Advertisement

Optimization of processing parameters and surface roughness of metallic sheets plastically deformed by incremental forming process

  • Mariem Dakhli
  • Atef BoulilaEmail author
  • Pierre-Yves Manach
  • Zoubeir Tourki
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • 24 Downloads

Abstract

Single point incremental sheet forming (SPIF) is a process of manufacturing parts that leads to low prices of manufactured parts and high productivity. However, surface finish and forming time are responses that still need to be optimized to get better surface quality and less forming time. In the present paper, two techniques, the Taguchi grey relational analysis (TG) and response surface methodology (RSM), are combined together in order to get an optimal combination of several process parameters, such as the step increment, the feed rate, the rotation speed, the lubricant, and the sheet material. The cost function takes into account the response parameters such as the forming time, the axial, and the radial force, as well as the surface roughness in the sheet plane. The obtained results of this combination of techniques predict the grey relational grade by an empirical model that could be used in further experiments. Furthermore, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the grey relational grade is conducted to obtain the best levels of input process parameters.

Keywords

SPIF RSM TG DOE ANOVA 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Boulila A, Ayadi M, Marzouki S, Bouzidi S (2018) Contribution to biomedical component production by incremental sheet forming. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 95(5–8):2821–2833.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-1397-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Formisano A, Boccarusso L, Capece Minutolo F, Carrino L, Durante M, Langella A (2017) Negative and positive incremental forming: comparison by geometrical, experimental, and FEM considerations. Mater Manuf Process 32(5):530–536.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2016.1232810 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Min J, Kuhlenkötter B, Shu C, Störkle D, Thyssen L (2018) Experimental and numerical investigation on incremental sheet forming with flexible die-support from metallic foam. J Manuf Process 31:605–612.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2017.12.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Maqbool F, Bambach M (2018) Dominant deformation mechanisms in single point incremental forming (SPIF) and their effect on geometrical accuracy. Int J Mech Sci 136:279–292.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2017.12.053 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Suresh K, Bagade SD, Regalla SP (2015) Deformation behavior of extra deep drawing steel in single-point incremental forming. Mater Manuf Process 30(10):1202–1209.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2014.994755 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Raju C, Haloi N, Sathiya Narayanan C (2017) Strain distribution and failure mode in single point incremental forming (SPIF) of multiple commercially pure aluminum sheets. J Manuf Process 30:328–335.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2017.09.033 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hussain G, Al-Ghamdi KA, Khalatbari H, Iqbal A, Hashemipour M (2014) Forming parameters and forming defects in incremental forming process. Part B Mater Manuf Process 29(4):454–460.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2014.880457 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dakhli M, Boulila A, Tourki Z (2017) Effect of generatrix profile on single-point incremental forming parameters. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 93(5–8):2505–2516.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0598-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Echrif SBM, Hrairi M (2011) Research and progress in incremental sheet forming processes. Mater Manuf Process 26(11):1404–1414.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2010.544817 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kim YH, Park JJ (2002) Effect of process parameters on formability in incremental forming of sheet metal. J Mater Process Technol 130–131:42–46.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00788-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sarraji WKH, Hussain J, Ren W-X (2012) Experimental investigations on forming time in negative incremental sheet metal forming process. Mater Manuf Process 27(5):499–506.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2011.585550 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bagudanch I, Vives-Mestres M, Sabater M, Garcia-Romeu ML (2017) Polymer incremental sheet forming process: temperature analysis using response surface methodology. Mater Manuf Process 32(1):44–53.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2016.1176191 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu Z, Liu S, Li Y, Meehan PA (2014) Modeling and optimization of surface roughness in incremental sheet forming using a multi-objective function. Mater Manuf Process 29(7):808–818.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2013.864405 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Singh D, Rao PV (2007) A surface roughness prediction model for hard turning process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 32(11–12):1115–1124.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-006-0429-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Chauhan SR, Dass K (2012) Optimization of machining parameters in turning of titanium (grade-5) alloy using response surface methodology. Mater Manuf Process 27(5):531–537.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2011.593236 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bhardwaj B, Kumar R, Singh PK (2013) Surface roughness (Ra) prediction model for turning of AISI 1019 steel using response surface methodology and Box–Cox transformation. Proc IMechE Part B: J Eng Manuf 228(2):223–232.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405413499564 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Suresh K, Nasih HR, Regalla SP, Gupta AK (2016) Parametric study and multi-objective optimization in single-point incremental forming of extra deep drawing steel sheets. Proc IMechE Part B: J Eng Manuf 230(5):825–837.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405414564408 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Siddiquee AN, Khan ZA, Mallick Z (2010) Grey relational analysis coupled with principal component analysis for optimization design of the process parameters in in-feed centre less cylindrical grinding. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 46(9–12):983–992.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-009-2159-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chinnaiyan P, Jeevanantham AK (2014) Multi-objective optimization of single point incremental sheet forming of AA5052 using Taguchi based grey relational analysis coupled with principal component analysis. Int J Precis Eng Man 15:2309–2316.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-014-0595-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Raju C, Sathiya Narayanan C (2016) Application of a hybrid optimization technique in a multiple sheet single point incremental forming process. Measurement 78:296–308.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2015.10.025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Mulay A, Ben S, Ismail S, Kocanda A (2017) Experimental investigations into the effects of SPIF forming conditions on surface roughness and formability by design of experiments. J Braz Soc Mech Sci Eng 39(10):3997–4010.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-016-0703-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lin CL (2004) Use of the Taguchi method and Grey relational analysis to optimize turning operations with multiple performance characteristics. Mater Manuf Process 19(2):209–220.  https://doi.org/10.1081/AMP-120029852 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sundarasrinivasan A, Ganesh P (2015) Experimental study of incremental forming in stainless steel (AISI 316) for a truncated pyramid shape. International conference on recent advancement in mechanical engineering & technology (ICRAMET’ 15). J Chem Pharm Sci 2015(9):454–462Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Khalatbari H, Iqbal A, Shi X, Gao L, Hussain G, Hashemipour M (2015) High-speed incremental forming process: a trade-off between formability and time efficiency. Mater Manuf Process 30(11):1354–1363.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2015.1037892 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Selvarajana L, Sathiya Narayanana C, JeyaPaul R (2016) Optimisation of EDM parameters on machining Si3N4–TiN composite for improving circularity, cylindricity and perpendicularity. Mater Manuf Process 31(4):405–412.  https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2015.1058947 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ambrogio G, Cozza V, Filice L, Micari F (2007) An analytical model for improving precision in single point incremental forming. J Mater Process Technol 191(1–3):92–95.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.03.079 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kurra S, Swetha N, Vinodh Reddy C, Regalla SP (2018) Experimental and finite element studies of single stage incremental forming process: effect of process parameters on maximum wall angle and thickness distribution. Adv Mater Process Technol 4(2):322–334.  https://doi.org/10.1080/2374068X.2017.1420290 Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Pandivelan C, Jeevanantham AK, Sathiyanarayanan C (2018) Optimization study on incremental forming of sheet metal AA5052 for variable wall angle using CNC milling machine. Mater Today: Proc 5(5):12832–12836.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2018.02.267 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Adalarasan R, Santhanakumar M, Rajmohan M (2015) Application of Grey Taguchi-based response surface methodology (GT-RSM) for optimizing the plasma arc cutting parameters of 304L stainless steel. Inter J Adv Manuf Technol 78(5–8):1161–1170.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-014-6744-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Noorul Haq A, Marimuthu P, Jeyapaul R (2008) Multi response optimization of machining parameters of drilling Al/SiC metal matrix composite using grey relational analysis in the Taguchi method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 37:250–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mariem Dakhli
    • 1
  • Atef Boulila
    • 2
    Email author
  • Pierre-Yves Manach
    • 3
  • Zoubeir Tourki
    • 1
  1. 1.Mechanical Laboratory of Sousse, National Engineering School of SousseUniversity of SousseSousseTunisia
  2. 2.National Institute of Applied Sciences and TechnologyUniversity of CarthageTunis CedexTunisia
  3. 3.Univ. Bretagne Sud, UMR CNRS 6027, IRDLLorientFrance

Personalised recommendations