N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao

Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing

Abstract
Incremental Sheet Metal Forming (ISMF) has demonstrated its great potential to form complex three-dimensional parts
without using component specific tools against the conventional stamping operation. Forming components without
component specific tooling in ISMF provides a competitive alternative for economically and effectively fabricating
low-volume functional sheet metal products; hence, it offers a valid manufacturing process to match the need of mass
customization, which is regarded as the future of manufacturing. In ISMF process, sheet is clamped in a fixture/frame with
an opening window on a programmable machine and a hemispherical/spherical ended tool is programmed to move in a
pre-defined path giving shape to the clamped sheet by progressively deforming a small region in incremental steps.
Although, formability in incremental forming is higher than that of conventional forming, the capability to form components
with desired accuracy and surface finish without fracture becomes an important requirement for commercializing the ISMF
processes. This chapter presents various configurations developed to incrementally form the sheet metal components,
experimental as well as numerical methods for estimating forming limits, procedures for enhancing the accuracy and
methodologies for tool path generation.

Introduction
Evolution of manufacturing can be broadly divided into Manual manufacturing, Mechanization, Hard automation (mass
production), soft automation and integrated manufacturing. Metal forming processes also have gone through a similar
evolution process. Incremental forming is in practice from the day human begun processing the metals using manual
hammering for making tools and ornaments. Manual manufacturing is carried out in an integrated fashion with many
limitations. For example, a black smith would have knowledge/information to design, fabricate, deliver; repair/service and
recycle say a ploughing tool. Quality of the tool/ornament depends on the skill of technician and repeatability is not
guaranteed. In addition, productivity is low. The industrial revolution and development of electrical and hydraulic
machines lead to mass production of forming components using dies; resulting in traditional art of incremental processes
disappear from center stage except in few cases [1]. Incremental metal forming is characterized by small overlapping
regions of deformation in desired sequence to form the intended geometry using simple tools. Hence, smaller deformation
loads are sufficient at any instance. However, in the recent past, industry has witnessed a renewed interest in incremental
forming (bulk as well as sheet metal) processes due to change in consumer psychology, emergence of individualism
which lead the market towards mass customization, change in market dynamics, reducing product prices and increasing
product features and product variety forced industry to reduce costs in order to stay competitive and the possibility of
developing numerical control machines with complex kinematics. The conventional production methods used in mass
production are no longer able to fulfill the challenging demand of flexibility and agility at competitive prices. In incremental
forming the shape of product is defined by kinematics of the tools instead of part specific dies and punches. Tooling costs
and subsequent investment in tool storage, space required to store dedicated tools and dies and cost associated with
maintenance of tools are low in incremental forming. Based on the surface area to volume ratio of material being
deformed, incremental forming processes can be broadly classified into Incremental Bulk Metal Forming (IBMF) and
Incremental Sheet Metal Forming (ISMF). It is well known that in IBMF, surface area to volume ratio is smaller than that of
ISMF. This chapter will discuss the developments related to ISMF only.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 1
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Incremental Sheet Metal Forming and Configurations

Sheet metal forming covers variety of processes wherein shearing, bending, stretching and drawing or their combinations
are used to produce parts for wide variety of applications. Most of the conventional sheet metal forming operations
requires component specific and costly tooling and their design and fabrication add to the lead-time. Hence, these forming
processes are suitable for mass production to offset for the tool costs. Societal changes impacted manufacturing including
other engineering fields. Earlier industrialized economies were on mass production; however a combination of advances
in technology and information is making it increasingly possible to manufacture the customized products. In the
competitive world market, customers are demanding for more flexible and personal design in quality, performance,
services and aesthetics of the products with approximately same cost (if not lesser) and quality (if not higher). To be
competitive in the global economy and to satisfy customer demand without much lead time, majority of manufacturers are
using computer aided tools such as Computer Aided Design (CAD), Computer Aided Engineering (CAE), Computer Aided
Process Planning (CAPP), Computer Aided Manufacturing (CAM), Computer Aided Inspection (CAI) etc. leading to
integrated manufacturing without any physical boundaries between different functional departments of an organization.
Development of neutral data exchange standards led to proper integration. To be competitive in mass customization era,
one shall be able to convert the ideas quickly into products using flexible and rapid prototyping and manufacturing as well
as computer aided technologies. In addition, some traditional technologies also may have to be used. For
mass-customization (manufacturing system shall be agile to consumers with customized products at mass production
prices with equivalent or higher quality and lesser lead time), manufacturing processes have to be flexible with minimum
change over time and tooling costs. Manufacturers worldwide, now attempt to grow by competing on product
differentiation as much as on price. This trend leads to short product life cycles, low volume of a chosen product model,
and profitability is as much dependent on the speed at which new models and products are introduced as on the control
of direct cost. This trend in manufacturing sector led to the development of flexible manufacturing technologies including
layered manufacturing, and particularly in the area of machining to changeover between different products with the help of
fully automated systems. However, developments in the area of flexible forming [2] have not kept pace with machining
mainly because of the requirement of component specific tooling in many of the operations.

Conventional sheet metal forming operations require component specific and costly tooling and their design and
fabrication add to the lead-time. Incremental forming is one of the technologies that have emerged as an alternative to
some of the conventional sheet metal forming processes for mass customization. Incremental Sheet Metal Forming
(ISMF) is commonly regarded as a die-less sheet metal forming process which can form complex three-dimensional parts
using relatively simple tools. It is receiving attention from the engineering community due to its flexibility and low cost.
This unique combination enables the rapid prototyping of functional sheet metal parts before mass production. In addition,
it offers a valid manufacturing process to match the need of mass customization, which is regarded as the future of
manufacturing [3]. In ISMF process, sheet is clamped in a fixture/frame with an opening window on a
commercialComputer Numerical Control (CNC) machine and a hemispherical/spherical ended tool is programmed to
move in a pre-defined path giving shape to the clamped sheet by progressively deforming a small region in incremental
steps. As the forming tool moves and deforms a small portion at a time, the overall time to produce one component is
comparatively more but for small batch sizes and prototyping, ISMF demonstrated its potential of being cost competitive.
Existing experimental configurations for incremental sheet metal forming can be broadly classified into two categories:
with (full/partial) and without die/pattern [4] support.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 2
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 1: Single Point Incremental Forming (SPIF)

Negative die-less incremental forming, also known as single point incremental forming (SPIF), is the earliest form of
incremental forming. Figure 1 showsthe block diagram of SPIF with a spherical tool. In SPIF, tool generally comes in
contact with the sheet close to the clamped boundary at a programmed location and moves down by an amount
equivalent to chosen incremental depthor a fraction of that depending on the type of tool path used. Figure 2(a) and (b)
depicts the contourand spiraltool [Link] both the cases, tool moves along the programmed path peripherally.

Figure 2: Contour and helical tool paths

In contour tool path, tool moves down by an amount equivalent to incremental depth at the starting of each contour
whereas in spiral tool path, tool gradually moves down and completes the downward movement equal to incremental
depth by the time tool completes 360 degrees movement along the spiral and the same can be clearly seen in figure 2 (a)

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 3
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

and (b). Note that in contour tool path, tool disengages at the end of each contour, moves to the starting point of next
contour and plunges down equivalent to incremental depth from its original location at the end of earlier contour whereas
in case of spiral tool path tool disengages only after completely forming the [Link] 2(c) and (d) shows the
components produced using contour as well as spiral paths and a distinct mark connecting all the start/end points of each
contour can be noticedin case of contour tool path. Bending between the clamped region and component periphery can
be clearly seen from these figures and is one of the reasons of inaccuracy. Allwood et al. [5] have designed and built a
dedicated SPIF machine at Cambridge University and its block diagram is shown in figure 3. They have designed a
tool-mounting system that allows free rotation of tool passively and for ease of mounting and un-mounting of tools.
Provision for measurement of load(s) is provided by mounting the fixture on load cells.

Figure 3: Block diagram of SPIF developed at Cambridge University [5]

Positive die-less incremental forming, also referred to as Two Point Incremental Forming (TPIF)is another variant of ISMF
and is known to be first attempted by Matsubara [6]. In this process (figure 4), clamped sheet can move up and down.
One can clearly see form figure 4 that the sheet metal is restrained at two locations (other than the clamping) i.e. at one
location by forming tool and the second location is the static support. This static support can be a partial die or a full die.
Full die can be either a negative one as shown in figure 4(b) or a positive die. Most of the above configurations are
realized by mounting the required tools on standalone NC [Link] Corporation of Japan has developed a
commercial machine for incremental sheet metal forming with pattern support and is shown in figure 5. Note that only
movement in two directions are provided to tool and the third movement necessary to form the component is provided to
the fixture and in addition, the fixture can move up and down.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 4
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 4: Two Point Incremental Forming (TPIF) configurations (a) partial support (b) full support

Figure 5: Configuration of commercial machine developed by AminoCorporation([Link]

Recently, a variant of TPIF (figure 6) in which, instead of partial or full die, another independently controlled forming tool is
used which provides further flexibility to the process as features on both the sides of initial plane of the sheet can be
formed. This variant is named as Double Sided Incremental forming (DSIF).Here, the deforming and supporting roles of
each tool will keep changing depending on thegeometry being formed at the instantand the geometry that has to be
formed later. This configuration enhances the complexity of the components that can be formed and reduces many of the
limitations associated with incremental forming.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 5
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 6: Double Sided Incremental Forming (DSIF)

Modifications of the process setup has been made by various research groups, for example, to form doubly curved
surface, Yoon and Yang [7] have used a movable punch. Their setup (figure 7) consists of a movable punch and a
supporting tool that has four hemispherical headed cylindrical pins arranged in a grid. The sheet is placed between punch
and supporting tool without clamping, hence the deformation in this arrangement is mainly due to bending. The downward
movement of punch bends the sheet and movement of sheet on the support tool changes the deformation location. Each
bending operation produces a spherical shape and their combination gives doubly curved surface. The sequence of
operations in this process is shown in figure 7(c). Required curvature (R), during the deformation, is controlled by
selecting the downward movement (Δz) of the punch from the initial plane of the sheet and grid size (2a) and is given by:

(1)

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 6
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 7: Setup proposed by Yoon and Yang [7] to form doubly curved surface

Meier et al. [8] have used two robots (Figure 8) to control different tools on either side of sheet and termed the process as
duplex incremental forming (DPIF). They used position control for the forming tool and combination of force and position
control for the support tool to maintain continuous contact. Many people [9-11] have tried water jet as a forming tool along
with die/pattern support. Note that water jet system is force controlled, whereas the NC tool systems generally used for
incremental forming are displacement controlled.

Figure 8: Configuration of Duplex Incremental Forming

The first patent on incremental sheet metal forming is by Leszak [12] way back in 1967. In this invention, a turning
machine with a backing plate and a pair of clamping rings (to hold the sheet) mounted on the machine turn table and a
roller tool mounted on carriage as shown in figure 9 is used. The sheet is rotated on turn table while the roller moving on
the carriage applies pressure on the sheet. This methodology can only be used to produce axisymmetric
[Link] recently, Emmens et al. [13] reviewed the available literatures, especially patents, available on different
variants of ISF. Starting from the inception the chronological developments in ISF has been summarized by them. It can
be seen from their review that all patents are on different forms of SPIF and TPIF with or without partial or full dies (four
variants as shown in figure 1, 4 and 6). All such kinds of ISF process variants are able to form simple to complex
geometries but having features only on one side of the initial plane of sheet metal work-piece.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 7
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 9: Schematic showing the apparatus used by Leszak [12]

First comprehensive review article on ISMF has appeared in Annals of CIRP by Jeswiet et al. [14]. Based on the work
presented in literature, they provided many useful observations and guidelines for incremental forming, as summarized
below.

Formability in SPIF increases with decrease in tool size as well as incremental step down.
Anisotropy has an influence on formability; greater formability being achieved with smaller diameter tools in the
transverse direction.
Formability decreases with sheet thickness.
Large incremental step down increases the roughness.
Increase in the incremental step down and tool size increase forming forces.
There is a limitation on the maximum draw angle that can be formed in one pass hence, multiple pass
methodologies are preferred for forming large angle components.
Spiral tool path is preferred over contour one but the tool path generation is difficult.

Most of the attempts on all variants of ISMF are experimental in nature. Experimental observations/measurements of both
single and two point incremental forming have shown that,using spiral tool path for simple and reasonably complex
geometries with small to moderate wall angles, deformation is close to plane strain i.e. strain in one direction is
[Link] does not deform significantly in the peripheral direction i.e. strain is negligible in the peripheral direction (tool
movement direction). Assuming that the strain in the peripheral direction is principal one, the thickness strain (reduction
in thickness during the deformation) has to be equal to the meridional strain (increase in length) with opposite sign to
satisfy the volume constancy. Based on the above discussion, for a constant wall angle cone shown in figure 10, the
relationship between the wall thickness after deformation to the original sheet thickness in terms of wall angle can be
written as:
tf = t0 sin (90 - α) (2)

The above relation is very well known as sine law in ISMF. In case of continuously varying geometry, thickness can be
obtained at any location by using the local wall angle. However, thickness measurement of wide variety of components

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 8
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

formed using single and two point incremental forming has shown that there is a considerable difference between the
measured values and those predicted by sine law. Note that the sine-law expression for predicting the thickness is
derived under the ideal deformation conditions as shown in figure 10 where there is no radial displacement of any
through-thickness section of the material. Thickness calculated using the sine law (eq. 2) can only serve as a rough and
an average approximate estimate.

Figure 10: Sine law for thickness prediction in incremental forming

To understand the above mentioned conclusions and insight into various aspect of ISMF, details of each aspect to a
reasonable extent are presented in this chapter.

Formability and Thinning

Literature [14] indicates that formability in incremental sheet metal forming is much higher than the one reported in deep
drawing. Most of the studies related to formability in ISMF are experimental in nature. Capability to form components with
desired accuracy and surface finish without fracture becomes an important requirement for commercializing the ISMF
processes. Accurate prediction of formability helps in assisting better design of part geometry and corresponding tool
path. It has been well accepted that conventional forming limits are not suitable for incremental forming even when path
dependency of strains are considered. The forming limit of a sheet metal in conventional forming is defined to be the state
at which a localized thinning of sheet initiates when it is formed into a product shape in a stamping process. Formability of
sheet metals in conventional forming is at present characterized by the Forming Limit Diagram (FLD) introduced in 1960s
by Keeler and Backofen [15]. The forming limit is conventionally described as plot of major principal strain vs. minor
principal strain. It must cover as much as possible the strain domain which occurs in industrial sheet metal forming
processes. The curves are established by experiments that provide pair of the values of limiting major and minor principal
strains obtained for various loading patterns (equi-biaxial, biaxial, plane strain and uni-axial).A schematic representation
comparing the forming limit curves of conventional forming (stamping/deep drawing) with that of single point incremental
forming is shown in figure 11(a). It can be clearly seen that the forming limit curve for incremental forming is a straight line
with a negative slope in the positive region of minor strain whereas the conventional one is present in both the regions of
minor strain. Deformed grid obtained during incremental forming shown in figure 11(b) and (c) indicates that the
deformation that occurs varies from plane strain to biaxial stretching.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 9
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 11: Schematic representation of forming limit curve in SPIF against conventional forming

Iseki and Kumon [16] has proposed an incremental sheet metal stretch test (figure 12(a)) to estimate the forming limits in
incremental forming using a rolling ball and formed a groove shown in the figure 12(b). It can be seen that both plane
strain and biaxial stretching states are captured during the experiment. Shim and Park [17] experimentally investigated
the formability (of fully annealed Al-1050 sheets) in incremental forming (IF) using a tool having freely rotating ball tip
similar to that used by Iseki and Kumon [16] and generated strain based Forming Limit Curves (FLC) for incremental
forming by measuring the major and minor strains using a deformation grid. Different tool path strategies are used to
study various strain paths and their suitability to generate forming limit curves for incremental [Link] recommended
an alternate imposition of vertical and horizontal displacements to form a deep straight groove similar to that formed by
Iseki and Kumon [16] at the central portion of a square specimen clamped peripherally. Recommended methodology is
depicted pictorially in figure 13. It is realised by them also that bi-axial stretching occurs near the start and end of groove
and plane stretching occurs along a straight path and tendency of cracking is reported to be greater at the ends due to
biaxial stretching. They formed components having different shapes starting from triangular opening to octagonal
opening and then a circular opening and observed that deformation is close to equi-biaxial at the corners and plane strain
in the straight regions. Failure conditions of the above mentioned geometries were in good agreement with the forming
limit curve generated by them using the groove test.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 10
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 12: Groove test to obtain formability in incremental forming [16] (a) schematic (b) formed groove

Figure 13: Groove test (a) Tool path (b) Forming limit curve (FLC)

Kim and Park [18] have used the groove test mentioned above to study the effect of different process parameters on the
formability of fully annealed Al-1050 sheets by conducting experiments and their trends are presented in figure 14. It is
also reported that the use of freely rotating ball tool enhances the formability as the friction along the tool work interface
reduces. Formability decreases with increase in tool diameter and incremental depth. In addition, they carried out finite
element analysis using PAMSTAMP – explicit to understand the effect of process parameters on the deformation.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 11
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 14:Variation of formability with tool diameter and incremental depth during groove test

Filice et al. [19] have proposed experimental tests aiming at achieving different straining conditions that occur in
incremental forming to study the formability. They formed a truncated pyramid to obtain the conditions of plane stain
deformation and proposed a geometry with two straight grooves perpendicular to each other (tool path shown in figure
15)to achieve almost pure biaxial stretching condition at the centre of the geometry. In addition, they proposed to form
truncated cone geometry with a spiral tool path explained earlier to achieve the conditions between plane strain and
biaxial states. In all the cases, they formed the components using hemispherical ended tool (not a freely rotating ball tool)
till failure and generated the forming limit curves for incremental forming. Later, Fratini et al. [20] have carried out
experimental study to understand the effect of material properties on the formability in SPIF for commonly used sheet
materials namely copper, brass, high strength steel, deep drawing quality steel, AA1050-O and AA6114-T4 in sheet metal
industry. They measured strain hardening constant (K), strain hardening exponent (n), normal anisotropy index (R),
ultimate tensile strength and percentage elongation (%PE) of all the materials by conducting tensile tests. Truncated
cones and pyramids of varying wall angle were formed till failure, to study the influence of above mentioned process
parameters on formability of incremental forming and performed statistical analysis. Based on the analysis, they
concluded that strain hardening exponent, strain hardening constant and normal anisotropy have high, medium and low
influence respectively. Ultimate tensile strength has negligible influence whereas percentage elongation has medium
influence. Among the interactive terms, only interaction between strain-hardening exponent with strain-hardening constant
and percentage elongation are significant, whereas the others are insignificant. In addition, they reported the influence of
same process parameters on conventional forming limit diagram also.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 12
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 15: Tool path to achieve biaxial stretching at the centre of two perpendicular straight grooves

Ham and Jeswiet [21] used two fractional factorial designs of experiments to study the effect of process variables on
formability of AA3003. First set of design (wall angle, vertical step size/incremental depth, base/component opening
diameter, component depth, feed rate and spindle speed) indicates that feed rate, spindle rotation speed, step size and
forming angle decide whether a part can be successfully formed or not. It was also reported that faster spindle rotation
speed improves formability. Second set of experiments (vertical step size, sheet thickness and tool diameter) reveal that
vertical step size (they used 0.05, 0.127 and 0.25 mm) has little effect on the maximum forming angle. Material thickness,
tool size and the interaction between material thickness and tool size have a considerable influence on maximum forming
angle. Later they [22] used Box-Behenken design of experiments to study the forming limits in SPIF. They considered five
parameters namely, material type (three different aluminium alloys), thickness, formed shape (cone, pyramid and dome),
tool size and incremental step size at three levels for the experimentation. Material type has significant effect; the one
having lower ultimate tensile strength will have greater formability. Shape also has some influence on the formability as
the type of deformation is dependent on geometry. Allwood et al. [23] conducted experiments using Al 5251-H22 sheets
to explain the reasons behind higher forming limits observed in incremental forming and shown that the lines joining
corresponding points on the upper and lower surfaces of sheet formed by SPIF remain almost normal to the surface in
meridional plane (figure 16), indicating that the deformation in this plane is predominantly pure bending and stretching.
Whereas, measurements indicated that there is a relative movement between corresponding points parallel to the tool
movement direction, suggesting that shear occurs in this [Link] observations indicate that an appreciable
amount of through thickness shear occurs during incremental forming in the direction parallel to tool motion. Due to the
presence of through thickness shear, the tensile stresses responsible for fracture gets reduced hence formability is higher
in incremental forming.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 13
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 16: Deformation behaviour in meridional plane

Ambrogio et al. [24] made an attempt to predict the sheet thinning in SPIF using finite element analysis (implicit) and
compared with that of experimental values and concluded that the predictions using FEA as well as measured
experimental values are less than that of sine law thickness prediction over most of the deformed region. In addition,
experimental values are lower than the values predicted using FEA. Ambrogio et al. [25] used a force based strategy that
can be used on line to predict formability/failure. They measured the vertical component (thrust force on the tool) of the
forming force by mounting the incremental forming fixture on top of a dynamometer similar [26] to that as shown in figure
17 (a). They used the force gradient (monotonically decreasing curves, figure 17 (b)) as a criterion for [Link],
Szekeres et al. [27] observed the similar force trends while forming cone but not for pyramid shape, hence, they indicated
that tool force measurement may not be very reliable. Many researchers have conducted experimental study on the
forming forces by forming a cone using SPIF [28-37]. It is reported that the forming forces increases with tool diameter,
wall angle, incremental step size and sheet thickness as shown in figure 18. Increasing direction of the parameter is
shown using arrow. Note that force in the tool axial direction reaches peak value and then attains steady state in all
cases.

Figure 17: Force measurement and force trend before failure

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 14
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 18:Variation of vertical component of force with (a) tool diameter (b) wall angle (c) incremental depth and (d) sheet thickness

To reduce the number of experiments required to test the forming limits, Hussain et al. [38] considered an axisymmetric
component with varying wall angle along the depth direction. The cross section of the component parallel to the
incremental depth direction is chosen as circular profile and the same is shown schematically in figure 19. Components
are formed till the failure depth and quantified the formability as wall angle at that height. Later conical components with
failure angle obtained using varying angle component mentioned aboveare formed and concluded that formable wall
angles obtained by forming conical cups are more accurate but time consuming. This work is extended [39] by forming
components with different cross sectional profiles namely elliptical, exponential and parabolic and found that the forming
limits are different for different profiles (lowest for circular and highest for exponential). Based on the above observation,
they concluded that the forming limits depend on history of forming in ISMF.

Figure 19: Funnel geometry to evaluate formability

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 15
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Hamilton and Jeswiet [40] studied and analysed the effect of forming at high feed rate and tool rotational speed in SPIF.
They concluded that tool rotational speed does not have significant effect during SPIF and forming at high feed
(5080–8890 mm/min) produced similar thickness distribution as of low feed. Thus higher feed rate (less forming time) can
be used to reduce the forming time,making ISMF process suitable for industrial applications. During the study of the
microstructure, it was observed that the change in grain size after forming is dependent on the step size, spindle rotation
speed and feed rate. Cao et al. [41] presented a comprehensive review along with the advances and challenges in
incremental forming including formability. They used Oyane criterion [42] along with FEA as well as simple force
equilibrium analysis to predict the forming limits. The Oyane model includes the effect of hydrostatic stress history on
occurrence of the ductile fracture as given below

(3)

Here constants c1 and c2 have to be obtained experimentally. They conducted the necessary experiments and obtained
the values of c1 and c2 for AA5052-O material. The FLC experiments for the SPIF were carried out on a CNC machining
center using straight groove geometry and tool path similar to the one shown in figure 13. Malhotra et al. [43] analysed
the fracture behaviour in SPIF by using a fracture model in FEA to predict forming forces, thinning and fracture. The
material model was calibrated using the forming force history for a cone shape. The model was validated using a funnel
shape [38, 39] (varying wall angle as depth increases) by comparing experimental forming forces, thinning and fracture
depths with predicted values from FEA. It was concluded that fracture in SPIF is controlled by both local bending and
shear. Local stretching and bending of sheet around the hemispherical tool causes higher plastic strain on the outer side
of the sheet resulting in increased damage on the outer side as compared to the inner side. Greater shear in SPIF only
partially explains the increased formability as compared to conventional forming. The local nature of deformation in SPIF
is the root cause of increased formability as compared to conventional forming.

Bhattacharya et al. [44] conducted experiments to study the effect of incremental sheet metal forming process variables
on maximum formable angle. Box-Behnken method is used to design the experiments for formability study. From the
experimental results it was concluded that during incremental forming, the formability decreases with increase in tool
diameter. The formable angle first increases and then decreases with incremental depth. The variation in the formable
angle is not significant in the range of incremental depths that are used in their work to produce good surface finish. To
predict thickness during the SPIF, a simple model is proposed considering the overlap in deformation (figure 20(a)) and
thus estimated the deformed sheet thickness more accurately. They used the proposed thickness prediction model along
with a simple analytical model based on the force equilibrium to obtain the stress components at any section during SPIF.
Ratio of mean stress value to the yield stress value for all the experiments conducted for formability study at the
maximum formable angle are calculated by them using the force equilibrium analysis and its value is found to be very
close to unity at all conditions hence, used the same as the failure criterion. Maximum formable angles predicted using a
triaxility criterion mentioned above for plane stretching conditions are in very good agreement with the experimental
results (figure 20(b)).Duflou et al. [34, 35] have demonstrated that the use of local heating (using NdYAG laser) ahead of
tool reduces the forming forces and enhances the formability of the material. They used TiAl6V4 sheets of 0.6mm
thickness. Cone with 56 degrees wall angle and 30 mm depth is successfully formed with local heating whereasthe
maximum angle that could be formed without heating using the same parameters is only 32 degree.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 16
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 20: (a) Schematic showing the consideration of overlap in thickness calculation (b) Comparison of predictions of formable
angle using triaxiality criterion with the experimental results

Park and Kim [45] studied the formability of annealed aluminium sheet by forming different shapes using both positive and
negative incremental forming. While forming a truncated pyramid with negative single point incremental forming, cracks
occurred at the corners due to biaxial deformation but no cracks appeared during positive forming (in positive forming a
suitable jig support is used - figure 21). Strain measurements with the help of a grid indicated that in negative forming
both plane strain and biaxial stretching are present whereas in positive forming only plain strain stretching is present.
Further extending their work to more complex geometries using positive forming, they concluded that the formability in
positive incremental forming is better as the deformation occurs under plane strain conditions in addition to providing the
capability to form sharp corners. Designing of support jig is a challenging task and depends on the components geometry.
One can make use of pattern support to replace the jig necessary during positive incremental forming.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 17
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 21: Tool configuration used to form truncated pyramid in positive forming

Recently, Jackson and Allwood [46] have conducted experimental study to explain the deformation mechanism in SPIF
(figure 22a) and TPIF (figure 22b, with full pattern support) to that of forming the same geometry using conventional
pressing operation and to evaluate the validity of sine law and in turn to relate the thickness measurements to the
deformation mechanics. For the above mentioned purpose, they used copper plate of 3 mm thickness, cut in to two
halves. Cut section passes through the centre of the component. Faces of each half are machined flat and 1.5 mm x 1.5
mm grid pattern was marked. Later these plates were brazed together and used for forming conical components by SPIF,
TPIF and pressing. After forming the components are heated to separate the two halves. Then the formed geometry,
thickness and strains are measured. One half of the component with grid pattern is shown in figure 22(c). Note that the
measurements of above mentioned quantities can be carried out before joining the sheets together and after separating
them once the component is formed. Hence, evolution of strain at any instance cannot be measured, but the final strains
representing the final geometry with respect to initial geometry can be measured. Strain values were calculated by
measuring the relative movement of the points of intersection of the grid before and after the deformation. Local
coordinate system shown in figure 22(c)is used for strain measurement; where m, θ and tare meridional, tool movement
and thickness directions respectively. After analysing the measured thickness, geometry and strains, they concluded that
in both SPIF and TPIF, deformation is a combination of stretching as well asshear and the same increases with the
successive tool laps in the meridional direction with the greatest strain component being shear in the tool movement
direction and shear occurs perpendicular to the tool movement direction in both SPIF and TPIF but is more significant in
SPIF. Deformation mechanism in SPIF and TPIF are significantly different from the idealised mechanism of shear
spinning on which sine law thickness is proposed. One can easily realise the same in SPIF as there is no support similar
to spinning but the support is present in [Link] analysis of measurements indicated that gridlines in the thickness
direction more or less remain axial in ideal mechanism, but not after TPIF. In addition, circumferential shear is present in
TPIF which is absent in the ideal mechanism. Above observations clearly indicate that there is a radial movement of

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 18
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

through thickness sections during deformation hence there is a significant difference in measured and ideal thickness
values in both the processes.

Figure 22: Incremental forming configurations used for experimental study and grid for measuring

Single-pass SPIF can successfully form wall angles up to 700 for various aluminium as well as steel sheets of 1 mm initial
thickness [14] using suitable process parameters such as incremental depth, tool diameter and forming speed. However,
forming a wall angle close to 900 using SPIF is challenging. There have been a few attempts to increase the maximum
formable angle by using multi-pass single/two point incremental forming [47-49]. Hirt et al. [47] proposed and
implemented a multi-pass forming strategy with partial support die (Figure 23) to form components with steep walls which
cannot be formed using single pass incremental forming. The stages involved in their strategy are
1. First form the shallow angle component with final desired component height (figure 23 (b)).
2. Next, the wall angle is increased in steps of 30 to 50 by moving the forming tool alternatively upward and downward
as shown in figures 23 (c) and (d)
Using the above strategy, first they made a pyramidal component with 450 wall angle in the stage 1 and then formed up to
810 wall angle. Thickness measured by them revealed that the thickness at any location along the wall is more than the
thickness predicted by sine law for 810. This can be attributed to the availability of more material as the component is
formed to the final desired height in stage 1 and upward movement of tool in later stages. In addition, they performed
finite element analysis along with damage criterion of Gurson-Tveergard-Needleman to predict the damage evolution
during incremental forming process and predicted that the damage increases with increase in tool diameter as well as
incremental depth.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 19
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 23: Multistage forming strategy using TPIF to increase formable wall angle

Skjoedt et al. [48] proposed a five-stage strategy as shown in Figure 24 to form a cylindrical cup with a wall angle of 90
degrees with height/radius ratio equal to one but the components fractured either in the fourth stage or fifth stage. They
used two approaches, namely, Down-Down-Down-Up (DDDU, figure 24a) and Down-Up-Down-Down (DUDD, figure
24b). They demonstrated that the thickness variation is dependent not only on tool path but also on its direction
(downwards or upwards) in each stage. In one of the above strategies i.e. DUDD, component failed in 4th stage while in
the other one i.e. DDDU was successful up to 4th stage but the component formed did not confine to the designed shape.
In addition, they used the profiles for all the stages with the required component depth similar to that used by Hirt et al.
[47]. Note that the component height is constrained by the jig used in TPIF [47] but the material shifts down during down
pass and results in more depth than the required component in SPIF.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 20
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 24: Multi-pass strategies used by Skjoedt et al [48]

Duflou et al. [49] stated that the only way to achieve large wall angles was to aim for material redistribution by shifting
material from other zones in the blank to inclined wall regions. They deformed the region of the work-piece area that was
originally unaffected in single-pass SPIF tool paths (Figure 25) to form vertical walls without leading to failure. Their tool
paths always moved from the periphery towards the centre of the sheet and all the stages are to a depth of required
component. Hence, the stepped features [50] have resulted using the tool path used by Duflou et al. [51]. Multistage
incremental forming consists of a number of intermediate stages to form the desired geometry. To propose intermediate
stages, it is very important to predict the shape that actually form after each intermediate stage to select the profile for
next stage as well as the direction of tool movement (i.e. in-to-out or out-to-in). It is very well known that when the tool is
moved from out-to-in during any stage, material which is present ahead of it moves down like a rigid body. The stepped
feature formed at the bottom of the final component [48, 49] during multistage SPIF is a result of accumulated rigid body
translation during the deformation of the intermediate shapes. Abhishek [50] and Malhotra et al. [51] have proposed a
methodology using a combination of out-to-in (OI) and in-to-out (IO) tool paths (figure 26) in one pass and by selectively
deforming certain regions in an intermediate pass. Here, “OI tool path” refers to the tool moving from the outer periphery
of the sheet towards the centre of the sheet while moving down in the z-direction. The “IO tool path” refers to the tool
moving from the centre of the sheet towards the outer periphery while moving up or staying at a constant depth in the z-
[Link] [50, 51] used a seven stage strategy to successfully form a cylindrical component with height to radius ratio
equivalent to one. For each tool path the first number denotes the stage number, the number after the dash denotes the
order of execution and the arrow shows the direction of tool path. Note that some regions are not deformed in stages 4, 5
and 7. Abhishek [50] has extended the methodology to make hemi spherical and ellipsoidal components. Note that
stepped features are avoided in the works of Abhishek [50] and Malhotraet al. [51]. Very recently, rigid body movement
during in-to-out and out-to-in tool paths is modelled analytically and validated using finite element simulation for different
materials (Xu et al. [52]).

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 21
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 25: (a) Five stages of tool path to form vertical walls (b) Stepped features [50]

Figure 26:Successful multi-stage strategy to form vertical wall without formation of stepped features (a) tool path (b) profile
comparison (c) sectional view of component

Kim and Yang [53] compared two double pass strategies for SPIF. One was based on linear blending, i.e., the
intermediate shape was calculated to be at a height of 0.5 times the final height. In the other approach, they calculated
the intermediate shape so that highly deformed regions in the final shape were subjected to lesser deformation in the
intermediate shapes. Their methodologies yielded better thickness distributions than single-pass forming. They concluded
that the double pass forming method results in improved formability as well as higher mechanical strength of the formed
component. Young and Jeswiet [54] experimentally studied the effect of single-pass and double-pass forming strategies
on the thickness distribution in forming a 700 wall angle cone. They concluded that double-pass strategy causes marked
thinning at the flange near the backing plate. In addition, they concluded that the sine law will not predict the thicknesses
correctly when multiple passes are used for forming angles exceeding [Link] better understanding of formability in
termsof wall angle for different materials and process variables is tabulated below.
Table 1: Maximum formed wall angle for various parameters.
Sheet Thickness Tool diameter Incremental depth Formed angle
[Link]. Material
t (mm) D(mm) Δz (mm) (Degrees)
1 2.1 – – 78.1 [14]
2 1.3 – – 72.1 [14]
Al 3003-O
3 1.21 – – 71 [14]
4 0.93 – – 67 [14]
5 Al 5754-O 1.02 – – 62 [14]

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 22
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

6 Al 5182-O 0.93 – – 63 [14]

7 2.1 4.76 1.3 77 [21]
8 AA 3003-O 1.3 12.7 75 [27]
9 1.2 10 0.5 73 [33]
10 1.0 18.0 0.3 70 [25]
AA 1050-O
11 1 12 1 70 [33]
70 [39]
11 Aluminium 0.91 8.0 0.15
(Exponential profile)
12 Steel-DDQ 1.0 – – 70 [14]
13 Steel-DC04 1 12 1 70 [33]
14 LY 12M 0.91 8.0 0.15 66.0 [55]

Accuracy and Surface Finish

Accuracy of the component during incremental sheet metal forming is affected by bending of sheet between the clamped
boundary and component opening, continuous local spring back that occurs as soon as tool moves away from a point,
and global spring back that occurs after the tool retraction and un-clamping of the component. Comparison between the
ideal geometry and the possible final geometry during SPIF due to the above mentioned affects is schematically
represented in figure 27. One can reduce the deviation between the ideal and formed geometries due to bending that
occurs close to clamped boundary in SPIF by providing a suitable support/back-up or can be eliminated by using a
pattern support.

Figure 27: Schematic representation of ideal and formed profiles

Hirt et al. [47] proposed an iterative method to improve geometrical accuracy. First the formed component was measured
using Co-ordinate Measuring Machine (CMM) and compared with intended geometry. Deviation vector between
measured and target points is generated and the same is used to modify the tool path. Ambrogio et al. [56] have studied
the effect of tool diameter and incremental depth on the geometrical accuracy in SPIF by conducting series of
experiments and concluded that the accuracy is better while using smaller diameter tools and lower incremental depth.
Note that the use of lower incremental depth increases the forming time. In addition, they also stated that, elastic spring
back and bending in absence of a backing plate/die is the major cause for geometrical inaccuracies. Importance of a
proper tool path for obtaining desirable geometrical accuracies in the formed component is emphasised and proposed a
modified tool path to enhance the accuracy by forming a component with higher wall angle than the desired angle up to

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 23
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

some depth and then forming the remaining component with the desired angle. Conical components formed using the
above strategy enhanced the accuracy by reducing the bending near component opening (figure 28). Note that the
modified tool path with larger angle than the desired starts deforming the sheet at somewhat distance away from the
clamping region than the ideal tool path. Ambrogio et al. [57] studied the influence of process parameters (tool diameter,
step size, sheet thickness) on spring back and pillow effect (figure 29) in SPIF by forming a truncated pyramid with square
base. Pillow effect is compensated by over bending. This in turn increases the bending at the opening region although it
reduces the deviation in the wall region.

Figure 28: Schematic representation of tool path strategy adopted by Ambrogio et al [56] to reduce bending in SPIF

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 24
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 29: Schematic illustrating bending and pillow effect observed during SPIF

Tanaka et al. [58] have used a backup tool that comes in contact with the work piece intermittently (following sinusoidal
path) during SPIF. Finite element analysis has demonstrated that this strategy reduces the residual stress gradients and
in turn enhances the component accuracy. Duflou et al. [34, 35] made an attempt to improve the geometrical accuracy by
applying local heating principle. Improvement in geometrical accuracy was realised by achieving more localised forming
effect (due to local heating) and reduced residual stress levels which reduces the spring back effects (figure 30).

Figure 30: Schematic to show the effect of local heating on accuracy

Allwood et al. [59] suggested a closed-loop control strategy (figure 31) that uses spatial impulse responses to enhance
the product accuracy in single point incremental forming with feedback provided by a stereovision camera. They used a
Weibull distribution curve to impulse responses from a set of experiments for a conical component and then used the
same to form similar conical components with ±0.2mm accuracy prior to unclamping the component. They measured and
reported that the formed component deviate around 2 to 3mm from that of intended, without using the feedback. Their
strategy requires an iterative process in which a few trials were first conducted for a component and based on the spatial
impulses obtained, tool path compensation was done to obtain a better component.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 25
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 31: Block diagram of closed loop strategy proposed by Allwood et al. [59]

Behera et al. [60] proposed a compensated tool path generation methodology for SPIF to improve the accuracy by using
Multivariate Adaptive Regression Splines (MARS) as an error prediction tool. The MARS generates continuous error
response surfaces for individual features and feature combinations. Two types of features (planar and ruled) and two
feature interactions (combinations of planar features and combinations of ruled features) were studied with parameters
and algorithms to generate response surfaces. The method has two stages (i) training stage and (ii) MARS model
generation stage. In training stage formed components are scanned to generate point cloud and are compared with
available point cloud of Stereo Lithography (STL) model to generate accuracy reports and used the same to build MARS
engine (figure 32). Feature assisted Single Point Incremental Forming (FSPIF) module detects the features and MARS
engine adjusts these features and generates adjusted STL models in second stage (figure 33). The components formed
from these adjusted models are again compared with original STL model to generate reports for validation. The validation
results show average deviation of less than 0.3 mm and the maximum deviation for horizontal non-planar feature is of
0.72-0.99 mm. Although the methodology reasonably enhances the part accuracy,however,the process of implementation
of MARS system is difficult and limited. Also, for parts with wall angles close to maximum formable angle, the
compensation of the STL file results in a compensated geometry having zones with wall angle greater than maximum
formable angle.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 26
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 32: Flowchart illustrating the generation and use of strategy proposed by Behera et al. [60] to improve accuracy in SPIF -
generation stage

Figure 33: Flowchart illustrating the generation and use of strategy proposed by Behera et al. [60] to improve accuracy in SPIF -
usage stage

Twist is observed in incremental forming of components and its quantity is dependent on the type of configuration and
other process parameters involved. Twist in incrementally formed sheet metal components is first reported by Matsubara

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 27
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

[6] while forming cone as well as pyramid shapes using two point incremental forming (TPIF). Note that in TPIF, tool
moves from inside (starting from fixed/support tool) to outside. Due to this reason, already formed region of the part is
compelled to tilt/rotate about the fixed tool. Here, fixed tool acts like a pivot. Matsubara [6] reported twist as high as 30
degrees in TPIF when the tool path direction is kept same during each step. To reduce this twist, tool path direction is
reversed between consecutive contours. Alternative tool movement directions are used by many researchers to reduce
the twist in incremental forming [14]. Although, twist accumulation can be reduced by alternating the tool path direction
but it also results in the deterioration of surface quality at the location of contour transition. In addition, spiral tool path [14]
is better for product quality and to enhance formability. Very recently, Duflouet al. [61] andVanhove et al. [62] have
studied the twist in SPIF of pyramid and conical shapes using uni-directional tool path. Note that in SPIF, tool moves from
outside to inside and no fixed tool or any support is present as in TPIF. Twist quantified by them [61, 62] is in terms of
angle by drawing appropriate lines (radial lines in case of cone) prior to forming and measuring its deviation after forming.
They classified the twist in two categories namely conventional (that occurs at low wall angles) and reverse (close to
formability limits). They concluded that at lower wall angles, tangential force on the deforming sheet results in twist in the
tool path direction and is named as conventional twist. Asymmetric strain distribution along the meridional direction at
higher wall angles for pyramidal structures was observed and the twist started reducing and even reversal is reported.
They also concluded that the geometrical features like ribs/corners have significant influence on the twist. However, they
reported that the twist is independent of tool diameter, rotation speed of the tool and tool feed rate. They concluded that
the twist along tool movement direction increases with wall angle up to some value and then the trend reverses with
further increase in wall angle. Javed et al. [63] have carried out experimental and numerical analysis to study the effect of
process variables on twist in incremental forming and concluded that the twist increases with increase in incremental
depth and decrease in tool diameter and sheet thickness. Feed rate effect is insignificant. Numerical predictions are in
good qualitative agreement with experimental results.

Surface finish of the formed component is of equal importance as that of accuracy. Hagan and Jeswiet [64] carried out
experimental study by forming conical parts with contour tool paths to measure surface roughness in SPIF. Incremental
depths varying from 0.051 mm to 1.3 mm are used to form a conical component of 45 degrees wall angle using 12.7 mm
tool diameter with a feed rate of 25 mm/s. Peak to valley heights measured between 5 to 25 microns corresponds to
incremental depths between 0.051 and 1.3mm. In addition, spindle speeds varying from 0 to 2600 rpm were used and
concluded that, it does not have significant effect but a minimum surface roughness was observed around 1500 rpm.
Ham et al. [65] carried out experiments to study the effect of incremental depth and tool diameter on the surface
roughness of components formed using contour tool paths and observed that usage of smaller tools result in more
distinctive cusps. As the tool size increases, the increased contact area between the tool and work for the same
incremental depth results in greater overlap of the tool with the previously formed material hence the surface cusps
become indistinguishable with increase in tool diameter. Singh [66] and Bhattacharya et al. [44] have studied the
influence of wall angle (20, 40 and 60 degrees), tool diameter (4, 6 and 8mm) and incremental depth (0.2, 0.6 and 1 mm)
on surface finish by forming conical components with spiral tool path keeping sheet thickness, feed rate and other
parameters constant. Design of experiments was carried out using full factorial design and the best surface finish (in
terms of Ra) obtained by them in the range of parameters used is 0.3 microns. Empirical equation that relatessurface
roughness (Ra) to process variables is reproduced below
Ra = 8.41 - 0.069α - 2.14d + 9.13Δz + 0.0035αd + 0.0191αΔz - 0.417dΔz +
(4)
0.00005.7α2 + 0.153d2 - 4.66Δz2

They concluded that surface roughness decreases with increase in tool diameter for all incremental depths and it
happens due to the increase in overlap between the neighbouring tool paths with increase in tool diameter. In addition, up
to certain wall angle, surface roughness value initially increased with increase in incremental depth and then decreased.
With further increase in angle, surface roughness increased with increase in incremental depth. It was observed that the
un-deformed region between successive tool paths is more at lesser wall angles and higher incremental depth. Note that
the overlap increases with increase in wall angle whereas contact area of the tool reduces for a given incremental depth.
The average surface roughness (Ra) achieved by SPIF at different process parameters is summarised in Table 2.
Table 2: Average surface roughness at different process variables in SPIF

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 28
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

S. No. Material Wall angle (degrees) Tool diameter (mm) Incremental depth (mm) Surface roughness(Ra) (microns)

1 45 12.7 0.051 0.5 [64]

Al 3003
2 45 12.7 1.3 5.0 [64]
3 60 4 1.0 2.99 [66]
4 60 8 0.2 0.30 [66]
5 40 4 1.0 3.91 [66]
AA 5052-O
6 40 8 0.2 0.34 [66]
7 20 4 1.0 4.28 [66]
8 20 8 0.2 1.75 [66]

Double Sided Incremental Forming

Double Sided Incremental forming (DSIF) uses one tool each on either side of the sheet. As stated earlier, the deforming
and supporting roles of each tool will keep changing depending on the geometry. DSIF configuration enhances the
complexity of the components that can be formed and reduces many of the limitations associated with incremental
forming. Cao et al. [41] mounted two tools on a single rigid C-frame [figure 34] to demonstrate DSIF to form features on
both sides of initial plane of sheet. They introduced squeeze factor as ratio between tool gap and initial sheet thickness
and reported that decrease in squeeze factor improves the dimensional accuracy of the formed component (relative
error of 46.6 to 28.4%, for squeeze of 0 to 40% sheet thickness). Their group [67] further studied the effect of squeezing
on geometrical accuracy for conical component with fillet (65º wall angle, depth 36mm) using two independently moving
tools on either side of the sheet. Note that the squeeze factor definition here is the ratio between tool gap at any instant
and the expected thickness using sine law at that location. The contact condition of the bottom tool (support tool) is
improved with decrease in squeeze factor but the effect of squeeze factor on part accuracy is not consistent.

Figure 34: Double Sided Incremental Forming using a C-clamp to mount both the tools[41].

Malhotra et al. [68] have proposed another DSIF strategy(Accumulative DSIF) using in-to-out (IO) tool path strategy [51]
with displacement controlled forming and support tools. Using ADSIF, they formed cones of 40 0 and 500 angles and
reported maximum shape deviation of 1.15 mm. Forming time, using ADSIF, increases drastically to achieve the desired
depth and geometry of the component as it uses only in-to-out tool paths. Meier et al. [8] used two robots to control
different tools on either side of sheet and termed the process as duplex incremental forming (DPIF) [Figure 8]. They used

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 29
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

position control for the forming tool and combination of force and position control for the support tool to maintain
continuous contact. They used a vision based measurement technique to estimate deviations from ideal profile and
modified the tool path to reduce the deviation. They made use of FEA predictions also to modify the tool path and
reported significant improvement in the wall region. But, the improvement in accuracy in component opening region and
bottom regions is marginal (deviation in the range of 0.5mm to 1.0 mm). Due to the superimposed pressure from support
tool, 12.5 % increase in formability has been reported. Meier et al. [69] presented an integrated CAx ( CAD, CAM, CAE)
process chain (figure 35) for the robot assisted incremental forming process, called as Roboforming, to quickly realized
the path planning and simultaneously raise the geometrical accuracy using different compensation methods. Commercial
CAM-system with additional features has been developed for two synchronized tool paths according to different forming
strategies. A simulation model uses this tool path for animation of robot movements and to ensure the experimental
safety. Forming results are forecasted using the tool path in an established FEM-model, which are fed back to the
CAM-program. After the comparison with the target geometry, the geometrical deviations were used to adjust the tool
paths. They reported reduction of profile deviation from 1.08 to 0.2 mm but FEA consumes about 10 hours for simulation
thus the real time compensation is difficult to implement. Recently, DSIF machine has been designed and developed at
Indian Institute of Technology Kanpurand many studies are in progress [70-74]. Very recently, Northwestern University,
Evanston has also developed a DSIF machine.

Figure35: Block diagram showing the interaction of different modules to generate the tool path for roboforming [69].

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 30
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Tool path planning

In Incremental forming, tool path plays a significant role on the forming limits, component accuracy, surface quality,
thickness variation and forming time. Many attempts have been made to study various tool path strategies (contour,
spiral, radial and multiple passes – in-to-out and/or out-to-in) and their effect on forming limits, thickness distribution,
accuracy and surface quality in various variants of incremental forming (SPIF, TPIF, DSIF) and the same has been
presented in the earlier sections. Hence, certain aspects are not discussed in detail in this section. As presented earlier,
there are two types of tool path used for ISMF process namely contour and spiral (Figure 2(a), (b)). Most of those tool
paths have been generated using surface milling modules of commercial CAM packages developed for machining.
Deformation is biaxial at the starting and end points of each contour in contour tool path and is near to plane strain in
between; hence, the tendency for fracture at the start and end points of each contour is higher. Contour tool path leaves
stretch marks at the start points of each contour (figure 2(c)). To avoid equi-biaxial stretching and the tool marks at the
end points of each contour, Filice et al. [19] have suggested the use of a spiral toolpath (figure 2(b)). In SPIF, tool (either
contour or spiral) moves from out-to-in and represented as conventional strategy in figure 36(a). Bambach et al. [75]
have proposed a conical strategy in addition to conventional strategy. In conical strategy, tool movement starts at the
centre and opens up with increasing depth. They studied two in-plane tool movement strategies (contour figure 36(b) and
radial figure 36(c)) coupled with two z-movement strategies, conventional and conical strategies. Considering the time
required for producing the part and the uniformity of sheet thickness throughout the part, they concluded that the
conventional/contour strategy is better (2 min production time with comparable thickness distribution) as compared to
radial strategies (9 min for cone/radial and 40 min for conventional radial trajectory). Time required to form the component
reported by them can be easily understood with the schematic representations presented in figure36.

Figure 36: Different tool path strategies used by Bambach et al. [70] (a) conventional and conical strategies (b) contour tool path (c)
radial tool path (d) conventional-contour and (e) conical-contour strategies

Kopac and Kampus[76] studied the effect of various in-plane tool movement strategies for axi-symmetric components.
They examined four procedures in terms of tool movement, namely (A) from exterior to interior, (B) from interior to
exterior, (C) first in the centre then from exterior to interior and (D) first in the centre then from interior to exterior, and
reported that the maximum depth of forming can be achieved with case D i.e. first in the centre then from interior to
exterior. Ambrogio et al. [77] developed a tool path modification strategy by integrating an on-line measuring system and

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 31
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

tool path to be followed for forming the remaining portion of the component under consideration. For achieving the same,
they utilized the combination of online measuring techniques, numerical simulation (Deform3D) and optimization
techniques to modify the tool path. Their path-correcting methodology makes use of the measurement of the previous
reference point on a given section of the spiral and its comparison to the desired position at the final and current step.
Three dimensional spiral tool paths for forming asymmetric components [78] is generated by first generating contour tool
paths using the milling module available in Pro/ENGINEER and then interpolated between the individual contours to
produce a single 3D spiral. They used constant incremental depth for generating the contour tool path. Stereolithography
(STL) files are used to develop an iterative tool path generation methodology (contour tool path was generated using a
combination of forming, scanning, and reforming) [79]. It is well known that STL format has inherent chordal errors and
iterative nature increases time. Attanasio et al. [80, 81] have investigated two types of tool paths, one with a constant
incremental depth (Δz) and the other with a constant scallop height (h) (figure 37). It was reported that the surface quality
of the formed component improved by decreasing the values of incremental depth (Δz). A shortcoming of their approach
is that when the value of Δz is arbitrarily reduced to a very small value the forming time increases, especially when larger
components are to be formed. This kind of approach does give the designer the freedom to form a component quickly
with acceptable surface finish.

Figure 37:Schematic of tool path with (a) constant incremental depth (b) constant scallop height

Malhotra et al. [82, 83] developed and implemented a platform-independent methodology for generation of contour and
spiral tool paths for an arbitrary component formable by SPIF. The methodology takes neutral part format STEP
AP203/AP214 of CAD model as input. Adaptive slicing techniques used in layered manufacturing [84] and 3D spiral
toolpath generation methodology for surface milling of freeform shapes with constant scallop height [85] have been
modified and used for generating tool paths. Tool path methodology developed by them for single point incremental
forming addresses the trade-off that exists between geometric accuracy, surface finish, and forming time. Steps involved
in their tool path generation methodology are
1. Generation of contour tool path with a constant incremental depth.
2. Calculation of volumetric errors and scallop heights to form components with good accuracy and surface-finish.
3. Usage of adaptive slicing criterion to evaluate the need for new contour insertion
a. Repeat steps 2 to 4 for the inserted contour and the one above that when the new contour is inserted.
b. Otherwise move down to the next pair of contours and perform steps 3 and 4 till all the contours are finished.
4. Perform deletion of slices to get the final contours. Here, extra slices are deleted, which will not adversely affect the
accuracy by evaluating the volumetric error percentage between slice n and slice n+1.
5. Generation of final spiral path using the finalised contours.
6. Apply the tool radius compensation (figure 38) using local geometrical conditions and generate the tool path for
forming the components.
The adaptive slicing methodology along with volumetric error criterion enhances the conformity between the formed and
the desired components and the same can be seen from figure 39.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 32
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Figure 38:Schematic showing the importance of tool radius compensation (a) with and (b) without compensation

Figure 39: Comparison of ideal and measured profiles (a) with and (b) without tool radius compensation

Azaouri and Lebaal[86] proposed a tool path optimization strategy for SPIF for finding the shortest tool path (less forming
time) which distributes the material as evenly as possible throughout the part. As a consequence of volume conservation,
the part with the lowest reduction in sheet thickness would have a homogeneous distribution of thickness. FEA, in
combination with response surface method and sequential quadratic programming algorithm was used for determining the
optimal forming strategy. The authors reported a better thickness distribution (minimum thickness 0.91-0.96 mm with
optimization and 0.79 mm without optimization, for an initial sheet thickness of 1.5mm) and less forming forces. However,
in order to achieve the shortest path, the accuracy and surface finish of the component get [Link] [41,47 - 54,
87] have proposed tool paths for other variants of incremental forming and their details are presented in earlier sections
dealing with formability, thickness distribution and accuracy.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 33
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Summary
Incremental sheet metal forming is gaining importance in automobile [88], aerospace [14] and biomedical industries [89]
and even for processing recycling panels [90, 91] and producing dies/moulds quickly using complex sheet metal surfaces
produced by incremental forming at very less expense [92]. Accuracy of the component during incremental sheet metal
forming is affected by bending of sheet between the clamped boundary and component opening, continuous local spring
back that occurs as soon as tool moves away from a point, and global spring back that occurs after the tool retraction and
un-clamping of the component. Predicting spring back using numerical analysis and compensating for the same during
tool path generation is a time consuming process due to the nature of process. Development of DSIF enhanced the
product complexity to form parts with double-curvature on both sides of the initial sheet plane without any additional
setups with better accuracy than other incremental forming configurations.

References
[1] Groche P, Fritsche D, Tekkaya EA, Allwood JM, Hirt G, Neugebauer R (2007) Incremental Bulk Metal Forming. CIRP
Annals, 56(2): 635-656.
[2] Allwood JM, Utsunomiya H (2006) A survey of flexible forming processes in Japan. International Journal of Machine
Tools and Manufacture 46: 1939-1960.
[3] Wulf WA (2007) Changes in innovation ecology. SCIENCE 316:1253.
[4] Jeswiet J (2001) Incremental single point forming. Transactions of NAMRI/SME 29:75-79.
[5] Allwood JM, Houghton NE, Jackson KP (2005) The Design of an Incremental Sheet Forming Machine. Advanced
Materials Research 6-8:471-478.
[6] Matsubara S (2001) A computer numerically controlled dieless incremental forming of a sheet metal. Proceedings of
the Institution of Mechanical Engineers 215: 959-966.
[7] Yoon SJ, yang DY (2001) Investigation into a new incremental forming process using an adjustable punch set for the
manufacture of a doubly curved sheet metal. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers 215: 991-1004.
[8] Meier H, Magnus C, Smukala V (2011) Impact of superimposed pressure on dieless incremental sheet metal forming
with two moving tools. CIRP Annals 60: 327-330.
[9] International Patent WO 00/16926–PCT/US99/21890, 20 September1999, Ball Corporation (US).
[10] Jurisevic B, Heiniger KC, Kuzman K, Junkar M (2003) Incremental sheet metal forming with a high-speed water jet,
Proceedings of the IDDRG Congress,139–148.
[11] Emmens WC (2006) Water jet forming of steel beverage cans. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture 46:1243 – 1247.
[12] Leszak E (1967) Patent: Apparatus and process for incremental dieless forming. United States patent office. Patent
number: 3,342,051.
[13] Emmens WC, Sebastiani G, Googaard AH (2010) The technology of Incremental Sheet Forming - A brief review of
the history. Journal of Materials Processing Technology. 210: 981-997.
[14] Jeswiet J, Micari F, Hirt G, Bramley A, Duflou A, Allwood J (2005) Asymmetric single point incremental forming of
sheet metal. CIRP Annals 54(2): 623-649.
[15] Keeler SP, Backhofen WA (1964) Plastic instability and fracture in sheet stretched over rigid punches. Transactions
of ASM. 56:25-48.
[16] Iseki H, Kumon H (1994) Forming limit of incremental sheet metal stretch forming using spherical rollers. Journal of
JSTP 35:1336-41.
[17] Shim MS, Park JJ (2001) The formability of aluminium sheet in incremental forming. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology 113: 654-658.
[18] Kim YH, Park JJ (2002) Effect of process parameters on formability in incremental forming of sheet metal. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 130: 42-46.
[19] Filice L, Fratini L, Micari F (2002) Analysis of Material Formability in Incremental Forming. CIRP Annals51(1):
199–202.
[20] Fratini L, Ambrogio G, Di Lorenzo R, Filice L, Micari F (2004) Influence of mechanical properties of the sheet
material on formability in single point incremental forming. CIRP Annals 53(1): 207-210.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 34
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

[21] Ham M, Jeswiet J (2006) Single Point Incremental Forming and the Forming Criteria for AA3003. CIRP Annals
55:241-244.
[22] Ham M, Jeswiet J (2007) Forming Limit Curves in Single Point Incremental Forming. CIRP Annals 56:277-280.
[23] Allwood JM, Shouler DR, Tekkaya AE (2007) The increased forming limits of incremental sheet forming
processes. Key Engineering Materials 344:621-628.
[24] Ambrogio G, Filice L, Gagliardi F, Micari F (2005) Sheet Thinning Prediction in Single Point Incremental Forming.
Advanced Materials Research 6-8: 479 – 486.
[25] Ambrogio G, Filice L, Micari F (2006) A force measuring based strategy for failure prevention in incremental forming.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 177: 413–416.
[26] Chintan YD (2008) Single point incremental forming: force and thickness measurements. [Link] thesis, Indian
Institute of Technology-Kanpur.
[27] Szekeres A, Ham M, Jeswiet J (2007) Force Measurement in pyramid shaped parts with a spindle mounted force
sensor. Key Engineering Materials 344: 551-558.
[28] Jeswiet J, Duflou JR, Szekeres A (2005) Forces in Single Point and Two Point Incremental Forming. Advanced
Materials Research. 6-8: 449-456.
[29] Jeswiet J, Szekeres A (2005) Forces in Single Point Incremental Forming. Transaction of NAMRI/SME 30: 399-404.
[30] Duflou JR, Szekeres A, Vanherck P (2005) Force Measurements for Single Point Incremental Forming: An
Experimental Study. Advanced Materials Research. 6-8: 441-448.
[31]Duflou J, Kol YT, Szekeres A, VanherckP (2007) Experimental study on force measurements for single point
incremental forming. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 189: 65–72.
[32] Filice L, Ambrogio G, Micari F (2006) On-Line Control of Single Point Incremental Forming Operations through Punch
Force Monitoring. CIRP Annals 55: 245-248.
[33] Ambrogio G, Duflou J, Filice L, Aerens R (2007) Some considerations on force trends in Incremental Forming of
different materials. Proceedings of 10th ESAFORM Conference on Material Forming 907: 193-197.
[34] Duflou JR, Callebaut B, Verbert J, De Baerdemaeker H (2007) Laser Assisted Incremental Forming: Formability and
Accuracy Improvement. CIRP Annals 56: 273-276.
[35] Duflou JR, Callebaut B, Verbert J, De Baerdemaeker H (2008) Improved SPIF performance through dynamic local
heating. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacturing. 48: 543-549.
[36] Aerens R, Eyckens P, Bael AV, Duflou JR (2009) Force prediction for single point incremental forming deduced from
experimental and FEM observations. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 46:969-982.
[37] Henrard C, Bouffioux C, Eyckens P, Sol H, Duflou JR, Van Houtte P, Van Bael A, Duchene L, Habraken A (2011)
Forming forces in single point incremental forming: prediction by finite element simulations, validation and sensitivity.
Computational Mechanics 47: 573-590.
[38] Hussain G, Gao L (2007) A novel method to test the thinning limits of sheet- metals in Negative Incremental Forming.
International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture 47: 419-435.
[39] Hussain G, Gao L, Dar NU (2007) An experimental study on some formability evaluation methods in negative
incremental forming. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 186: 45-53.
[40] Hamilton K, Jeswiet J (2010) Single point incremental forming at high feed rates and rotational speeds: Surface and
structural consequences. CIRP Annals 59: 311-314.
[41] Cao J, Huang Y, Reddy NV, Malhotra R, Wang Y (2008) Incremental Sheet Metal Forming: Advances and
Challenges. Proceedings of International Conference on Technology of Plasticity Gyeongju, Korea 1967-1982.
[42] Oyane M (1980) Criteria for ductile fracture and their applications. Journal of Mechanical Working Technology
4:65-81.
[43] Malhotra R, Xue L, Belytschko T, Cao J (2012) Mechanics of fracture in single point incremental forming.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology 212: 1573–1590.
[44] Bhattacharya A, Reddy NV, Maneesh K, Cao J (2011) Formability and surface finish studies in single point
incremental forming. ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 133: 0610201-8
[45] Park JJ, Kim YH (2003) Fundamental studies on the incremental sheet metal forming technique. Journal of Materials
Processing Technology 140: 447-453.
[46] Jackson K, Allwood J (2009) The mechanics of incremental sheet forming. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology 209: 1158-1174.
[47] Hirt G, Ames J, Bambach M, Kopp R (2004) Forming strategies and Process Modelling for CNC Incremental Sheet

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 35
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Forming. CIRP Annals 53(1): 203–206.

[48] Skjoedt M, Bay N, Endelt B, Ingarao G (2008) Multi stage strategies for single point incremental forming of a cup.
International Journal of Material Forming 1: 1199-1202.
[49] Duflou JR, Verbert J, Belkassem B, Gu J, Sol H, Henrard C, Habraken AM (2008) Process window enhancement for
single point incremental forming through multi-step toolpaths. CIRP Annals 57:253–256.
[50] Abhishek Kumar (2009) Multi-stage tool path strategies for single point incremental [Link] thesis, Indian
Institute of Technology Kanpur.
[51] Malhotra R, Bhattacharya A, Kumar A, Reddy NV, Cao J (2011) A new methodology for multi-pass single point
incremental forming with mixed tool paths. CIRP Annals 60:323–326.
[52] Xu D, Malhotra R, Reddy NV, Chen J, Cao J (2012) Analytical prediction of stepped feature generation in multi-pass
single point incremental forming. Journal of Manufacturing Processes 14:487–494.
[53] Kim TJ, Yang DY (2000) Improvement of formability for the incremental sheet metal forming process. International
Journal of Mechanical Sciences 42(7): 1271-1286.
[54] Young D, Jeswiet J (2004) Wall thickness variations in single-point incremental forming. Journal of Engineering
Manufacture 218: 1453–1459.
[55] Hussain G, Dar NU, Gao L, Chen MH (2007) A comparative study on the forming limits of an aluminum sheet-metal
in negative incremental forming, Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 187, 94–98.
[56] Ambrogio G, Costantino I, Napoli LD, Filice L, Muzzupappa, M. (2004) Influence of some relevant process
parameters on the dimensional accuracy in incremental forming: a numerical and experimental investigation. Journal of
Material Processing Technology 153-154: 501-507.
[57] Ambrogio G, Cozza V, Filice L, Micari F. (2007) An analytical model for improving precision in single point
incremental forming. Journal of Materials Processing Technology 191:92-95.
[58] Tanaka S, Nakamura T, Hayakawa K, Motomura K (2007) Residual stress in sheet metal parts made by
incremental forming process. Proceeding of the 9th NUMIFORM: 775-780.
[59] Allwood JM, Music O, Raithathna A, Duncan SR (2009) Closed-loop feedback control of product properties in
flexible metal forming processes with mobile tools. CIRP Annals 58(1):287–290.
[60] Behera AK, Verbert J, Lauwers B, Duflou JR (2013) Tool path compensation strategies for single point incremental
sheet forming using multivariate adaptive regression splines. Computer-Aided Design 45: 575–590.
[61] Duflou JR, Vanhove H, Verbert J, Gu J, Vasilakos I, Eyckens P (2010) Twist revisited: Twist phenomena in single
point incremental forming. CIRP Annals 59: 307-310.
[62] Vanhove H, Verbert J, Gu J, Vasilakos I, Duflou RJ (2010) An experimental study of twist phenomena in single point
incremental forming. International Journal of Material Forming 3:975-978.
[63] Javed A, Shibin E, Bhattacharya A, Reddy NV (2012) Twist in single point incremental forming. Proceedings of the
International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference. University of Norte Dame, USA.
[64] Hagan E, Jeswiet J (2004) Analysis of surface roughness for parts formed by computer numerical controlled
incremental forming. Journal of Engineering Manufacture 218:1307-1312.
[65] Ham M, Powers B, Brown CA, Jeswiet J, Hamilton K (2009) Roughness Evaluation of Single Point Incrementally
Formed Surfaces Transactions of North American Manufacturing Research Institute of Society of Manufacturing
Engineering 37: 222-230.
[66] Singh S (2009) Single Point Incremental Forming: Formability and Surface Finish Studies. [Link]. Thesis, Indian
Institute of Technology Kanpur.
[67] Malhotra R, Cao J, Ren F, Kiridena V, Xia ZC, Reddy NV (2011) Improvement of Geometric Accuracy in Incremental
Forming by Using a Squeezing Tool path Strategy With Two Forming Tools. ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and
Engineering 133: 061019 1-10.
[68] Malhotra R, Cao J, Beltran M, Xu D, Magargee J., Kiridena V, Xia ZC (2012) Accumulative - DSIF strategy for
enhancing process capabilities in incremental forming. CIRP Annals 61:251-254.
[69] Meier H, Zhu J, Buff B, Laurischkat R (2012) CAx Process Chain for Two Robots Based Incremental Sheet Metal
Forming. CIRP Annals 3:37 – 42.
[70] Srivastsava A, (2010) Electric Pulse Aided Single Point Incremental Forming. [Link] thesis, Indian Institute of
Technology-Kanpur.
[71] Koganti M, (2011) Geometrical accuracy and complexity using Double Sided Incremental Forming. [Link] thesis,
Indian Institute of Technology-Kanpur.

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 36
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

[72] Asghar J, (2012) Tool Path Compensations for Enhancing Accuracy in Incremental Sheet Metal Forming. [Link]
thesis, Indian Institute of Technology-Kanpur.
[73]Shibin E, (2012) Finite element analysis of Incremental Sheet Metal Forming. [Link] thesis, Indian Institute of
Technology-Kanpur.
[74]Lingam R, (2012) An interactive tool for feature sequencing in incremental sheet metal forming. [Link] thesis, Indian
Institute of Technology-Kanpur.
[75]Bambach M, Ames J, Azaouzi M, Campagne L, Hirt G, Batoz JL (2005) Initial experimental and numerical
investigations into a class of new strategies for single point incremental sheet forming (SPIF). Proceeding of 8th
ESAFORM Conference on Material Forming: 671 - 674.
[76] Kopac J, Kampus Z (2005) Incremental sheet metal forming on CNC milling machine-tool. Journal of Material
Processing Technology 162-163: 622-628.
[77] Ambrogio G, Filice L, De Napoli L, Muzzupappa M. (2005) A simple approach for reducing profile diverting in a single
point incremental forming process. Journal of Engineering Manufacture 219(11): 823-830.
[78] Skjoedt M, Hancock MH, Bay N (2007) Creating helical tool paths for single point incremental forming. Key
Engineering Materials 344: 583-590.
[79] Verbert J, Duflou JR, Lauwers B (2007) Feature based approach for increasing the accuracy of the SPIF process.
Key Engineering Materials 344: 527-534.
[80] Attanasio A, Ceretti E, Giardini C (2006) Optimization of tool path in two points incremental forming. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology 177: 409–412
[81] Attanasio A, Ceretti E, Giardini C,Mazzoni L (2008) Asymmetric two points incremental forming: Improving
surface quality and geometric accuracy by tool path optimization. Journal of Materials Processing Technology
197(1-3): 59-67.
[82] Malhotra R (2008) Automatic Tool Path Generation for Single Point Incremental [Link] thesis, Indian
Institute of Technology-Kanpur.
[83] Malhotra R, Reddy NV, Cao J (2010) Automatic 3D spiral tool path generation for single point incremental forming,
ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 132(6), 0610031-10.
[84] Pandey PM, Reddy NV, Dhande SG (2003) Slicing procedures in layeredmanufacturing. Rapid Prototyping Journal
9(5): 274-288.
[85] Lee E (2003) Contour offset approach to spiral toolpath generation with constant scallop height. Computer Aided
design, 35:511-518
[86] Azaouri, Lebbal N (2012) Tool path optimization for single point incremental sheet forming using response surface
method. Simulation modeling practice and theory 24: 49-58.
[87] Skjoedt M, Silva MB, Martins PAF, Bay N (2010) Strategies and limits in multi-stage single-point incremental forming.
The Journal of Strain Analysis for Engineering Design 45: 33-44.
[88] Governale A, Franco AL, Panzeca A, Frantini L, Micari F (2007) Incremental forming process for the accomplishment
of automotive details. Key Engineering Materials 344: 559-566.
[89] Ambrogio G, De Napoli L, Filice L, Gagliardi F, Muzzupappa M (2005) Application of incremental forming process
for high customized medical product manufacturing. Journal of Material Processing Technology 162-163: 156-162.
[90] Jackson KP, Allwood JM, Landert M (2007) Incremental forming of sandwich panels. KeyEngineering Materials 344:
591-598.
[91] Takano H, Kitazawa K, Goto T (2008)Incremental forming of no uniform sheet metal: Possibilityof cold recycling
process of sheet metal waste. International Journal of Machine Tool Manufacturing 48: 477-482.
[92] Allwood JM, BramleyAN, Ridgman TW, Mileham AR (2006) A novel method for the rapid production of inexpensive
dies and moulds with surfaces made by incremental sheet [Link] of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers Part B- Journal of Engineering Manufacture 220: 323-327.

Keywords
Incremental sheet metal forming (ISMF), Single point incremental forming (SPIF), Two point incremental forming (TPIF),
Double sided incremental forming (DSIF), Roboforming, Formability in IF, Surface finish in IF, Accuracy in IF, Contour tool
path, Spiral tool path, Multi stage forming, Sine law for IF, Spring back in IF, Pillow effect, Twist, Groove test for IF, Plain
strain stretching, Biaxial stretching, Through thickness shear, Compensations

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 37
N Venkata Reddy, Rakesh Lingam and Jian Cao
Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing SpringerReference

Incremental Metal Forming processes in manufacturing

N Venkata
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of technology, Kanpur, India
Reddy
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur,
Rakesh Lingam
India
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston,
Jian Cao
USA

DOI: 10.1007/SpringerReference_331458
URL: [Link]
Part of: Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology

Editor: Professor Andrew Yeh-Ching Nee

PDF created on: June, 13, 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

[Link] 13 Jun 2013 09:12

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013 38