series), EMCO (Germany; theMAXMILL 500 milling center), and AgieCharmilles(Switzerland; the Mikron HPM series).

An important recent trend globally is the steadygrowth in equipment for nonmechanical machining[10–13]. That category includes electrospark, laser,photon, plasma, and ultrasound systems [13, 14]. Inthe countries that lead the field, they account for 3–10% of all machine�tool production. In particular, thefigure is 5% for Germany and more than 10% forJapan (in cost terms).

In recent years, the greatest development has beenin electrospark machining. In precision and produc�tivity, current electrospark systems match (and some�times surpass) mechanical systems [10].

Sodick (Japan) is the world’s leading manufacturerof electrospark machine tools. In recent years, Sodickhas initiated the series production of the AE 05 ultra�precision machine tool; the AQ15L precision machinetool for large components; the AP500L wire�cuttingmachine tool; the AZ150 precision machine tool; theAG400L wire�cutting machine tool; the AD325Lwire�cutting machine tool; and the AG40L/AG60Lcoordinate�broaching machine.

Typically, the structure of the demand for machin�ing equipment in Russia varies in accordance with glo�bal trends and without significant time delay [15]. Inparticular, machining centers account for 18% of all

metal�cutting machine tools purchased in Russia,while nonmechanical equipment accounts for 5% ofthe total. The machine tools employed in Russiaincreasingly include new materials and thermal andvibrational stabilization systems and tend to be flexi�ble, universal, and multifunctional systems withnumerous simultaneously controllable axes. The pro�portion of nonmechanical equipment is growing.

The Russian market for machine tools dependsheavily on imports (more than 94% of total purchases)[15–17]. The development of the Russian machine�tool industry is of undoubted importance for reasonsof security and economic development, as acknowl�edged not only by the industry itself but by the relevantgovernment agencies [18, 19]. In shaping the develop�ment of the Russian machine�tool industry, carefulattention must be paid to the global trends outlined inthe present work.

REFERENCES

1. Grigor’ev, S.N., Developing the Russian machine�toolindustry: A key to the modernization of manufacturing,Avtomat. Prom., 2012, no. 5, pp. 4–7.

2. Gribkov, A.A., Grigor’ev, S.N., and Zakharchenko, D.V.,Trends in global and Russian machine�tool production,Vestn. MGTU Stankin, 2012, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 8–11.

3. Grigor’ev, S.N., Reequipment of machine�tool plants,ITO: Instrum., Tekhnol., Oborud., 2008, no. 10, pp. 14–19.

4. Bushuev, V.V. and Sabirov, F.S., Trends in the globalmachine�tool industry, Vestn. MGTU Stankin, 2010,no. 1, pp. 24–30.

5. Grigor’ev, S.N., Kozochkin, M.P., Sabirov, F.S., andSinopal’nikov, V.A., Engineering diagnostics ofmachine tools today, Vestn. MGTU Stankin, 2010, no. 4,pp. 27–36.

6. Dolgov, V.A., More efficient short�run production byadapting the process to the current state of the techno�logical system, Vestn. MGTU Stankin, 2011, no. 3,pp. 83–87.

7. Grigor’ev, S.N., Kozochkin, M.P., Sabirov, F.S., andSinopal’nikov, V.A., Engineering diagnostics ofmachine tools in automated production, Kontrol’,Diagn., 2011, no. 8, pp. 48–54.

8. Pozdneev, B.M. and Dubrovin, A.V., Creating inte�grated informational support for quality maintenancein Russian machine�tool production, Vestn. MGTUStankin, 2012, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 77–81.

9. Kutin, A.A. and Turkin, M.V., Highly efficient manu�facturing technologies based on a new generation offlexible production systems, Vestn. MGTU Stankin,2010, no. 4, pp. 41–47.

10. Smurov, I.Yu., Movchan, I.A., Yaroitsev, I.A., et al.,Laser�based additive production, Vestn. MGTUStankin, 2011, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 144–146.

11. Okun’kova, A.A., Design and manufacture of press�mold components by means of integrated CAD/CAM

470

RUSSIAN ENGINEERING RESEARCH Vol. 33 No. 8 2013

GRIGOR’EV et al.

systems (for the example of PRO/ENGINEER soft�ware), Vestn. MGTU Stankin, 2010, no. 3, pp. 56–60.

12. Grigoriev, S.N. and Teleshevskii, V.I., Measurementproblems in technological shaping processes, Meas.Techn., 2011, vol. 54, no. 7, pp. 744–749.

13. Grigor’ev, S.N. and Krasnovskii, A.N., Trends in themanufacture of polymer�composite components bycoiling, Vestn. MGTU Stankin, 2011, no. 3, pp. 95–98.

14. Nazarov, A.P., Prospects for fast prototyping by selec�tive laser sintering (melting), Vestn. MGTU Stankin,2011, no. 4, pp. 46–51.

15. Gribkov, A.A. and Zakharchenko, D.V., Reequipmentof Russian manufacturing, Ekon. Upravl. Mashinostr.,2012, no. 2, pp. 8–11.

16. Grigor’ev, S.N., Kutin, A.A., and Skhirtladze, A.G.,Technological preparations for modernization of Rus�sian manufacturing, Spravochnik, Inzh. Zh. Prilozh.,2011, no. 5, pp. 18–20.

17. Grigor’ev, S.N., Creating educational structures, Vestn.MGTU Stankin, 2010, no. 1, pp. 5–7.

18. Grigor’ev, S.N., Providing qualified workers for Rus�sian manufacturing, Vestn. MGTU Stankin, 2009, no. 1,pp. 5–8.

19. Gribkov, A.A. and Zakharchenko, D.V., Medium� andlong�term prediction of the development of Russianmanufacturing, Ekon. Prom., 2012, no. 1, pp. 30–36.

Translated by Bernard Gilbert