Kinematics-Grounded Agentic AI for Robotic Additive Manufacturing Process Planning
arXiv:2609.19347v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Robotic additive manufacturing (AM) extends material-extrusion printing beyond gantry kinematics but makes process planning robot-dependent. A slicer-generated plan that appears favorable in part coordinates can become infeasible or robotically unfavorable on a manipulator because slicer-process decisions and part orientation determine the generated path, while part orientation and workspace placement affect its kinematic realization. Existing AM
Overview
arXiv:2609.19347v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Robotic additive manufacturing (AM) extends material-extrusion printing beyond gantry kinematics but makes process planning robot-dependent. A slicer-generated plan that appears favorable in part coordinates can become infeasible or robotically unfavorable on a manipulator because slicer-process decisions and part orientation determine the generated path, while part orientation and workspace placement affect its kinematic realization. Existing AM tools, large language model (LLM)-based decision-support methods, and digital-shadow systems do not provide integrated pre-execution evaluation of these coupled decisions. This paper presents agentic robotic additive manufacturing (A-RAM), an agent-specialist-tool framework that converts user intent and a part file into traceable, execution-ready plans. The LLM interprets manufacturing objectives and constraints, identifies prescribed and searchable planning variables, and encodes this reasoning in a schema-constrained request; a deterministic Planning Agent instantiates the corresponding search workflow, while domain tools compute quantitative evidence for slicing, placement, inverse kinematics, trajectory timing, Joint-6 jerk, and extrusion. The framework is evaluated on a six-axis robotic-arm AM cell through three case studies covering expert-specified planning, goal-only planning, objective-dependent infill screening, and geometry-dependent orientation-placement selection. Across the evaluated candidate sets, selected plans achieve up to 53.5% lower maximum Joint-6 jerk and 48.3% lower mean absolute Joint-6 jerk than the least favorable valid candidates, while objective-specific infill screening yields motion-plan completion times up to 40.1% shorter and extrusion paths up to 12.7% shorter than the corresponding least favorable screened patterns.
Source
Originally published at arxiv.org.
Related Articles
Source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.19347
