Microstructure and part integrity

investigation on single point incremental

forming of AA5052 H32, C110, SS304, Ti
grade 3
Abstract
Incremental forming is a flexible and adaptable process with high scope in the future for the
prototyping sector and batch shop production. It finds application in almost every
engineering field. One such prominent field is the research and development of sheet metal
forming processes. Single Point Incremental Forming (SPIF) has great potential as it can be
easily implemented and the forming process does not require the use of dies. The
characteristics of incremental sheet metal forming reduce setup cost and unit cost by a great
margin, but it is suited only for batch or job production. In spite of the process capabilities,
the process is still in the research stage because of its limitations in part accuracy and
product quality. The main aim of this study is to determine the combination of the process
parameters that predominantly influences its part quality. The purpose of this research is to
investigate the effects of process parameters like feed rate (f), incremental depth (d), and
tool rotational speed on the forming characteristics of materials such as Aluminium alloy
5052 H32, Copper 110, Stainless Steel 304, Titanium grade 3, and Response surface
methodology is used to obtain the optimal process parameter and its output response is
chosen to study their maximum height, surface roughness, forming force, final thickness,
temperature, and tensile strength. To examine the best parameters, confirmation experiments
were carried out. Finally, a microstructure and fractography study is performed for the
optimised process parameter with the deformed region and undeformed of the materials
being discussed and studied. The selected materials are predominantly used in the areas of
the automobile industry, aerospace industry, marine industry, and medical industry.

Key words: Single point incremental forming, Optimization, Formability, Response surface
methodology, Microstructure, Fractography.

Introduction
The sheet metal industry has seen more technological advances than any other since
the last century. From hand-forming processes to finite element-based simulation, the
transformation is very significant. They have prominent industrial applications, especially in
the automotive and aerospace industry. Sheet metal is simply metal formed into thin and flat
pieces. It is one of the fundamental forms used in metalworking and can be cut and bent into
a variety of different shapes. Thicknesses can vary significantly, although extremely thin
thicknesses are considered foil or leaf, and pieces thicker than 6 mm (0.25 in) are considered
plate. Forming can be defined as the process in which the desired size and shape of the
object are obtained through the plastic deformation of material. The stresses induced during
the process are greater than the yield strength but should be less than the fracture strength.
Different types of loading may be used depending on the process, like tensile, compressive,
shear, and bending [1]. The raw material for sheet metal manufacturing processes is the
output of the rolling process. Typically, sheets of metal are sold as flat, rectangular sheets of
a standard size. If the sheets are thin and very long, they may be in the form of rolls. As a
result, the first step in any sheet metal process is to cut the appropriate shape and size ‘blank'
from larger sheet. Sheet metal processes can be broken down into two major classifications
[2].

Over view of the incremental forming process

Incremental sheet forming is a newly developed technique for the manufacturing of
sheet metal components that is suitable for producing prototypes and small batch production
in a number of fields, including the automotive industry, the aerospace industry, medical
implants, and biomedical components. Incremental forming is a die-less sheet metal forming
process which can be performed easily with a Numerical Control (NC) machine and a part
program. The induced local deformations on sheet metal and their cumulative effect result in
the desired final geometry [3].
The incremental forming process offers better formability limits when compared to
the traditional sheet metal forming process. The incremental forming process involves tool
path generation using the CAD geometry of the required part and using a CNC machine or
robotic arm to form the final component. A fixture is used to clamp the sheet rigidly and the
tool moves as per the programme command over the sheet to obtain the final part. The
material is subjected to localised deformation to get the part with the desired shape. Without
any need for specialised dies and presses, this process can be used to form a wide range of
shapes with small and light-weight machines. In the incremental forming process, each
process parameter like tool size dimension, incremental depth, tool rotational speed, feed
rate, forming angle, sheet thickness, and lubricant has its own effects on the process in
different ways, such as accuracy of the part, maximum forming angle, formability, and
thickness distribution [4]. There are two types of incremental forming processes. 1) Single-
point incremental forming; 2) Two-point incremental forming
The Single point incremental forming (SPIF) process uses only one tool on one side
of the seat, and the sheet metal does not have any backing support. The process's basic
components are a sheet metal blank, a blank holder, a backing plate, and a rotating single
point forming tool. The blank holder is utilised for clamping and holding the sheet in
position during SPIF. The backing plate which supports the sheet at the bottom, and its
opening defines the working area of the forming tool [5]. The tool is utilised to
progressively shape the sheet into a component and its pan is generated by a CNC
machining centre. During the forming process, there is no backup die supporting the back
surface of the sheet. A schematic of single point forming is shown in Fig.1
 Fig.1 Schematic of single point incremental forming
Process flow in the Incremental forming process
Incremental forming is an emerging technology used for deforming sheet metals that
involves providing a small increment in the deforming tool feeding without the use of a die.
In the traditional forming process, the need for a specialised tool is required for the
fabrication of the final component. This leads to an increase in the fabrication cost for a
complicated 3D design. But in the incremental forming process, only the four essential
components are sheet metal, blank holder, deforming tool, and a CNC machine needed to
complete the process. In the incremental forming process, the incremental step-down size
affects the surface quality and machine time [6]. The shaving tool feed rate is the rate at
which it goes around the milling bed. The angle between the undeformed sheet metal and
the deformed sheet metal is referred to as the forming angle, and it’s also used to determine
the formability of the material. A maximum angle is defined as the maximum angle created
in the shape of the sheet metal without any failure.
Information flow of Incremental forming process
The first step in incremental forming is to build CAD modelling in Creo software,
which is then loaded into Master Cam as a stet file or .STL file. When the CAD data is
entered into Master Cam, it is checked for alignment; if there are any irregularities, the
dimensions and view from front view to top view can be changed. The selection of the
machine (such as 4-axis or 3-axis), the blank, the machining area for the workpiece, the tool
path (such as contour, parallel), and also the surface finish (such as ramp, broken), and the
process parameters all play a significant part in this process.
Finally, using Master Cam software, all of the information is saved as an NC file, which is
then transferred to the CNC machine, where tool offset is configured (such as workpiece
clamping and modifications based on workpiece size), and the fabrication cycle begins. A
process flow is shown in the Fig 2.
 Cad modelling

Fig 2. Pictorial representation of data flow in incremental forming process

Need for research in Incremental forming process
In recent times, the forming of complex and highly accurate parts requires a tailored
die, so the production of this kind of tool often takes more or consumes more time, making the
manufacturing of a die an important bottleneck. To overcome this time-lag with high
production costs, the incremental forming process is proposed and it is becoming an emerging
technology that can replace the existing conventional sheet forming methods to produce small
batch components. Materials like AA5052 H32, C110, SS304, Ti grade 3, that are obtained in
this study are widely used in the automobile industry, aerospace industry, marine industry, and
medical industry. In order to improve the part quality, proper selection of process parameters is
required. In this study, the main aim is to determine the interactions between the categorical
factor and the process parameter that predominantly enhance the part quality by using a single
point incremental forming process.

Need for systematic Literature review

It is more important to obtain the interactions that influence part quality and
formability of sheet materials, effects of process parameters, and the corresponding output
in order to fabricate the real-time product in industrial aspects and day-to-day commercial
utilities using the incremental forming process. Several researchers have made significant
efforts to improve the process of incremental sheet forming. To make the process robust and
to improve the part quality and formability of the process, various parameters such as
spindle speed, feed rate, incremental depth, form tool, tool path, and lubrication have been
analysed in the previous research work. The evolution of the incremental sheet forming
process over the years has been discussed below.

Yoganjaneyulu et al. [7] were investigated on the fracture behaviour of titanium grade 2
sheets by using the Single Point Incremental Forming (SPIF) process. It was found that the
maximum fracture strains were observed for the highest 12mm to0l diameter. The fracture
behaviour of speed 600 rpm spindle speed. The Forming Limit Diagram (FLD) shows that
the speed and vertical step depth increases the major true strain value also increases,
conversely both values are decreases. Finally, it is observed that, the rational shear stress
plays a major role is void coalescence of the titanium grade 2 sheet material. The Energy
Dispersive X-ray Spectroscopy (EDS) analysis was investigated to confirm the elemental
composition of titanium grade 2 sheets.
WenjunKuang et al. [8] were experimentally analysed the micro structural characteristics of
the oxide scale formed on 304 stainless steels in oxygenated high temperature water. They
observed that the oxide scale formed on type 304 Exposed to 290oC water containing 3 ppm
O2. The oxide scales consist of faceted and loosely packed spinel (Ni, Cr, Fe)304 particles,
irregularly shaped and close packed hematite (Fe, Cr)203 particles and a compact layer of
Nano-sized spine oxides. The study observed that the outmost Cr-depleted spinel particles in
the oxide scale were formed by precipitation while the small hematite particles and the
medium-sized spinel particles embedded among the hematite particles. As a result, both an
orderly crystallized Cr-rich inner area and a disorderly crystallized Cr-depleted outer area.
The related oxidation mechanism was also discussed.
Zhaobing Liu et al. [9] a comprehensive study was conducted to investigate the deformation
behaviours of roll-bonded Cu-Al composite sheets in SPIF through predictive modelling,
including analytical, empirical as well as numerical approaches, and extensive experimental
work. It was further revealed that deformation mode of layer-up sheet tends to a
compression state and that of layer-down sheet tends to a stretching state. The result
presented in the paper was the formability in the Al/Cu layer arrangement in GR and TCG
tests is obviously higher than that in the Cu/Al layer arrangement regardless of influences of
process parameters, such as step-down sizes, feed rates and tool diameters. There is little
difference on the surface roughness RZ of tool-sheet contact surface between two kinds of
layer arrangements in TP tests. The thickness of residual Cu layer in the Al/Cu layer
arrangement is larger than that in the Cu/Al layer arrangement in terms of different formable
angles in TP tests.
Sirichai Torsakul and Natha Kuptasthien [10] has examined the effects of three parameter
groups on the forming force of single point incremental forming (SPIF) process. The
parameters taken for the study include the types of material (sheet aluminium, brass and
copper), the forming angles (30°, 40° and 50°), and the tool revolution speeds (200, 400 and
600 rpm). Although this experiment the forming forces were measured and analysed to
determine an optimal parameter combination, with regard to the material type, forming
angle and revolution speed, for the SPIF process. The results were indicated that all
parameters’ groups are exerted with varying the influences over the forming forces of the
process and also the brass sheet exhibited the highest force value and the smaller forming
angle contributed to the greater forming force. Also, the higher tool revolution speed shows
in the lower forming force.
Vijayakumar et al. [11] was conducted an experimental investigation on single point
incremental forming of IS513Cr3 using response surface method when subjected to
incremental forming characterized with various process parameter like step angle, tool
material, feed and spindle speed. ANOVA was performed to study the effect of step depth
and tool diameter on the surface roughness and formability of the sheet metal. Finally,
optimal comparisons have been made to understand the effectiveness of the process. The
result shows that the optimal solution is obtained to have desired formability while using the
High-speed steel tool and the optimum value of wall angle, speed and feed rate are found as
62.67, 258.8 mm/min and 942 rpm respectively.
Hui Wang et al. [12] was experimentally study on the incremental forming limit of the
aluminium alloy AA2024 sheet to investigates the mechanical properties and characteristics
of the sheet with different heat treatment conditions. The effect of different process
parameters on the incremental forming limit are studied through tensile and warm
incremental forming experiments. The results shows that the elevated temperature can
reduce the tensile strength by 26.14% and increase its uniform elongation by 28.29%, and
the temperature increases with the increasing with forming limit by 21.98% while in the
room temperature it shows the still lower than forming angle limit by 18.38%.
Maheshwar et al. [13] were investigated the effect of process parameters on forming forces
in Single Point Incremental Forming. The objective of the study was to ascertain the nature
of Cutting forces expected during tie Single Point incremental Forming process. To study
the effect of different process parameters on these forming forces. Detailed experiments
were conducted based on Taguchi Robust design approach. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
was used to identify the most significant and control factors and their interactions. Finally,
the study proposed guidelines for forming thick sheets and improving production rate of
SPIF process.
Wifak et al. [14] were investigated the Influence of some Parameters in SPIF Process on the
Forming Forces and Thickness Distributions of a Bimetallic Sheet CP-Titanium/Low-carbon
Steel Compared to an individual Layer. The authors have tried to check the feasibility of the
SPIF process by establishing a comparative study between the composite bilayer sheet
behavior low-carbon steel/commercially pure titanium (St/CP-Ti) in forming process and
the forming behavior of a single layer sheet made of CF-Titanium. A numerical analysis is
conducted in order to predict the forming forces and the homogeneity of the thickness
variations of bilayer material compared to the single layer sheet. Finally, this study reveals
the importance of the bilayer sheet as a low-cost material. In addition, it elucidates the
flexibility of SPiF process to deform composite sheet.
He Min et al. [15] investigated on Forming Limit Stress Diagram Prediction of Aluminum
Alloy 5052 Based on GTN Model Parameters Determined by In Situ Tensile Test. A
forming limit stress-based diagram (FLSD) has been adopted to predict the fracture limit of
aluminum alloy (AA) 5052-01 sheet. Nakazima test is simulated by plastic constitutive
formula derived from the modified Gurson-Tvergaard-Needleman (GTN) model. The
damage evolution is observed and recorded, and the parameters of GTN model are identified
through counting void fraction at three damage stages of AA5052-01. According to the
experimental results, the original void volume fraction, the volume fraction of potential
nucleated voids, the critical void volume fraction, the void volume fraction at the final
failure of material is assigned as 0.002 918, 0.024 9, 0.030 103, 0.048 54, respectively.
Chunfeng Li et al. [16] researched on formability of 5052 aluminum alloy sheet in a quasi-
static-dynamic tensile process. The formability of 5052 aluminum alloy sheets in a quasi-
static-dynamic tensile process was experimentally investigated using a combined quasi-
static tension and the pulsed electromagnetic forming (EMF) method in order to establish
the efficacy of electromagnetically assisted sheet metal stamping (EMAS). The formability
of aluminum alloy sheet subjected to a quasi-static-dynamic tensile process is considerably
boosted over that of quasi-static tensile testing, and is slightly greater than or at least
comparable to that of the totally dynamic EMF method.
Tao Yang et al. [17] investigated on The Influence of Process Parameters on Vertical
Surface Roughness of the AlSi10Mg Parts Fabricated by Selective Laser Melting. The goal
of this research is to see how linear energy density affects the surface roughness of vertical
planes. The morphologies and surface roughness of both deposited tracks and volumetric
specimens were determined. When an appropriate linear energy density was deposited, the
surface roughness of the vertical planes was decreased to 4 m from 15 m, resulting in a
surface roughness reduction of more than 70%. The surface roughness was influenced by
the surface morphologies and the height change rate of the deposited tracks.
Daniel Nasulea and Gheorghe Oancea [18] influencing the achieving accuracy
Improvements for Single-Point Incremental Forming Process Using a Circumferential
Hammering Tool. The research is focused on an experimental study of frustum-of-cone
shapes manufactured from sheet metal blanks of DC05 deep drawing steel of 1 mm
thickness. A typical customary technological setup is used for the single point incremental
forming process, without any additional elements, and two forming tools, a hemispherical
and a special one, which use the circumferential hammering effect. Using a full factorial
plan of experiments the results of 32 test runs were processed. All parts were machined
adequately, free of any material fracturing. Based on the achieved machining accuracy of
the part walls, precision mathematical models were developed for the prediction of part
dimensional accuracy in those areas.
Marcin Szpunar et al. [19] conducted a Central Composite Design Optimisation in Single
Point Incremental Forming of Truncated Cones from Commercially Pure Titanium Grade 2
Sheet Metals. Grade 2 pure titanium sheets with a thickness of 0.4 mm were used as the test
material for the single point incremental forming process. The central composite design and
response surface method was used to determine the number of experiments required to study
the responses through building a second-order quadratic model. The input parameters were
spindle speed, tool feed rate, and step size. Results was found that feed rate has an
insignificant role in both axial and in-plane forming forces, but step size is a major factor
affecting axial and radial forming forces.
Fawad Maqbool and Markus Bambach [20] were investigated on Dominant Deformation
Mechanisms in Single Point Incremental Forming (SPIF) and their Effect on Geometrical
Accuracy. In this study moves a step forward and quantifies the respective contribution of
each forming mechanism, i.e., membrane stretching, bending, through-thickness shear,
involved in the SPIF process and the dependence between geometrical accuracy and the
dominant deformation mechanism. Using an analytical approach, plastic energy dissipated
during SPIF is split as a contribution of energies dissipated in membrane stretching,
through-thickness shear and bending deformation modes. The results indicate that at any
location on the geometry of a part formed with SPIF, the deformation is always a
combination of these three modes. formation mode over the other two depends on the
process variables, for example, the bending mode of deformation dominates at larger tool
diameters and shear dominates at increasing sheet thickness.
Yoganjaneyulu et al. [21] were investigated on strain distribution, stress-based fracture limit
and corrosion behaviour of titanium Grade 2 sheets during single point incremental forming
process with various computerized numerical control (CNC) spindle rotational speeds and
step depths. A potentiodynamic polarization (PDP) study was performed to investigate the
corrosion behaviour of titanium Grade 2 deformed samples, with various spindle rotational
speeds in 3.5 (%) NaCl solution. The scanning electron microscope (SEM) and transmission
electron microscope (TEM) analysis was carried out to study the fracture behaviour,
dislocation densities and corrosion morphology of deformed samples. Results shows that,
poor corrosion rate was observed for the as-received condition, and better corrosion rate was
achieved at maximum speed of 600 rpm and 0.6 mm of VSD in the deformed sheet. This
indicates that corrosion rate improved with increase in the plastic deformation. The EDS
analysis report of corroded surface revealed the composition to be mainly of titanium and
oxides.
Ghulam et al. [22] conducted a experimentation on Mechanical properties and
microstructure evolution in incremental forming of AA5754 and AA6061 aluminum alloys.
This study performs single point incremental forming (SPIF) on two aluminum alloys (i.e.,
AA5754 and AA6061), and analyses their post forming mechanical properties and
microstructure evolution. The forming parameters namely wall angle (35°−55°), feed rate
(1−4 m/min), spindle rotational speed (50−1000 r/min), and lubricant (grease and hydraulic
oil) are varied to probe detailed processing effects. The pre- and post-SPIF mechanical
properties and microstructures are characterized by conducting tensile tests and optical
microscopy, respectively. Result shows that the ultimate tensile strength of the formed parts
is increased by 10% for AA5754 and by 8% for AA6061. And, the ductility of AA5754 is
decreased from 22.9% to 12% and that of AA6061 is decreased from 16% to 10.7%. And
also, indicate that SPIF processing modifies the microstructure of Al alloys in a way to
enhance the strength at the cost of ductility.
Parnika Shrivastava and Puneet Tandon [23] were analysed on Microstructure and texture-
based analysis of forming behavior and deformation mechanism of AA1050 sheet during
Single Point Incremental Forming with sheet deformation characteristics, forming behavior,
and dominant deformation mechanism of SPIF process. Process deformation characteristics
such as dimensional accuracy, thickness distribution, true surface strain, von Mises stress
and equivalent plastic strain, evolved at different forming stages, were evaluated through
experimental investigation and Finite element analysis pf the formed parts. The evolved
microstructural features for different stages and modes of strains have been analysed by
Electron Back Scatter Diffraction (EBSD) and X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) techniques. Result
shows that Particle Stimulated Nucleation (PSN) has taken place due to excessive strains
occurring in the sheet material during SPIF, causing grain refinement and shear band
formation, and simulating kind of recovery or recrystallization process. Enhanced
formability in SPIF can be attributed to the depletion of Cube texture, and development of P
texture and Brass texture component with the progression of SPIF.
Shanmuganatan and Senthil Kumar [24] were conducted an experimental investigation on
Modelling of Incremental forming process parameters of Al 3003 (O) by response surface
methodology. Input parameters chosen is e tool diameter, step depth, feed rate and spindle
speed and the process performances like average thickness, wall angle and surface
roughness were evaluated. results of analysis of variance indicated that the proposed
mathematical models obtained can effectively describe the performances within the limits of
factors being studied. The experimental values were in good agreement with the predicted
values.
Mohammad Honarpisheh et al. [25] were performed an experimental study on incremental
forming process of al/cu bimetals: influence of process parameters on the forming force,
dimensional accuracy and thickness variations. A finite element method was carried out on
the single point incremental forming process of explosive-welded Al/Cu bimetal. The effect
of process parameters, such as the tool diameter, vertical pitch, sheet thickness, pyramid
angle, and process strategies, were investigated on the forming forces, dimensional
accuracy, and thickness distribution of a truncated pyramid with FEM approaches. The
results indicated that by increasing the tool radius and vertical pitch size, the forming force
increases and the wall thickness decreases. The finite element prediction for forming force,
thickness distribution, and process strategies shown good agreement with experiments.

From the reviews in the literature, it has been proposed that the single point incremental
forming has large number of process parameters that will influence the component quality
and material properties of the sheet metal. The effect of selecting the process parameters
shows that the smaller forming angle affects the higher forming force, increase in tool speed
with decrease forming force, elevated temperature that reduce the tensile strength and
increases the uniform elongation of the material, increase in feed rate and spindle speed
results in increased ultimate tensile strength and decreased ductility of the material. Most
importantly the component quality and mechanical properties of formed components
depends upon the appropriate selection of the process parameters. Thus, the information
from the literature review provides the basic knowledge about the process and understanding
the process, effects of process parameters, and its influence on the output is more important
while studying the formability of the incremental forming process.

Most of the researchers have investigated and optimized the process parameters for
incremental sheet forming. Based on previous studies and research gaps, it was found that
the need to determine the process parameters that predominantly influence the part quality
and formability of AA5052 H32, C110, SS304, and Ti grade 3 sheet materials was evident.
The selected materials are most commonly used in industrial aspects, but there is still a lag
in the investigation of improving the part integrity. Response surface methodology is used to
determine the best optimal process parameter with the interaction of feed rate and step
depth. The selected process parameters are surface roughness, maximum height, final
thickness, forming force, temperature, and tensile strength of the workpiece. Optimization
was carried out to find the optimal process parameters. The microstructure and fractography
analysis were carried out in order to ensure the part integrity was studied.

2. Experimentation methods and materials

Design of experiments (DOE) is defined as a branch of applied statistics that deals with
planning, conducting, analysing, and interpreting controlled tests to evaluate the factors that
control the value of a parameter or group of parameters []. The design was conducted for the
3 levels of factors are feed rate (f), incremental depth, tool rotation speed. Conduction of
experiments with respect to the levels of factors selected. Further, measurement of tensile
strength, maximum height, final thickness, temperature, forming force and surface
roughness of the sheet materials. By use of Response Surface Methodology (RSM), the
optimization process has been carried out to predict the best optimal parameter.
Material selection
Four sheet metal materials are selected according to their application. The experimentation
was conducted on four different materials to study the deformation behavior and to analyse
the formability of the materials. The sheet metal used for experimentation are listed below,
• Aluminum 5052 h32Sheet material of 150 mm *150 mm and thickness 1mm.
• Copper C110 sheet material of 150 mm *150 mm and thickness 0.7 mm
• Stainless ss304 sheet material of 150 mm *150 mm and thickness 0.8 mm.
• Titanium grade 3 sheet material of 150 mm *150 mm and thickness 0.5 mm.
A ball nose tool of 10 mm diameter made of High-Speed Steel (HSS) which is
suitable for these applications. Wear of the tool can then become an important consideration.
Lubrication helps reduce friction and tool wear and increase tool lifetime.
SPIF is having advantages over conventional forming process, but still this process is
limited in use. The reason is some parameters are not optimized yet. To understand this first
we have to identify process parameters and then we have understood the influence of these
parameters. So, following are some parameters which are having considerable effect on the
process. The trial-and-error experiments were conducted. Process parameters are finalized
after the trial-and-error experiments. The studied process parameters are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. List of process parameters

Factors Level 1 Level 2 Level 3
Feed rate
1000 2000 3000
(mm/min)
Tool rotational
100 550 1000
speed (rpm)
Incremental
0.2 0.4 0.6
depth (mm)

To estimate the influence of the processing parameters on surface roughness, forming force,
temperature and maximum height a full factorial design of experiment (DOE) with Three
levels o-f feed rate and depth of cut and spindle speed as constant (100 rpm) are used as
input parameter. Totally 9 experiments were performed and best process parameter were
selected for formability.
The experimentation was carried out on 3-axis MW LV45 CNC Vertical Machining
Centre as shown in Fig.6.1 and NC machine specification are shown in table. Fixtures made
of mild steel material were mounted on the NC machine table to hold the blank of
dimension 150 mm * 150 mm for conducting a set of SPIF experiments. Sheet metal is
mounted with the help of wooden block, washer, nut and bolt as shown in Fig.3.

Fig. 3 Vertical machining Centre for incremental forming

In the incremental sheet forming process, a simple shaped forming tool is attached to a
general-purpose NC milling machine, and as the machine table moves according to a
preloaded code, the tool applies a pre-programmed deforming load to a sheet metal work
piece clamped to the machine table. The applied load deforms the sheet incrementally into a
predefined shape.

3. Result and discussions

Total of 9 experiments were performed. The test specimens were formed to fracture
using the process parameters listed earlier. The influence of input parameters such as feed
rate, tool rotational speed and incremental depth over the output parameter like maximum
height, surface roughness, forming force, final thickness, temperature and tensile strength.
Fig 4 shows the experimented materials of AA 5052 H32, SS304, C110 and Ti grade 3
sheets metals.

Fig 4. Formed components a) AA 5052 H32 b) C 110 c) Ti Grade 3

d) SS 304
Tensile test was carried out for all the four components to find the tensile strength of the
materials after forming. For the formed component, the maximum amount of tensile stress
that it can accept before any failure. It specifies the point at which the material goes from
elastic to plastic deformation. Fig 4 and 5 shows the test specimen and tested specimen of
the sheet metals.
 Fig.4 Tensile test specimens a) AA 5052 H32 b) C 110 c) Ti grade 3
d) SS 304

Fig 5. Tensile tested Specimen a) AA 5052 H32 b) C 110 c) Ti grade 3

d) SS 304
 The process parameters and response values as maximum height, surface roughness,
forming force, final thickness, temperature, tensile strength of AA 5052 H32, C110, SS304,
Ti grade 3 are shown in the Table 4, Table5, Table 6, Table 7 respectively.
Table 2. Process parameter and results obtained on AA 5052 H32

Feed Step Maximum Tensile Forming Surface Final

S.
No rate depth height strength force Roughness thickness Temperature
O
(mm/min) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kN) (µm) (mm) C

1 1000 0.2 63.5 1.09 3.599 2.28 0.58 39

2 2000 0.2 61.9 1.055 3.629 2.82 0.44 41

3 3000 0.2 61.5 0.736 3.695 2.56 0.42 46

4 1000 0.4 57.9 0.949 3.943 2.52 0.44 40

5 2000 0.4 59 0.992 3.953 2.93 0.37 42

6 3000 0.4 58 0.636 3.982 2.78 0.35 49

7 1000 0.6 58 0.939 4.071 2.88 0.49 40

8 2000 0.6 58.8 0.799 4.12 3.59 0.38 47

9 3000 0.6 59.5 0.649 4.179 2.99 0.42 52

Table 3. Process parameter and response values of C110

Feed Step Maximum Tensile Forming Surface Final

S. Temperature
rate depth height strength force Roughness thickness
No
O
(mm/min) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kN) (µm) (mm) C

1 1000 0.2 59.5 0.759 2.442 2.83 0.39 39

2 2000 0.2 57.4 0.795 2.426 3.01 0.37 42

3 3000 0.2 55.7 1.005 2.423 3.35 0.38 45

4 1000 0.4 60 1.134 2.809 2.59 0.42 40

5 2000 0.4 59.2 1.123 2.807 2.53 0.35 43

6 3000 0.4 59 1.126 2.923 2.92 0.36 46

7 1000 0.6 57 0.937 3.159 1.84 0.4 42

8 2000 0.6 58 0.924 3.324 2.3 0.34 44

9 3000 0.6 57.9 0.894 3.304 2.62 0.31 47

 Table 4. Process parameter and response values of SS 304

S. Feed Step Maximum Tensile Forming Surface Final

No rate depth height strength force Roughness thickness Temperature

O
(mm/min) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kN) (µm) (mm) C

1 1000 0.2 50 3.241 8.103 3.91 0.44 110

2 2000 0.2 39.8 2.995 8.358 2.84 0.39 120

3 3000 0.2 49.1 2.956 8.907 2.19 0.4 125

4 1000 0.4 43 3.118 9.731 2.63 0.43 115

5 2000 0.4 40 2.701 10.457 1.79 0.38 125

6 3000 0.4 47.4 2.654 10.094 1.19 0.39 130

7 1000 0.6 37.8 3.137 11.565 1.89 0.42 125

8 2000 0.6 33 2.75 11.742 1.86 0.39 128

9 3000 0.6 46.5 2.548 12.399 2.25 0.4 138.6

Table 5. Process parameter and response values of Ti grade 3

S. Feed Step Maximum Tensile Forming Surface Final

Temperature
No rate depth height strength force Roughness thickness
O
(mm/min) (mm) (mm) (kN) (kN) (µm) (mm) C

2 2000 0.2 33.6 1.592 3.011 1.68 0.36 42.4

3 3000 0.2 32.2 1.428 2.589 2.99 0.42 64.1

4 1000 0.4 28 1.602 3.58 3.88 0.39 48.7

5 2000 0.4 28.4 1.676 3.61 2.26 0.35 41.5

6 3000 0.4 26 1.512 3.109 3.56 0.39 60.9

7 1000 0.6 34 1.74 4.365 3.99 0.46 49

8 2000 0.6 32 1.729 4.277 2.28 0.37 42

9 3000 0.6 30.5 1.622 3.933 2.88 0.4 69.8

Fig 6. 3D surface plot for interaction between feed rate and step depth with a) Maximum
height b) Tensile strength c) Forming force d) Temperature e) Final thickness f) Surface
roughness
From the interaction between the feed rate and step depth with all the response values, as
shown in the Fig 6. Interaction with the maximum height of the four materials was shown in
the Fig .6 (a) It can be seen that the AA 5052 H32 attains a maximum height of 63.5mm at a
feed rate of 1000 mm/min step depth of 0.2mm and the C110 height of 60mm at a feed rate
of 1000 mm/min step depth of 0.4mm, respectively. This may be due to the arrangement of
atoms in the face centred cubic (FCC) structure because it has 12 true or permanent slip
systems compared to BCC, which is an SS304 structure that leads to the FCC structure
having higher ductility in nature, which results in attaining the maximum height while
deforming [26][27]. In addition to that, elongation in both silicon grains of aluminium and
grain boundaries in copper leads to maximum deformation that results in a maximum height
of the materials. SS 304 reaches a height of 50mm at a feed rate of 1000 mm/min, with a step
depth of 0.2mm. This may be due to the arrangement of atoms in body-centred cubic (BCC)
that leads to the maximum strain rate with minimal stress rate which also leads to lower
ductility that results in slower deformation [28]. Step depth of 0.6 at a feed rate of 1000
mm/min for Ti grade 3. This may be due to the arrangement of atoms in hexagonal close
packed crystal (HCP) structure known as α-phase. It leads to the minimum strain rate with
lower deformation and lower ductility that results in slower deformation, but due to the
presence of α- alloys and β- alloys, the fracture happens earlier, which affects the maximum
height [29].
Maximum tensile strength for SS 304 with 3.241kN at a feed rate of 1000 mm/min
step depth of 0.2mm as shown in the Fig 6 (b). This is mainly due to the presence of coarse
grains in the specimen which leads to increase in the plasticity of the materials and in
addition to this it also increases the normal strength of that material [30][31]. Ti grade 3
strength of about 1.74kN with feed rate of 1000 mm/min step depth of 0.2mm. This may be
due to the presence of coarse grains by applying load, the grains are separated as α- alloy and
β- alloy which tends to the different grades of titanium that results in the slight reduction of
tensile strength of the materials [32][33]. Aluminium 5052 and Copper 110 both are exists in
the range of 1.09kN to 1.134kN respectively, this may be due to the presence of atoms in the
closed pack structure with more density that results in higher elongation with minimal
strength [34][35].
Observation from the maximum forming force of the four materials, it can be seen
that the stainless steel 304 requires a maximum forming force of about 12.399kN with a feed
rate of 3000 mm/min and a step depth of 0.6mm. This may be due to the presence of an open
pack structure with lower density that leads to a higher forming force. Furthermore, the
presence of coarse grain structure with lower density tends to deform with the highest feed
rate and step depth [37] [36]. Aluminium 5052, Copper 110 and Titanium grade 3 require
forming forces ranging from 2kN to 4.5kN. This may be due to the process of applying load
to the material; after that, the coarse grain is converted to finer grains that tend to have
quicker deformation with lower forming force [38].
Inference from the maximum temperatures of the four materials, it can be seen that
the temperature of the stainless steel 304 is higher at 138.6OC with a feed rate of 3000
mm/min and a step depth of 0.6mm. This may be due to the presence of a crystal structure in
the materials and it contains no permanent slip system, so that it leads to the occurrence of
deformation at a minimal strain rate with a higher stress rate, that results in the generation of
temperature during the forming process [39][40]. Aluminium 5052, Copper 110 and
Titanium grade 3 reaches temperature exists between 33OC to 70OC, this may be due to the
higher formability of the materials leads to quicker deformations with minimal amount of
forming force required that results in the minimal amount of heat is generated [41][42].
 Examine the final thickness of the four materials. It can be seen that the Aluminium
5052 attains a maximum of 0.58mm with a feed rate of 1000 mm/min and a step depth of
0.2mm. This may be due to the presence of silicon grains in the materials when applying
minimal load and step depth, which leads to longer deformation with the delayed occurrence
of fracture [41]. The feed rate and step depth in combination have a major effect on the final
thickness of all the materials, with the values ranging from 0.31mm to 0.42mm. This may be
due to the presence of coarse grains that lead to earlier fracture occurrence that results in a
reduction of final thickness [42]. Interaction with the four materials' surface roughness, as
shown in Fig. 6. (f) It can be seen that the combination of the feed rate and step depth has a
significant major impact on the materials with increased overlapping of the values.
3.1. Optimization
Optimization was carried out using response surface methodology by choosing the
categorical factors as feed rate and step depth, response factors as tensile strength, maximum
height, final thickness, temperature, forming force and surface roughness of the four
materials. The input and output parameter values are listed in the respective tables.
The list of optimized process parameters with multiple response prediction with 95%
confidence interval and prediction interval are shown in the Table 6.
Table 6. List of optimized process parameters
S.no Materials Feed rate Step depth
Units mm/min mm
1 AA 5052 H32 1000 0.2
2 C 110 1000 0.4
3 Ti grade 3 1000 0.6
4 SS 304 1000 0.2
The optimal values of the response characteristics (maximum height, surface roughness,
forming force, final thickness, temperature and tensile strength) along with their respective
confidence intervals have been predicted. The optimal value of each response characteristic
is predicted considering the effect of the significant parameters only. The average values of
the response characteristics obtained through the confirmation experiments must lie within
the 95 % confidence interval.
 In order to examine the predicted values, a confirmation experiments were conducted
for the 3 trails. The values of predicted and experimented values are listed in the Table 7.
Table 7. Confirmation experiments for predicted values
Max. Tensile Forming Surface Final
Temp.
Materials height strength force roughness thickness
Study results
O
mm kN kN µm mm C
Predicted results
63.19 1.73 3.61 2.25 0.57 38.92

Trail 1 60.03 1.7 3.43 2.14 0.54 36.97

Aluminiu
Experimental
m alloy Trail 2 60.12 1.76 3.49 2.23 0.49 37.47
results
5052 H32
Trail 3 61.59 3.52 2.18 37.97
1.64 0.6
% Deviation
4.1304 1.7341 3.601 2.962 4.678 3.725
Predicted results
60.03 1.11 2.81 2.43 0.41 40.24

Trail 1 57.03 1.05 2.67 2.31 0.395 38.22

Experimental
Copper110 Trail 2 57.53 1.1 2.75 2.39 0.38 37.5
results
Trail 3 58.63 2.73 2.42 0.4 39.3
1.13
% Deviation
3.831 1.501 3.321 2.331 4.471 4.721

Predicted results
49.35 3.25 8.11 4.03 0.44 110.59
Trail 1 46.88 3.09 7.71 3.83 0.41 105.06
Stainless Experimental
Trail 2 48.33 3.15 7.82 3.95 0.43 107.56
steel 304 results
Trail 3 4.02
50.25 3.12 7.77 0.42 109.56
% Deviation
1.749 4 4.233 2.398 4.545 2.890
Predicted results
58.89 1.16 2.95 2.93 0.35 40.03

Trail 1 55.94 1.1 2.8 2.78 0.33 37.05

Titanium Experimental
Trail 2 57.94 1.18 2.9 2.85 0.36 38.79
grade 3 results
Trail 3 1.05 2.86 0.31
55.94 2.74 39.47
% Deviation
3.877 4.31 3.276 4.778 4.7619 3.980

3.2. Tensile Strength deviations

The maximum tensile strength of the deformed materials is partially lower when
compared with the undeformed materials. This is due to the reduction in thickness of the
material while deforming. In addition to that, during deformation, grain elongation happens
due to the applied force, which also causes the strain elongation of the material. It tends to
strain hardening that results in increased strength of the material, but in this case, while
deformation thickness reduction predominantly influences tensile strength [43] [44]. The
tensile strength was conducted for 3 trails and the average values of the different materials
before and after deformation are listed in Table 8.
Table 8. Tensile strength values before and after deformation

Tensile Strength
Materials % Reduction
S.no Undeformed Deformed
Units kN kN %
1 AA 5052 H32 2.194 1.08 0.371012

2 C 110 1.852 1.134 0.387689

3 SS 304 3.768 3.03 0.381635

4 Ti grade 3 2.182 1.74 0.202566

Microstructure analysis
Microstructure analysis is a useful method to determining how a material was
manufactured and the quality of the finished product. A microstructural examination can be
used to determine if a component was made from a specific material. For the best optimal
process parameters, the microstructure analysis was carried out to examine the material in
the formed condition. Aluminium 5052 was undergone microstructural analysis that are
shown in the Fig 7.

Fig 7. Microstructure of Aluminium 5052 a) undeformed specimen

b) deformed specimen
Microstructure was taken with the help of an optical microscope to evaluate the specimen's
behaviour under applied load. Fig. 7 depicts the undeformed and deformed microstructures
of aluminum. In the undeformed specimen, the silicon is seen in a scattered manner and the
grain size is very small, as shown in Fig. 7 (a). In the deformed specimen shown in Fig 7
(b), the size of the silicon gets elongated due to the applied load and the reduced grain size
of aluminium is also clearly visible [45]. The applied load separates the silicon from each
other as loosely coupled. This results in the deformation to maximum height with maximum
final thickness and higher tensile strength with lower surface roughness [46] [47].
 Fig 8. Microstructure of Copper C110 a) undeformed specimen
b) deformed specimen

The microstructure of C110 was shown in Fig 8. In the undeformed specimen, grain
boundaries are clearly visible. It is an interface between the two crystals of the same crystal
structure. This is shown in Fig 8 (a), where as in the deformed specimen, grain boundary
segregation is clearly visible in Fig 8 (b). This is due to the increase in grain deformation that
caused grain boundary distortion [48]. The grain deformation affects the material formability
with a minimal requirement of forming force, resulting in a maximum height with a higher
final thickness [49].

Fig 9. Microstructure of Titanium grade 3 a) undeformed specimen

b) deformed specimen

In the undeformed specimen of Ti grade 3, the coarse grain is clearly visible; it is the natural
grain structure of the titanium as shown in Fig. 9 (a). In the deformed specimen, due to the
applied load, the coarse grains are broken into finer grains and split into α- alloy and β- alloy
are shown in the Fig 9 (b). Here the α- alloys and β- alloys are the different grades of
titanium. It mainly depends on the composition of different alloys like aluminium and
vanadium [50]. The finer grains are produced with the maximum step depth while forming,
which results in the structure attaining maximum surface roughness and maximum height
with increased forming force [51].
 Fig 10. Microstructure of Stainless steel 304 a) undeformed specimen
b) deformed specimen

The observation from the undeformed specimen of SS304 shows that the coarse grains and
the grain boundaries are clearly visible and nearer in the Fig 10 (a). In the deformed specimen
as shown in the Fig 10 (b), this is due to the applied tensile load, the increase in grain
deformation results in the elongation of the grain boundaries and becomes finer grains [52].
The conversion of structured grains to elongated grains results in the strain hardening that
leads to attain maximum strength of the material with maximum surface roughness and
requirement of forming force is higher [53].

Fractography analysis
Fractography is a technique in failure evaluation for reading the fracture floor of
materials. Studying the traits of the fractured floor can assist to decide the motive of failure
in an engineered product. Different modes of failure produce function capabilities at the
floor, permitting a forensic evaluation to decide the basis motive of the failure. For the best
process parameters obtained from the optimization, fractography study was carried for those
parameters to study the mode of failure happens on the materials.
 Fig 11. Fractography study a) Aluminium 5052 b) Copper C110
c) Titanium grade 3 d) Stainless steel 304

The fracture surface of the formed specimen is shown in Fig. 11. The formation of dimples,
voids, inter crystalline separation, and inter crystalline fracture in aluminium 5052 was
discovered using a scanning electron microscope (SEM), as shown in Fig. 11 (a). A dimple
is a micropore combination formed in a material during plastic deformation. Greater
triaxiality promotes void initiation and propagation, resulting in a significant number of
dimples and fractures perpendicular to the maximum tensile stress [54]. Voids are tiny pores
that occur as a result of applying load. When plastic deformation reaches the target limit,
this may result in ductile fracture of the material due to gradual erosion of material stiffness
[55]. Inter crystalline separation occurs when a crack propagates along the material's grain
boundaries, which may be caused by the applied tensile force [56]. When a crack forms
across the material grains, it causes inter-crystalline fracture. This might be owing to the
nucleation and coalescence of microvoids at inclusions or second-phase particles positioned
along grain boundaries [57]. Fig. 11 (b) shows that the low hydrostatic stress state prevents
void expansion ahead of the crack tip, resulting in small elongated dimples upon fracture,
and failure occurs as a result of shearing of the intervoids ligaments [54]. Figure 11 (c)
shows a quasi-cleavage pattern. The trans-crystalline mode propagates along cleavage
planes through crystallites and deflects at high-angle grain boundaries. This might be
because of a cluster of planar facets separated from the other facets by bigger voids or
clusters of microvoids [56]. The formation of dimples, Intercrystalline separation, and voids
are formed as in earlier discussion, but the large voids are found in Fig. 11 (d), which is
formed with the combination of microvoids in the region of grain boundaries by applying
the tensile load. The microvoids are transformed into macrovoids, which may tend to
deformation in the grain boundaries that results in large voids [57].

Conclusion

In this study, the main objective is to determine the optimal process parameters that
influence the formability of the materials. For this study, the materials are Aluminum Alloy
5052, Copper 110, Titanium Grade 3, and Stainless Steel 304. The microstructure and
fractography analysis of all the materials were carried out for the optimal process parameter.
The selected materials are widely used in the automobile industry, the aerospace industry, the
marine industry, and the medical industry. Future work could integrate incremental forming
with IOT to enable the continuous and real-time monitoring of the process to make the
component more accurate. Also, process parameters like tool rotation, tool path, and tool
shape may be considered to make the process more efficient.

The optimised process parameters of the different materials, obtained from the response
surface methodology, were the best parameters that possessed the maximum strength with the
maximum height. The optimal parameters are listed below.
• Aluminum 5052 was formed with a feed rate of 1000 mm/min and a step depth of 0.2
mm, resulting in a maximum tensile strength of 09kN and a maximum height of
63.5mm.
• Copper C110 was formed with a feed rate of 1000 mm/min and a step depth of 0.1
mm, resulting in a maximum tensile strength of 134 kN and a maximum height of 60
mm.
• Titanium grade 3 C110 was formed with a feed rate of 1000 mm/min and a step depth
of 0.6 mm, resulting in a maximum tensile strength of 74kN and a maximum height of
34mm.
• Stainless Steel 304 was formed with a feed rate of 1000 mm/min and a step depth of
0.6 mm, resulting in a maximum tensile strength of 74kN and a maximum height of
34mm.

Reference
[1] S. Pratheesh Kumar, S. Elangovan,"Optimization in Single Point Incremental Forming of
Inconel 718 through Response Surface Methodology", Transactions of the Canadian Society
for Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 44, Issue. 01, pp. 148-160, (2020).
[2] S. Pratheesh Kumar, S. Elangovan, and R. Mohanraj, "Experimental study on Single
Point Incremental Forming of Inconel 718", Transactions of the Canadian Society for
Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 44, Issue. 02, pp. 179-188, (2020).
[3] S. Pratheesh Kumar, S. Elangovan, R. Mohanraj, and S. Boopathi, "A comprehensive
review in incremental forming on approaches of deformation analysis and surface
morphologies", Materials Today: Proceedings, Vol. 43, Issue. 05, pp. 3129-3139, (2021).
[4] S. Pratheesh Kumar, S. Elangovan, R. Mohanraj, and S. Boopathi, “Real-time
applications and novel manufacturing strategies of incremental forming: an industrial
perspective”, Materials Today: Proceedings, Vol. 46, Issue. 17, pp. 8153-8164, (2021).
[5] Mohanraj Ramasamy, Elangovan Sooriya Moorthy, Pratheesh Kumar Selva Kumaran
and Arun Prakash Rangasamy, “Experimental and finite element analysis of titanium based
medial tibial condyle using incremental sheet metal forming”, Indian Journal of Engineering
and Materials Sciences (IJEMS), Vol. 28, Issue. 05, pp. 502-508, (2021).
[6] C Veera Ajay, S Elangovan, S Pratheesh Kumar, K Manisekar, “Multi-objective
optimization in incremental sheet forming of Ti-6Al-4V alloy using grey relational analysis
method”, Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part E: Journal of Process
Mechanical Engineering, Vol. 0, Issue. 0, pp. 00 - 00, (2021).
[7] Yoganjaneyulu, G., Narayanan, C.S. and Narayanasamy, R., 2018. Investigation on the
fracture behavior of titanium grade 2 sheets by using the single point incremental forming
process. Journal of Manufacturing Processes, 35, pp.197-204.
[8] Dwivedy, M. and Kalluri, V., 2019. The effect of process parameters on forming forces
in single point incremental forming. Procedia Manufacturing, 29, pp.120-128.
[9] Kumar, R., Kumar, G. and Singh, A., 2020. An assessment of residual stresses and
micro-structure during single point incremental forming of commercially pure titanium used
in biomedical applications. Materials Today: Proceedings, 28, pp.1261-1266.
[10] Jawale, K., Duarte, J.F., Reis, A. and Silva, M.B., 2020. Microstructural investigation
and lubrication study for single point incremental forming of copper. International Journal of
Solids and Structures, 151, pp.145-151.
[11] Lehtinen, P., Väisänen, T. and Salmi, M., 2019. The effect of local heating by laser
irradiation for aluminum, deep drawing steel and copper sheets in incremental sheet
forming. Physics Procedia, 78, pp.312-319.
[12] Dwivedy, M. and Kalluri, V., 2019. The effect of process parameters on forming forces
in single point incremental forming. Procedia Manufacturing, 29, pp.120-128.
[13] Abdelkader, W.B., Bahloul, R. and Arfa, H., 2020. Numerical investigation of the
influence of some parameters in SPIF process on the forming forces and thickness
distributions of a bimetallic sheet CP-titanium/low-carbon steel compared to an individual
layer. Procedia Manufacturing, 47, pp.1319-1327.
[14] Min, H.E., Fuguo, L.I. and Zhigang, W.A.N.G., 2011. Forming limit stress diagram
prediction of aluminum alloy 5052 based on GTN model parameters determined by in situ
tensile test. Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, 24(3), pp.378-386.
[15] Li, C., Liu, D., Yu, H. and Ji, Z., 2009. Research on formability of 5052 aluminum alloy
sheet in a quasi-static–dynamic tensile process. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture, 49(2), pp.117-124.
[16] Yang, T., Liu, T., Liao, W., MacDonald, E., Wei, H., Chen, X. and Jiang, L., 2019. The
influence of process parameters on vertical surface roughness of the AlSi10Mg parts
fabricated by selective laser melting. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 266,
pp.26-36.
[17] Nasulea, D. and Oancea, G., 2021. Achieving accuracy improvements for single-point
incremental forming process using a circumferential hammering tool. Metals, 11(3), p.482.
[18] Szpunar, M., Ostrowski, R., Trzepieciński, T. and Kaščák, Ľ., 2021. Central composite
design optimisation in single point incremental forming of truncated cones from
commercially pure titanium grade 2 sheet metals. Materials, 14(13), p.3634.
[19] Maqbool, F. and Bambach, M., 2018. Dominant deformation mechanisms in single
point incremental forming (SPIF) and their effect on geometrical accuracy. International
Journal of Mechanical Sciences, 136, pp.279-292.
[20] Yoganjaneyulu, G., Ravikumar, V.V. and Narayanan, C.S., 2019. Investigations on
strain distribution, stress-based fracture limit and corrosion behaviour of titanium Grade 2
sheets during single point incremental forming. Anti-Corrosion Methods and Materials,
67(1), pp.119-127.
[21] Hussain, G., Ilyas, M. and Isidore, B.L., 2020. Mechanical properties and
microstructure evolution in incremental forming of AA5754 and AA6061 aluminum alloys.
Transactions of Nonferrous Metals Society of China, 30(1), pp.51-64.
[22] Shrivastava, P. and Tandon, P., 2019. Microstructure and texture-based analysis of
forming behavior and deformation mechanism of AA1050 sheet during Single Point
Incremental Forming. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 266, pp.292-310.
[23] Shanmuganatan, S.P. and Kumar, V.S., 2014. Modeling of incremental forming process
parameters of Al 3003 (O) by response surface methodology. Procedia Engineering, 97,
pp.346-356.
[24] Honarpisheh, M., Keimasi, M. and Alinaghian, I., 2018. Numerical and experimental
study on incremental forming process of Al/Cu bimetals: influence of process parameters on
the forming force, dimensional accuracy and thickness variations. Journal of Mechanics of
Materials and Structures, 13(1), pp.35-51.
[25] Sbayti, M., Bahloul, R., BelHadjSalah, H. and Zemzemi, F., 2018. Optimization
techniques applied to single point incremental forming process for biomedical application.
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 95(5), pp.1789-1804.
[26] Wu, Z., Bei, H., Pharr, G.M. and George, E.P., 2014. Temperature dependence of the
mechanical properties of equiatomic solid solution alloys with face-centered cubic crystal
structures. Acta Materialia, 81, pp.428-441.
[27] Basu, I., Ocelík, V. and De Hosson, J.T.M., 2018. Size dependent plasticity and damage
response in multiphase body centered cubic high entropy alloys. Acta Materialia, 150,
pp.104-116.
[28] He, J.Y., Liu, W.H., Wang, H., Wu, Y., Liu, X.J., Nieh, T.G. and Lu, Z.P., 2014. Effects
of Al addition on structural evolution and tensile properties of the FeCoNiCrMn high-
entropy alloy system. Acta Materialia, 62, pp.105-113.
[29] Uheida, E.H., Oosthuizen, G.A. and Dimitrov, D., 2017. Investigating the impact of tool
velocity on the process conditions in incremental forming of titanium sheets. Procedia
Manufacturing, 7, pp.345-350.
[30] Estrin, Y. and Vinogradov, A., 2013. Extreme grain refinement by severe plastic
deformation: A wealth of challenging science. Acta materialia, 61(3), pp.782-817.
[31] Tamimi, S., Sivaswamy, G., Pirgazi, H., Amirkhiz, B.S., Moturu, S., Siddiq, M.A.,
Kockelmann, W. and Blackwell, P., 2021. A new route for developing ultrafine-grained Al
alloy strips using repetitive bending under tension. Materials & Design, 206, p.109750.
[32] Huang, S., Sing, S.L., de Looze, G., Wilson, R. and Yeong, W.Y., 2020. Laser powder
bed fusion of titanium-tantalum alloys: Compositions and designs for biomedical
applications. Journal of the mechanical behavior of biomedical materials, 108, p.103775.
[33] Gupta, A., Khatirkar, R.K., Dandekar, T. and Mahadule, D., 2021. Texture development
during multi-step cross rolling of a β titanium alloy: Experiments and simulations. Journal of
Alloys and Compounds, 850, p.156824.
[34] Rao, G.A., Kumar, M., Srinivas, M. and Sarma, D.S., 2003. Effect of standard heat
treatment on the microstructure and mechanical properties of hot isostatically pressed
superalloy inconel 718. Materials Science and Engineering: A, 355(1-2), pp.114-125.
[35] Billard, S., Fondère, J.P., Bacroix, B. and Dirras, G.F., 2006. Macroscopic and
microscopic aspects of the deformation and fracture mechanisms of ultrafine-grained
aluminum processed by hot isostatic pressing. Acta materialia, 54(2), pp.411-421.
[36] Yi, S.B., Zaefferer, S. and Brokmeier, H.G., 2006. Mechanical behaviour and
microstructural evolution of magnesium alloy AZ31 in tension at different temperatures.
Materials Science and Engineering: A, 424(1-2), pp.275-281.
[37] Agarwal, R., Sonkusare, R., Jha, S.R., Gurao, N.P., Biswas, K. and Nayan, N., 2018.
Understanding the deformation behavior of CoCuFeMnNi high entropy alloy by
investigating mechanical properties of binary ternary and quaternary alloy subsets. Materials
& Design, 157, pp.539-550.
[38] Kumar, A., Gulati, V., Kumar, P. and Singh, H., 2019. Forming force in incremental
sheet forming: a comparative analysis of the state of the art. Journal of the Brazilian Society
of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, 41(6), pp.1-45.
[39] Waheed, S., Zheng, Z., Balint, D.S. and Dunne, F.P., 2019. Microstructural effects on
strain rate and dwell sensitivity in dual-phase titanium alloys. Acta Materialia, 162, pp.136-
148.
[40] Agnew, S.R. and Duygulu, Ö., 2005. Plastic anisotropy and the role of non-basal slip in
magnesium alloy AZ31B. International Journal of plasticity, 21(6), pp.1161-1193.
[41] Shrivastava, P. and Tandon, P., 2019. Microstructure and texture-based analysis of
forming behavior and deformation mechanism of AA1050 sheet during Single Point
Incremental Forming. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 266, pp.292-310.
[42] Baruah, A., Pandivelan, C. and Jeevanantham, A.K., 2017. Optimization of AA5052 in
incremental sheet forming using grey relational analysis. Measurement, 106, pp.95-100.
[43] Lu, B., Fang, Y., Xu, D.K., Chen, J., Ou, H., Moser, N.H. and Cao, J., 2014.
Mechanism investigation of friction-related effects in single point incremental forming using
a developed oblique roller-ball tool. International Journal of Machine Tools and
Manufacture, 85, pp.14-29.
[44] Liao, H., Kim, J., Liu, T., Tang, A., She, J., Peng, P. and Pan, F., 2019. Effects of Mn
addition on the microstructures, mechanical properties and work-hardening of Mg-1Sn alloy.
Materials Science and Engineering: A, 754, pp.778-785.
[45] Mondal, D.P. and Das, S., 2006. High stress abrasive wear behaviour of aluminium hard
particle composites: Effect of experimental parameters, particle size and volume fraction.
Tribology international, 39(6), pp.470-478.
[46] Bagudanch, I., Garcia-Romeu, M.L., Centeno, G., Elías-Zúñiga, A. and Ciurana, J.,
2015. Forming force and temperature effects on single point incremental forming of
polyvinylchloride. Journal of materials processing technology, 219, pp.221-229.
[47] Chen, S., Ke, F., Zhou, M. and Bai, Y., 2007. Atomistic investigation of the effects of
temperature and surface roughness on diffusion bonding between Cu and Al. Acta
Materialia, 55(9), pp.3169-3175.
[48] Menyhard, M., Blum, B. and McMahon Jr, C.J., 1989. Grain boundary segregation and
transformations in Bi-doped polycrystalline copper. Acta Metallurgica, 37(2), pp.549-557.
[49] Thibaud, S., Hmida, R.B., Richard, F. and Malecot, P., 2012. A fully parametric toolbox
for the simulation of single point incremental sheet forming process: Numerical feasibility
and experimental validation. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 29, pp.32-43.
[50] Gao, S., Hu, Z., Duchamp, M., Krishnan, P.S.R., Tekumalla, S., Song, X. and Seita, M.,
2020. Recrystallization-based grain boundary engineering of 316L stainless steel produced
via selective laser melting. Acta Materialia, 200, pp.366-377.
[51] Li, C., Guo, Y.B. and Zhao, J.B., 2017. Interfacial phenomena and characteristics
between the deposited material and substrate in selective laser melting Inconel 625. Journal
of Materials Processing Technology, 243, pp.269-281.
[52] Zhecheva, A., Sha, W., Malinov, S. and Long, A., 2005. Enhancing the microstructure
and properties of titanium alloys through nitriding and other surface engineering methods.
Surface and Coatings technology, 200(7), pp.2192-2207.
[53] Durante, M., Formisano, A., Langella, A. and Minutolo, F.M.C., 2009. The influence of
tool rotation on an incremental forming process. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 209(9), pp.4621-4626.
[54] Xiong, Z., Jacques, P.J., Perlade, A. and Pardoen, T., 2018. Ductile and intergranular
brittle fracture in a two-step quenching and partitioning steel. Scripta Materialia, 157, pp.6-9.
[55] Eberhardt, E., Stead, D. and Stimpson, B., 1999. Quantifying progressive pre-peak
brittle fracture damage in rock during uniaxial compression. International Journal of Rock
Mechanics and Mining Sciences, 36(3), pp.361-380.
[56] Benedetti, I. and Aliabadi, M., 2013. A three-dimensional cohesive-frictional grain-
boundary micromechanical model for intergranular degradation and failure in polycrystalline
materials. Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 265, pp.36-62.
[57] Becker, R., Needleman, A., Suresh, S., Tvergaard, V. and Vasudevan, A.K., 1989. An
analysis of ductile failure by grain boundary void growth. Acta Metallurgica, 37(1), pp.99-
120.