Multi-response optimization on single-point incremental forming of hyperbolic shape Al-1050/Cu bimetal using response surface methodology


In present work, experimental and numerical investigations were carried out on single-point incremental forming of explosive bonded clad sheets. The sheets were produced by explosion welding from 1050 aluminum alloy and C10100 copper alloy sheets. A generatrix of hyperbolic curve was utilized as profile of final shapes formed by SPIF process. During some investigations, the interaction and main effect of the process parameters viz. tool diameter, step down, rotational speed, and sheet arrangement were evaluated on the fracture depth and wall thickness at fracture using ANOVA method. For experimentation, a customized design table was built with three quantify and one qualify factors in two levels. The design table totally provides four input factors and two responses in 12 runs. The responses are fracture depth and wall thickness. A multi-response optimization was conducted to find optimum values for input parameters using response surface methodology (RSM) and the confirmatory experiment revealed the reliability of RSM in this regard. Moreover, predictive models were presented in confidence interval of 95% to formulate the relationship between the responses and the input factors using RSM approach. Additionally, a finite element analysis was carried out on the SPIF based on optimal input parameters to depict reaction force changing, thickness variation, and stress distribution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. 1.

    Jeswiet J, Micari F, Hirt G, Bramley A, Duflou J, Allwood J (2005) Asymmetric single point incremental forming of sheet metal. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 54(2):88–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Xue Y, Jiang J, Zhao B, Ma T (2017) A self-adaptive artificial bee colony algorithm based on global best for global optimization. Soft Comput 1–18.

  3. 3.

    Liu Q, Cai W, Shen J, Fu Z, Liu X, Linge N (2016) A speculative approach to spatial-temporal efficiency with multi-objective optimization in a heterogeneous cloud environment. Secur Commun Netw 9(17):4002–4012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Deng W, Zhao H, Yang X, Xiong J, Sun M, Li B (2017) Study on an improved adaptive PSO algorithm for solving multi-objective gate assignment. Appl Soft Comput J 59:288–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Gu B, Sheng VS (2017) A robust regularization path algorithm for ν-support vector classification. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 28(5):1241–1248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Kurra S, HR N, Regalla S, Gupta AK (2016) Parametric study and multi-objective optimization in single-point incremental forming of extra deep drawing steel sheets. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 230(5):825–837

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Kurra S, Hifzur Rahman N, Regalla SP, Gupta AK (2015) Modeling and optimization of surface roughness in single point incremental forming process. J Mater Res Technol 4(3):304–313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Hussain G, Gao L, Zhang ZY (2008) Formability evaluation of a pure titanium sheet in the cold incremental forming process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 37(9–10):920–926

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Durante M, Formisano A, Langella A, Capece Minutolo FM (2009) The influence of tool rotation on an incremental forming process. J Mater Process Technol 209(9):4621–4626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Honarpisheh M, Abdolhoseini MJ, Amini S (2015) Experimental and numerical investigation of the hot incremental forming of Ti-6Al-4V sheet using electrical current. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 83(9–12):2027–2037

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Kim SW, Lee YS, Kang SH, Lee JH (2007) Incremental forming of mg alloy sheet at elevated temperatures. J Mech Sci Technol 21(10):1518–1522

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Young D, Jeswiet J (2004) Wall thickness variations in single-point incremental forming. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 218(11):1453–1459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Silva MB, Nielsen PS, Bay N, Martins PAF (2011) Failure mechanisms in single-point incremental forming of metals. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 56(9–12):893–903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Madeira T, Silva CM a, Silva MB, Martins P a F (2015) Failure in single point incremental forming. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 80:1471–1479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Cui Z, Cedric Xia Z, Ren F, Kiridena V, Gao L (2013) Modeling and validation of deformation process for incremental sheet forming. J Manuf Process 15(2):236–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Silva MB, Skjoedt M, Atkins AG, Bay N, Martins PAF (2008) Single-point incremental forming and formability–failure diagrams. J Strain Anal Eng Des 43(1):15–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Golabi S, Khazaali H (2014) Determining frustum depth of 304 stainless steel sheets with various diameters and thicknesses by incremental forming. J Mech Sci Technol 28(8):3273–3278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Isidore BBL, Hussain G, Shamchi SP, Khan WA (2016) Prediction and control of pillow defect in single point incremental forming using numerical simulations. J Mech Sci Technol 30(5):2151–2161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Benedetti M, Fontanari V, Monelli B, Tassan M (2015) Single-point incremental forming of sheet metals: experimental study and numerical simulation. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 231:301–312

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Honarpisheh M Gheysarian A (2017) An experimental study on the process parameters of incremental forming of explosively-welded Al/Cu bimetal. Journal of Computational and Applied Research in Mechanical Engineering 7(1):73–83

  21. 21.

    Sakhtemanian MR, Honarpisheh M, Amini S (2017) Numerical and experimental study on the layer arrangement in the incremental forming process of explosive-welded low-carbon steel/CP-titanium bimetal sheet. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 1–16.

  22. 22.

    Al-Ghamdi KA, Hussain G (2016) SPIF of Cu/steel clad sheet: annealing effect on bond force and formability. Mater Manuf Process 31(6):758–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Uttarwar PB, Raini SK, Malwad DS (2015) Optimization of process parameter on surface roughness (Ra) and wall thickness on SPIF using Taguchi method. Int Res J Eng Technol 2(9):781–784

    Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Hussain G, Gao L, Hayat N (2009) Empirical modelling of the influence of operating parameters on the spifability of a titanium sheet using response surface methodology. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 223(1):073–081

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Bouzid L, Yallese MA, Chaoui K, Mabrouki T, Boulanouar L (2015) Mathematical modeling for turning on AISI 420 stainless steel using surface response methodology. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 229(1):45–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Pradhan BB, Bhattacharyya B (2009) Modelling of micro-electrodischarge machining during machining of titanium alloy Ti–6Al–4V using response surface methodology and artificial neural network algorithm. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 223(6):683–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Lee P-H, Chung H, Lee SW (2011) Optimization of micro-grinding process with compressed air using response surface methodology. Proc Inst Mech Eng B J Eng Manuf 225(11):2040–2050

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. 28.

    Honarpisheh M, Niksokhan J, Nazari F (2016) Investigation of the effects of cold rolling on the mechanical properties of explosively-welded Al/St/Al multilayer sheet. Metallurg Res Technol 113(1):105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Sedighi M, Honarpisheh M (2012) Investigation of cold rolling influence on near surface residual stress distribution in explosive welded multilayer. Strength Mater 44(6):693–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Sedighi M, Honarpisheh M (2012) Experimental study of through-depth residual stress in explosive welded Al–Cu–Al multilayer. Mater Des 37:577–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Honarpisheh M, Asemabadi M, Sedighi M (2012) Investigation of annealing treatment on the interfacial properties of explosive-welded Al/Cu/Al multilayer. Mater Des 37:122–127

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. 32.

    Hussain G, Gao L (2007) A novel method to test the thinning limits of sheet metals in negative incremental forming. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 47(3–4):419–435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. 33.

    Montgomery DC (2017) Design and analysis of experiments. John Wiley & Sons

  34. 34.

    Cochran WG, Cox GM (1957) Experimental designs. John Wiley & Sons

  35. 35.

    Ryan BF, Joiner BL, Cryer JD (2012) MINITAB Handbook: Update for Release. Cengage Learning

  36. 36.

    Kurra S, Regalla SP (2015) Multi-objective optimisation of single point incremental sheet forming using Taguchi-based grey relational analysis. Int J Mater Eng Innov 6(1):74–90

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    Gulati V, Aryal A, Katyal P, Goswami A (2016) Process parameters optimization in single point incremental forming. J Inst Eng (India) Ser C 97(2):185–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Riadh B, Henia A, Hedi B (2013) Application of response surface analysis and genetic algorithm for the optimization of single point incremental forming process. Key Eng Mater 554:1265–1272

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information



Corresponding author

Correspondence to M. Honarpisheh.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Honarpisheh, M., Mohammadi Jobedar, M. & Alinaghian, I. Multi-response optimization on single-point incremental forming of hyperbolic shape Al-1050/Cu bimetal using response surface methodology. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 96, 3069–3080 (2018).

Download citation


  • Single-point incremental forming
  • Fracture depth
  • Wall thickness
  • RSM
  • Optimization
  • Al-Cu bimetal
  • FEA