Journal of Physics: Conference Series

PAPER • OPEN ACCESS

Experimental and numerical study on optimization of the single point

incremental forming of AINSI 304L stainless steel sheet
To cite this article: B. Saidi et al 2017 J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 896 012039

View the article online for updates and enhancements.

This content was downloaded from IP address [Link] on 28/09/2017 at 02:50

36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

Experimental and numerical study on optimization of the

single point incremental forming of AINSI 304L stainless steel
sheet
B. Saidi 1,2,*, L. Giraud-Moreau 1, A. Cherouat 1 and R. Nasri 2

1
University of Technology of Troyes- GAMMA3, 12 Rue Marie Curie, 10004 Troyes
France,
2
Université de Tunis El Manar, Ecole Nationale d'Ingénieurs de Tunis, LR-11-ES19
Mécanique Appliquée et Ingénierie, 1002, Tunis, Tunisie;

*
The corresponding author’s [Link]@[Link]

Abstract. AINSI 304L stainless steel sheets are commonly formed into a variety of shapes for
applications in the industrial, architectural, transportation and automobile fields, it’s also used
for manufacturing of denture base. In the field of dentistry, there is a need for personalized
devises that are custom made for the patient. The single point incremental forming process is
highly promising in this area for manufacturing of denture base.
The single point incremental forming process (ISF) is an emerging process based on the use of
a spherical tool, which is moved along CNC controlled tool path. One of the major advantages
of this process is the ability to program several punch trajectories on the same machine in order
to obtain different shapes. Several applications of this process exist in the medical field for the
manufacturing of personalized titanium prosthesis (cranial plate, knee prosthesis…) due to the
need of product customization to each patient.
The objective of this paper is to study the incremental forming of AISI 304L stainless steel sheets
for future applications in the dentistry field. During the incremental forming process,
considerable forces can occur. The control of the forming force is particularly important to ensure
the safe use of the CNC milling machine and preserve the tooling and machinery.
In this paper, the effect of four different process parameters on the maximum force is studied.
The proposed approach consists in using an experimental design based on experimental results.
An analysis of variance was conducted with ANOVA to find the input parameters allowing to
minimize the maximum forming force. A numerical simulation of the incremental forming
process is performed with the optimal input process parameters. Numerical results are compared
with the experimental ones.

Keywords: Incremental Sheet Forming: shapes; force; experimental; optimization; simulation.

1. Introduction
The single point incremental forming process (ISF) is an emerging process with a high industrial
interest. This process is based on the use of a spherical tool, which is moved along CNC controlled tool
path (figure 1). During the incremental forming process, the sheet blank is fixed in sheet holder. The
tool follows a certain tool path and progressively deforms the sheet[1]. Because incremental forming is
a dieless process, it is perfectly suited for prototyping, medical shapes and small volume production.
One of the major advantages of the ISF process is the ability to program several punch trajectories on
the same machine or robots in order to obtain different shapes without forming tools.
Stainless 304L steel sheets are used. But its high cost and difficult formability compared with
aluminum make that the incremental forming of titanium sheet is little studied.

Content from this work may be used under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 licence. Any further distribution
of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the title of the work, journal citation and DOI.
Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd 1
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

Before the incremental forming process of stainless 304L steel sheets are used is really industrialized,
studies are necessary[2-6]. The ISF process indeed suffers from a big slowness, geometrical inaccuracy,
a not homogeneous thickness distribution which reduces its industrial suitability[1].

During this process, considerable forces can occur. The control of the forming force is particularly
important when stainless 304L steel sheets are used are used to ensure the safe use of a CNC milling
machine and preserve the tooling and machinery[3].

Figure 1. Single point incremental sheet forming process (SPIF)

The aim of this paper is to determine input parameters of the process in order to minimize the
maximum force achieved during the incremental forming of stainless 304L steel sheets. An experimental
study, based on a Taguchi orthogonal experimental design is conducted [7]. The influence of four input
parameters (sheet thickness, punch diameter, steps size, and wall angle) on the maximum forming force
is analyzed to obtain the optimum values. A numerical simulation of the incremental forming process is
performed with the optimal input process parameters. Numerical results are compared with the
experimental ones.

2. Experimental Set up
The platform used for the experiment is a 4-axis Spinner MFG 850 milling machine given in figure 2.
A multi-component FN7325 force sensor was mounted on the work-table to measure the forming forces
that occur during the process. This platform was initially developed for the incremental forming of
aluminium sheets and was presented in previous paper [2]. This paper concerns the incremental forming
of stainless 304L steel sheets which have a size of 200 mm x 200 mm. A truncated cone with a maximum
diameter of 100 mm was chosen for this preliminary study about the optimization of the incremental
forming process with stainless 304L steel sheets. To produce the truncated cone, a specific assembly
was performed in order to clamp the sheet on its circumference (figure 2). A semi hemispherical punch
was used as forming tool. During the incremental forming process, the tool realizes a rotational
movement in the horizontal plane after which it moves with a small step in the horizontal direction and
then descends by a small step in the vertical direction to start a new circular contour in the next horizontal
plane. A forming speed of 700 mm/min was combined with a rotation speed of 700 rpm. The punch had
a 55HRC hardness and the material used was X160CrMoV12 steel. All the experiments were carried
out at room temperature.

2
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

Figure 2. CNC milling machine used for the incremental forming process

3. Experimental design optimization

The goal of this present study was to minimize the maximal forming force which occur during the
process. The influence of the four following input parameters presented in figure 3 is studied:
 Sheet thickness (t),
 Tool punch diameter (dp),
 Incremental tool displacement (Δz)
 Wall angle (β).

Figure 3. Geometrical parameters of the truncated cone

Classical optimization methods generally require a large number of experiments. As the incremental
forming process suffers from a big slowness, the Taguchi’s method and the Orthogonal Array (OA)
were used to reduce the number of experiments. This method is a powerful optimization technique which
allows to design the minimum number of tests to carry out [7, 8, 9] in order to reduce the time and the
cost.

3
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

An orthogonal array at two levels was chosen in this study. Table 1 presents the four forming factors
and their respected levels. Eight experiments were realized according to the Taguchi’s theory. The
response value is the maximal forming force which occurs during the incremental forming process.
Table 2 presents the L8 orthogonal array. The response value of each trial is reported in this table.

Table 1. Forming factors and levels.

Factors Factor notation Level 1: low value Level 2: high value
t : Sheet thickness (mm) A 0.5 0.8
dp : Tool diameter (mm) B 5 10
Δz : Step size (mm) C 0.5 1.0
β: Wall angle (°) D 30 60

Table 2: L8 orthogonal array and response values

Experiment A:t(mm) B: dp(mm) C: Δz(mm) D: β(°) Fz(N)

E1 0,5 5 0,5 30 1620
E2 0,8 5 0,5 60 3520
E3 0,5 10 0,5 60 1760
E4 0,8 10 0,5 30 2470
E5 0,5 5 1 60 1570
E6 0,8 5 1 30 3450
E7 0,5 10 1 30 1870
E8 0,8 10 1 60 3630

The average experimental response curve represented by the tool force versus time is illustrated in
figure 4 and 5 for each design case.

7000
Fz(N)
6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

Time(s)
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000
Fresu E4(N) FresulE1(N) Fresu E2(N) Fresu E3(N)

Figure 4. Force versus-time for the E1-4 design cases

4
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

7000
Fz(N)
6000

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000

Time(s)
0
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000
Fresul E5(N) Fresu E6(N) Fresul E7(N) Fresul E8(N)

Figure 5. Force versus-time for the E4-8 design cases

An analysis of variance with ANOVA was conducted in order to analyze the effects of the four input
parameters on the forming force. This technique has already been adopted by several author in order to
compare the impact of various factors on response values and to define the significant factors [10,11].
Figure 6 gives a representation of the standardized Pareto chart. It shows the predominance of the
sheet thickness (t) which has a significant effect on the maximal forming force. The step size (Δz) and
the wall angle (β) have much less important effects on the response value. A low impact of the punch
diameter (dp) on the forming force is observed.
Pareto Chart for Fz_1

A:t +
-
AD+BC

AB+CD

C:delta Z

D:angle

AC+BD

B:Dpunch

0 400 800 1200 1600

Effect

Figure 6. Standardized PARETO chart for the forming force.

The correlation matrix given in Table 3 shows the extent of the confounding amongst the effects. A
perfectly orthogonal design will show a diagonal matrix with (1) on the diagonal and (0) off the diagonal.
In the case of our experimental design, there is no correlation amongst the factors. A good estimation of
each factor effect can be get.

5
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

Table 3: Correlation Matrix for Estimated Effects

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8)

(1) Average 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(2) A:t 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
(3) B:Dpunch 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
(4) C:delta Z 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0
(5) D:angle 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
(6) AB+CD 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
(7) AC+BD 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
(8) AD+BC 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Figures 7 present the normal probability plot. The process parameters are considered significance to
the experiment if there is a large angled slope of the straight line. We can see that all the points are
relatively closed to the straight line and thus that the data follow a normal distribution [12].
Normal Probability Plot for Fz_1

99,9
99
95 A:t
percentage

80 AD+BC
C:delta Z
50 D:angle
AC+BD
20 B:Dpunch
AB+CD
5
1
0,1
-400 0 400 800 1200 1600
Standardized effects

Figure 7. Normal probability distribution for force forming.

ANOVA was used to determine the optimal input values which allow to minimize the forming force.
The results are presented in the table 4.

Table 4: Optimal input values for a minimal forming force

Input
parameters Low value High value Optimal Value
A:t(mm) 0.5 0.8 0,500058
B: dp(mm) 5 10 5,0101
C: Δz(mm) 0.5 1 0,5
D: β(°) 30 60 60,0
Minimal forming force 1540,83

6
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

4. Numerical simulation

A three dimensional finite element analysis (FEA) of the incremental forming process has been
performed using the finite element solver ABAQUS explicit solver. The finite elements chosen to mesh
the sheet are shell elements S4R with 4 nodes and reduced integration. The spherical tool is modelled
by a rigid surface. The optimal input values of sheet thickness (t), punch diameter (dp), steps size (Δz)
and wall angle (β) presented in the table 4 were used for the simulation. The elasto-plastic behaviour
with isotropic hardening model is used to characterize the stainless 304L steel sheet behaviour [4]. The
stress-strain material hardening parameters of the sheet are obtained using tensile tests (table 5).

Table 5: Mechanical characteristics of stainless 304L steel sheet

E (GPa) Rp0.2 (MPa) Rm (MPa) A%

304 L 210 350 650 50

Figure 8. Initial and final mesh of the sheet.

The initial and final mesh of the sheet are presented in figure 8. Figure 9 gives the force versus time
curve obtained by the numerical simulation.
A comparison between the numerical and experimental results is realized to validate the numerical
approach. But a difference can be observed between the maximal forming force obtained numerically
and the value given in table 4. We can conclude that the numerical model is not accurate enough and
has to be improved. The material law used to characterize the material behaviour doesn’t take into
account the general anisotropy. This result shows that it is important to take it into account.

7
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

1600
Fz(N)
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 Time
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6

Fz(N)

Figure 9. FEA forming force (Fz) for the optimal input parameters values

5. Conclusion
This study about the optimization of the incremental forming process with stainless 304L steel sheets
was a preliminary study. The Taguchi’s method and an Orthogonal Array based on experimental results
was proposed to optimize the maximal forming force.

An analysis of variance was conducted with ANOVA. The results show a significant effect of the
sheet thickness (t) on the forming force. A similar increase of the forming force was shown with increase
of the steps size (Δz) and wall angle (β). A low effect of the punch diameter (dp) on the forming force
is observed. Others effects due to the interaction between input parameters are shown.

Optimal input values of sheet thickness (t), punch diameter (dp), steps size (Δz) and wall angle (β)
which allow to minimize the forming force were obtained with ANOVA.

A numerical simulation of the incremental forming process was performed. A comparison of the
numerical results with the experimental ones has shown that the numerical model has to be improved.
The Swift hardening law is not sufficient to model the material behavior. The general anisotropy has to
be taken into account. This study will be pursued in future works.

References

[1] J. Duflou, Y. Tunçkol, A. Szekeres, and P. Vanherck, “Experimental study on force measurements
for single point incremental forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., vol. 189, no. 1–3, pp. 65–72,
Jul. 2007.
[2] B. Saidi, A. Boulila, M. Ayadi, and R. Nasri, “Experimental force measurements in single point
incremental sheet forming SPIF,” Mech. Ind., vol. 16, no. 4, p. 410, 2015.
[3] D. Xu, W. Wu, R. Malhotra, J. Chen, B. Lu, and J. Cao, “Mechanism investigation for the
influence of tool rotation and laser surface texturing (LST) on formability in single point
incremental forming,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., vol. 73, pp. 37–46, Oct. 2013.

8
36th IDDRG Conference – Materials Modelling and Testing for Sheet Metal Forming IOP Publishing
IOP Conf. Series: Journal of Physics: Conf. Series 1234567890
896 (2017) 012039 doi:10.1088/1742-6596/896/1/012039

[4] S. Thibaud, R. Ben Hmida, F. Richard, and P. Malécot, “A fully parametric toolbox for the
simulation of single point incremental sheet forming process: Numerical feasibility and
experimental validation,” Simul. Model. Pract. Theory, vol. 29, pp. 32–43, Dec. 2012.
[5] S. P. Shanmuganatan and V. S. Senthil Kumar, “Modeling of Incremental Forming Process
Parameters of Al 3003 (O) by Response Surface Methodology,” Procedia Eng., vol. 97, pp. 346–
356, 2014.
[6] B. Saidi, L. Giraud-Moreau, and A. Cherouat, “Optimization of the single point incremental
forming process for titanium sheets by using response surface,” MATEC Web Conf., vol. 80, p.
10011, 2016.
[7] G. Ambrogio, F. Gagliardi, and L. Filice, “Robust Design of Incremental Sheet forming by
Taguchi’s Method,” Procedia CIRP, vol. 12, pp. 270–275, 2013.
[8] M. S. Phadke, Quality engineering using robust design. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice Hall,
1989.
[9] F. Han, J. Mo, H. Qi, R. Long, X. Cui, and Z. Li, “Springback prediction for incremental sheet
forming based on FEM-PSONN technology,” Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China, vol. 23, no. 4,
pp. 1061–1071, Apr. 2013.
[10] M. Honarpisheh, M. J. Abdolhoseini, and S. Amini, “Experimental and numerical investigation of
the hot incremental forming of Ti-6Al-4V sheet using electrical current,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol., vol. 83, no. 9–12, pp. 2027–2037, Apr. 2016.
[11] C. Raju and C. Sathiya Narayanan, “Application of a hybrid optimization technique in a multiple
sheet single point incremental forming process,” Measurement, vol. 78, pp. 296–308, Jan. 2016.
[12] V. Mugendiran, A. Gnanavelbabu, and R. Ramadoss, “Parameter Optimization for Surface
Roughness and Wall Thickness on AA5052 Aluminium alloy by Incremental Forming using
Response Surface Methodology,” Procedia Eng., vol. 97, pp. 1991–2000, 2014.