Materials and Design 32 (2011) 4430–4436

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials and Design

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matdes

Process parameter design of spring-back and spring-go in V-bending process using

Taguchi technique
Sutasn Thipprakmas ⇑, Wiriyakorn Phanitwong
Department of Tool and Materials Engineering, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Thailand

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Bent parts of complex shapes with high precision are increasingly required. To achieve a high precision of
Received 15 December 2010 parts, especially the required bending angle, a suitable design of process parameters is strictly consid-
Accepted 28 March 2011 ered. In this study, process parameters of bending angle, material thickness and punch radius were inves-
Available online 31 March 2011
tigated. The finite element method (FEM), in association with the Taguchi and the analysis of variance
(ANOVA) techniques, was carried out to investigate the degree of importance of process parameters in
Keywords: V-bending process. The results revealed that the degree of importance of process parameters in V-bend-
Forming
ing process depended on the spring-back and spring-go. The material thickness has a major influence on
Elastic behaviour
Plastic behaviour
the spring-back. In contrast, in the case of spring-go, the bending angle has a major influence and closely
followed by the material thickness. In addition to predicting the degree of importance of process param-
eters by the combination of the FEM simulation, the Taguchi technique, and the ANOVA technique, by
facilitating an improvement in the quality of the required bending angle was strictly considered by opti-
mization of these process parameters corresponding with the spring-back and spring-go.
Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction analysis. Kim and Koc [6] investigated the spring-back

Formation of high-precision sheet metal is one of the main
objectives in many manufacturing industries. It plays a signifi-
cant role in automotive industries, electronics industries, and
housing-utensil industries. To fabricate the curved parts in the
production of various items, with an economical set-up and
enormous range of parts of complex sizes and shapes could be
fabricated; the sheet metal V-bending process is commonly ap-
plied. Accuracy in the dimension of bent parts, especially the
bending angle, is of utmost importance. In past researches,
numerous finite element method (FEM) simulation and experi-
mental works were conducted in understanding the bending fea-
ture [1–22]. However, the spring-back was studied in most of
these researches. For examples, Zang et al. [1] studied the consti-
tutive model for spring-back prediction in which the change of
Young’s modulus with plastic deformation is considered. Leu
and Hsieh [2] investigated the influence of the coining force on
spring-back reduction in V-die bending process. Wang et al. [3]
studied the spring-back control of sheet metal air bending pro-
cess. Tekaslan et al. [4] determined the spring-back of stainless
steel sheet metal in V-bending dies. Meinders et al. [5] studied
spring-back prediction and optimization using the numerical
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: 126 Prachautit Rd., Bangmod, Thungkru,
Bangkok 10140, Thailand. Tel.: +66 24709218; fax: +66 28729080.
E-mail addresses: sutasn.thi@kmutt.ac.th, sutasn@gmail.com (S. Thipprakmas).
characteristics of aluminum sheet metal alloys in warm forming
conditions using the numerical method. Yu [7] investigated the
variation of elastic modulus during plastic deformation and its
influence on spring-back. Kazan et al. [8] predicted spring-back
in wipe-bending process of sheet metal using neural network.
Ozturk et al. [9] investigated the tensile and spring-back behav-
iour of advanced steel of high strength (DP600) at warm temper-
atures. Parsa et al. [10] studied the spring-back of double curved
aluminum/polypropylene/aluminum sandwich sheet by using
FEM simulation and experiments. Panthi et al. [11] studied the
spring-back prediction of sheet metal bending process by using
FEM. It is not only the occurrence of spring-back but also the
occurrence of spring-go that has effect on the bending angle.
In recent years, the spring-go has also been conducted to under-
stand the bending feature as well as to achieve accuracy of the
bending angle. Thipprakmas et al. [12–14] investigated the
spring-go phenomenon, as well as the effects of punch height
and the ratio of punch to workpiece length. Bakhshi-Jooybari
et al. [15] studied the spring-back and spring-go of CK67 steel
sheet in V-die and U-die bending processes.
With the bending process, there are various process parameters
with different adjustment levels, which may affect the spring-back
and spring-go as well as the bending angle. Although many
researches have been conducted, the process parameter design for
controlling the spring-back and spring-go has not been researched
yet. In this study, therefore, the Taguchi and the analysis of variance

0261-3069/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.matdes.2011.03.069
 S. Thipprakmas, W. Phanitwong / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 4430–4436 4431

(ANOVA) techniques were carried out to examine the degree of Table 1

importance of process parameters, including bending angle, mate- FEM simulation conditions.

rial thickness, and punch radius, in relation to the spring-back and Simulation model Plane strain model
spring-go. The commercial software DEFORM-2D was used as the fi- Object type Workpiece:Elasto-plastic, Punch/Die:rigid
nite-element simulation (FE-simulation) code to carry out the pre- Workpiece material A1100-O (rB = 92.5 MPa, k = 46%)
diction of spring-back and spring-go. The experiments were Flow curve equation r ¼ 160:4e0:22
performed to validate the FEM simulation results. The ANOVA tech- Angular punch radius (Rp) 2.5 and 3.5 mm
Angular die radius (Rd) 5 mm
nique is able to specify the process parameters that markedly influ-
Bending angle (h) 30°, 45°, 120°, and 135°
ence the spring-back and spring-go and yield information about the Workpiece thickness (t) 2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 mm
degree of importance of each process parameter on the spring-back Friction coefficient (l) 0.1
and spring-go. The results elucidated that the degree of importance
of each process parameter in bending angle was different in the case
2.2. Experimental procedure
of spring-back and spring-go. The material thickness has a major
influence on the spring-back. The bending angle has a major influ-
Referring to the author’s past researches [13,14], V-bending dies
ence on the spring-go closely followed by the material thickness.
and a 5-ton universal tensile testing machine (Lloyd Instruments
This difference in the process parameter having a major influence
Ltd) were used for the laboratory V-bending experiments with
on the spring-back and spring-go in the V-bending process could
the same FEM simulation conditions, the laboratory experiments
be clearly identified based on the stress distribution analysis. There-
were carried out to validate the FEM simulation results. Aluminum
fore, the achievement of the required bending angle depended on
(A1100-O) of 30 mm width and 3 mm thickness was used as a
the application of the optimal value of the process parameters and
workpiece material. The bending angle was examined using the
their favorable combination relating to the spring-back and
profile projector. The bending force was recorded and compared
spring-go.
with the bending force analyzed by FEM.

2. The FEM simulation, experimental procedures, and Taguchi
method
2.1. FEM simulation procedure
Fig. 1 shows the FEM simulation model. A half V-bending sim-
ulation model with a die radius (Rd) of 5 mm was used to reduce
the calculated time. In this study, the model was a two-dimen-
sional plane strain 70 mm in length and 3 mm in thickness. The
commercial analytical code for two-dimensional implicit quasi-
static finite element method (DEFORM-2D) was used as the FEM
simulation tool. Automatic remeshing was set at every five steps
to prevent a divergence calculation due to excessive deformation.
With reference to earlier research [12–14], Table 1 shows the de-
tails of FEM simulation conditions and material properties. A
punch radius (Rp) of 2.5 and 3.5 mm, a material thickness (t) of 2,
3, and 4 mm, and bending angles (h) of 30°, 45°, 120°, and 135°
were investigated. The workpiece material was set as an elasto-
plastic type with a rectangular element of approximately 3500 ele-
ments. The punch and die were set as a rigid type. The material
used was aluminum A1100-O (JIS) and its properties included ten-
sile strength of 92.5 MPa and elongation of 46%. The constitutive
equation was determined from the SS (Stress Strain) curve ob-
tained by the tensile testing experiment [12–14].
2.3. Taguchi method
In this study, two levels of the three process parameters, includ-
ing bending angle, material thickness, and punch radius were ap-
plied. The experimental design of FEM simulation using the two
level for three-parameter full factorial design (23) is shown in Table
2. The spring-back and spring-go were the process responses. In
this study, to understand the effects of the process parameters,
the Taguchi technique employing a generic signal-to-noise ratio
for the ‘‘Smaller is better (SNS)’’ characteristics was considered
for the amounts of spring-back and spring-go as depicted in the
following equation:
!
1X n
SNS ¼ 10 log y2 ð1Þ
n i¼1 i
where n represents the number of experiments and y represents the
process response.
In addition to the FEM simulation results of the spring-back and
spring-go, the ANOVA technique was also applied to illustrate the
degree of importance of each process parameter that markedly
influenced the spring-back and spring-go in the V-bending process.
3. Results and discussion

3.1. Application of ANOVA

Punch
The process parameters and their levels investigated in spring-
υb R 10 mm
back and spring-go are listed in Table 3. Table 4 shows the amounts
of spring-back and spring-go analyzed by FEM. The results show
θP
Workpiece t Table 2
Full factorial (23) experimental design for FEM simulation.
RP
Experiment Bending angle Material thickness Punch radius
R 10 mm No. (h) (t) (Rp)
1 Low Low Low
2 High Low Low
Die 3 Low High Low
4 High High Low
5 Low Low High
6 High Low High
Rd 7 Low High High
8 High High High
Fig. 1. FEM simulation model.
4432 S. Thipprakmas, W. Phanitwong / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 4430–4436

Table 3
Process parameters and their levels.

(a) Spring-back (b) Spring-go

Process parameters Levels Process parameters Levels
Low High Low High
Bending angle (h)/(°) 30 45 Bending angle (h)/(°) 120 135
Material thickness (t)/(mm) 2.0 3.0 Material thickness (t)/(mm) 2.0 3.0
Punch radius (Rp)/(mm) 2.5 3.5 Punch radius (Rp)/(mm) 2.5 3.5

1X 8
Table 4 S=N ¼ ðS=NÞk ð2Þ
The amounts of spring-back and spring-go analyzed by FEM simulation. 8 k¼1
Experiment Bending Material Punch The amount
no. angle thickness radius of SB and SG/ 8 
X 2
(h)/(°) (t)/(mm) (Rp)/(mm) (°) SS ¼ ðS=NÞij  S=N ð3Þ
i¼1
(a) Spring-back (SB)
1 30 2.0 2.5 0.58
2 45 2.0 2.5 0.45 3 
X 2
3 30 3.0 2.5 0.11 SSi ¼ ðS=NÞij  S=N ð4Þ
4 45 3.0 2.5 0.09 j¼1
5 30 2.0 3.5 0.70
6 45 2.0 3.5 0.60  
SSi
7 30 3.0 3.5 0.27 % Contributioni ¼  100 ð5Þ
8 45 3.0 3.5 0.20 SS
(b) Spring-go (SG) The S=N; SS, and percentage contributions calculated for each
1 120 2.0 2.5 0.40
process parameters in the case of spring-back and spring-go are
2 135 2.0 2.5 0.48
3 120 3.0 2.5 0.46 illustrated in Table 5. In the case of spring-back, the percentage
4 135 3.0 2.5 0.54 contributions of the material thickness, the punch radius, and the
5 120 2.0 3.5 0.33 bending angle were 83.6365, 13.9263, and 2.4372, respectively.
6 135 2.0 3.5 0.47 On the other hand, in the case of spring-go, the percentage contri-
7 120 3.0 3.5 0.44
8 135 3.0 3.5 0.52
butions of the material thickness, the punch radius, and the bend-
ing angle were 33.4050, 6.9883, and 59.6067, respectively. Based
on these statistical analysis results, it was found that the degree
of importance of process parameters in V-bending process de-
pended on the spring-back and spring-go. As shown in the results,
good agreement with the bending theory in which the spring-back
in the case of spring-back the process parameters of the material
and spring-go generated in small and large bending angles, respec-
thickness had the most influence, respectively followed by the
tively. Specifically, spring-back was generated in 30° and 45° bend-
small influence of the punch radius and the bending angle. In the
ing angles while the spring-go was generated in 120° and 135°
case of spring-go it was vice versa, with the process parameters
bending angles. To investigate the degree of importance of the pro-
of bending angle having the highest influence, closely followed
cess parameters, therefore, the ANOVA technique was carried out
by the material thickness.
in case by case of spring-back and spring-go. The ‘‘Smaller is better
(SNs)’’ characteristics, as shown in Eq. (1), were considered for the
3.2. Effects of process parameters on the spring-back and spring-go
spring-back and spring-go. The mean value of the overall S/N (S=N)
is expressed as Eq. (2), where, k is the number of experiments. The
Many past researches have been studied on the effects of pro-
sums of squares owing to the variations of the overall mean (SS)
cess parameters in V-bending process, including bending angle
and the mean of the process parameters (SSi) are expressed as
[4,11], material thickness [3,11,15], punch radius [12,15], and
Eqs. (3) and (4), respectively. The percentage contributions as
punch height [13,14]. However, most of these were studied on
shown in Eq. (5) were calculated which was generally applied for
the spring-back. Therefore, the effects of process parameters in
considering the degree of importance of each process parameter
V-bending process on the spring-go were rarely investigated. In
as reported in the literature [23,24].
this study, the effects of bending angle, material thickness, and

Table 5
ANOVA results.

Process parameters Bending angle (h)/(°) Material thickness (t)/(mm) Punch radius (Rp)/(mm)
30 45 2.0 3.0 2.5 3.5
(a) Spring-back
(S/N)ij 9.59 11.57 4.80 16.36 12.94 8.22
Sum of squares (SSi) 1.95 66.81 11.12
% Contributions 2.4372 83.6365 13.9263
(b) Spring-go
120 135 2.0 3.0 2.5 3.5
(S/N)ij 7.87 5.99 7.63 6.23 6.61 7.25
Sum of squares (SSi) 1.76 0.98 0.21
% Contributions 59.6067 33.4050 6.9883
 S. Thipprakmas, W. Phanitwong / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 4430–4436 4433

Spring-go value Spring-back value

0.80
t = 2 mm
0.60
t = 3 mm
0.40

0.20

/ (°)
0.00 Bending angle (θ ) / (°)
-0.20 30 45 120 135

-0.40

-0.60

-0.80

(a) Rp 2.5 mm
Spring-go value Spring-back value

0.80
t = 2 mm
0.60
t = 3 mm
0.40

0.20
/ (°)

0.00 Bending angle (θ ) / (°)

-0.20 30 45 120 135

-0.40

-0.60

-0.80

(b) Rp 3.5 mm

Fig. 2. Comparison of the amounts of spring-back and spring-go analyzed by FEM simulation with respect to the process parameters.

3.13 mm

4.75 mm
3.30 mm
10.52 mm
(a-1) θ = 30°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 2 mm (b-1) θ = 120°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 2 mm

4.72 mm

6.02 mm
4.36 mm
11.33 mm
(a-2) θ = 30°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 3 mm (b-2) θ = 120°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 3 mm

5.91 mm

6.90 mm
4.80 mm
12.87 mm
(a-3) θ = 30°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 4 mm (b-3) θ = 120°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 4 mm

(a) spring-back (b) spring-go

Mean stress (MPa) 3 mm

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

Fig. 3. Comparison of mean stress with respect to the material thickness (Rd = 5 mm).
4434 S. Thipprakmas, W. Phanitwong / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 4430–4436
punch radius on spring-back and spring-go were clearly investi-
gated and identified based on the stress distribution analysis.
Fig. 2 shows the amounts of spring-back and spring-go analyzed
by FEM with respect to bending angle, material thickness, and
punch radius. The results showed the same tendency of spring-
back and spring-go in both cases of punch radius of 2.5 and
3.5 mm, as shown in Fig. 2a and b, respectively. Specifically, as
the bending angle increased, the amount of spring-back decreased
and the amount of spring-go increased. In addition, as the material
thickness increased, the amount of spring-back decreased whereas
the amount of spring-go increased. As the punch radius increased,
the amount of spring-back increased whereas the amount of
spring-go decreased. The results obtained in this research are gen-
erally in agreement with those reported in the literature. These re-
sults were reported by FEM simulation and experiments that
spring-back decreased with increase in bending angle [4,11] and
3.13 mm
10.52 mm
(a) θ = 30°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 2 mm
5.03 mm
10.75 mm
(c) θ = 45°, Rp = 2.5 mm, t = 3 mm
-150 -100 -50 0 50 100
Fig. 4. Comparison of mean stress with respect to the process parameters in case of spring-back (Rd = 5 mm).
4.75 mm
3.30 mm
(a) θ = 120°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 2 mm
5.27 mm
2.87mm
(c) θ = 135°, Rp = 2.5 mm, t = 3 mm
-150 -100 -50 0 50
Fig. 5. Comparison of mean stress with respect to the process parameters in case of spring-go (Rd = 5 mm).
material thickness [11,15], and decrease in punch radius [15].
However, the spring-go was rarely reported. Only the author’s past
research reported that the amount of spring-go decreased as the
punch radius increased [12]. However, the mechanism of spring-
back/spring-go related to these process parameters and the degree
of important of each process parameter have not been clearly iden-
tified yet. Base on the stress distribution analysis, the mechanism
of spring-back and spring-go related to process parameters was
clearly identified. Fig. 3 shows a comparison of mean stress with
respect to the material thickness. The results illustrated that as
the material thickness increased, the bending allowance zone
and reversed bending zone increased. It was observed that the in-
crease in reserved bending zone was larger than the increase in
bending allowance zone. In addition, as the material thickness in-
creased, the plastic zone across the thickness increased whereas
the elastic zone over the neutral plane was approximately
3.35 mm
10.27 mm
(b) θ = 45°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 2 mm
5.00 mm
11.08 mm
(d) θ = 45°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 3 mm
Mean stress (MPa) 3 mm
150
4.95 mm
2.90 mm
(b) θ = 135°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 2 mm
5.18 mm
3.00 mm
(d) θ = 135°, Rp = 3.5 mm, t = 3 mm
Mean stress (MPa) 3 mm
100 150
 S. Thipprakmas, W. Phanitwong / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 4430–4436 4435

Table 6
Required bending angle
Comparison of the amounts of spring-back and spring-go with reference to the 120.0
process parameters. FEM EXP

Bending angle (θ ) / (°)

119.5
Process parameters Case
(1) (Ref.) (2) (3) (4) 119.0

(a) Spring-back 118.5

Bending angle (h)/(°) 30 35 30 30
Material thickness (t)/(mm) 2.0 2.0 2.5 2.0 118.0
Punch radius (Rp)/(mm) 2.5 2.5 2.5 3.0
Spring-back value (°) 0.58 0.78 0.09 0.18 117.5
(b) Spring-go 117.0
Bending angle (h)/(°) 135 160 135 135
2.5 3.5 2.5 3.5
Material thickness (t)/(mm) 3.0 3.0 2.5 3.0
Punch radius (Rp) / (mm) Punch radius (Rp) / (mm)
Punch radius (Rp)/(mm) 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.0 2 3
Spring-go value (°) 0.54 0.38 0.43 0.52 Thickness (t) / (mm) Thickness (t) / (mm)

Fig. 6. Comparison of the bending angle between FEM and experimental results
(h = 120°).
constant. Therefore, with these characteristics, as the material
thickness increased, the amounts of spring-back and spring-go de-
creased and increased, respectively. Fig. 4 shows a comparison of 600
mean stress in case of spring-back, with respect to the bending an-

Bending force / (N)

gle, the reversed bending zone and the bending allowance zone in
the case of a large bending angle slightly increased and decreased,
respectively, comparing with that of a small bending angle case.
With respect to the punch radius, the reversed bending zone
slightly decreased and the bending allowance slightly increased
as the punch radius increased that was clearly identified and were
generally in agreement with those reported in the author’s past re-
search [12]. The results illustrated that the material thickness had
a great major on the reversed bending and bending allowance
zones whereas the punch radius and bending angle had a small
influence on the reversed bending and bending allowance zones.
Fig. 5 shows a comparison of mean stress in case of spring-go.
The mechanism of spring-go was clearly identified by the author’s
past research [12]. As the results, it was observed that the reversed
bending zone was larger than the bending allowance zone resulted
in the spring-go which corresponded with those reported in the
author’s past researches [12–14]. The effects of process parameters
could be explained in the same manner of the above-mentioned.
The reversed bending and bending allowance zones slightly in-
creased and decreased, respectively, as the bending angle in-
creased. Whereas the reversed bending zone decreased and the
bending allowance zone increased as the punch radius increased
that was clearly identified and were generally in agreement with
those reported in the author’s past research [12]. However, the in-
creases in reversed bending and bending allowance zones were
largest in case of changing in the bending angle.
Similar to these results, based on the stress distribution the ef-
fects of process parameters and the obtained results of the degree
of importance of process parameters analyzed by the ANOVA
technique could be clearly identified. The material thickness and
bending angle had a great major influence on the reversed bending
zone and bending allowance zone in the case of spring-back and
spring-go, respectively. To confirm the influence of these process
parameters, an increase or decrease of approximately 20% for each
process parameter as listed in Table 6 was simulated and the
amounts of spring-back and spring-go were also reported. The re-
sults confirmed that the effect of material thickness on the spring-
back was greatest. Additionally, in the case of spring-go, the results
also confirmed that the effect of bending angle on the spring-go
was greatest, closely followed by the material thickness.
3.3. Comparing the FEM simulation and experimental results
The accuracy of the FEM simulation results was validated by
laboratory experiments. It was also presented in many past
500
FEM EXP
400
300
200
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Bending stroke / (mm)
Fig. 7. Comparison of the bending force between FEM simulation and experimental
results (h = 120°, Rp = 3.5 mm, Rd = 5 mm, t = 3 mm).
researches that analyzed spring-back and spring-go with various
bent shapes and different commercial FEM software showed good
agreement with the experimental results [1,3–5,13–15]. In this
study, the experiments were performed following the author’s past
researches [13,14] in which the errors in analyzed bending force
and bending angle were approximately 1% compared with the
experimental results. However, most of past researches were per-
formed in the case of spring-back. In this study, experiments were
carried out to confirm the accuracy of FEM simulation results espe-
cially for the case of spring-go. Fig. 6 shows the comparison of the
bending angle between the FEM simulation and the experimental
results. Comparison of bending force between the FEM simulation
and the experiments was also observed as shown in Fig. 7. Again,
the FEM simulation results confirmed good agreement with the
experimental results with errors of approximately 1% in bending
force and bending angle compared with the experimental results.
4. Conclusions
The FEM simulation, in association with the Taguchi and the
ANOVA techniques, was used to examine the process parameters
in V-bending process, including bending angle, material thickness,
and punch radius. Laboratory experiments were carried out to val-
idate the accuracy of the FEM simulation results. The ANOVA re-
sults illustrated the influence of each process parameter on the
spring-back and spring-go, together with their calculated percent-
age contributions. The material thickness, with its approximately
calculated percentage contribution of 83.6365%, had a major influ-
ence on spring-back. In contrast, the bending angle and subsequent
material thickness, with their approximately calculated percentage
contributions of 59.6067% and 33.4050%, had a major influence on
4436 S. Thipprakmas, W. Phanitwong / Materials and Design 32 (2011) 4430–4436
spring-go. These ANOVA results and the effects of process param-
eters could be clearly identified based on the stress distribution
analysis. In the case of spring-back, the material thickness had a
great effect on the bending allowance and reversed bending zones.
It was vice versa in the case of spring-go; the bending angle and
subsequent material thickness had a major effect on the bending
allowance and reserved bending zones. Therefore, the process
parameter design in V-bending process depended on the spring-
back and spring-go. Specifically, the material thickness was
strongly considered in the case of spring-back. In contrast, the
bending angle and subsequent material thickness were strongly
considered in the case of spring-go. The combination of the FEM
simulation, the Taguchi method, and the ANOVA technique was
an effective tool to predict the degree of importance of the process
parameters in the V-bending process, in addition to aiding in
improvement of the quality of the required bending angle by opti-
mization of the process parameters relating to the spring-back and
spring-go.
Acknowledgements
The presented research is partially supported by a grant from
the National University Research Project of Thailand (NRU Project)
under Grant No. 54000298, the Thai Research Fund (TRF) under
Grant No. TRF-MRG5380117, and the Center of Excellence in Sheet
and Bulk Metal Forming Technology (SBMFT).
References
[1] Zang SL, Liang J, Guo C. A constitutive model for spring-back prediction in
which the change of young’s modulus with plastic deformation is considered.
Int J Mach Tool Manuf 2007;47:1791–7.
[2] Leu DK, Hsieh CM. The influence of coining force on spring-back reduction in
V-die bending process. J Mater Process Technol 2008;196:230–5.
[3] Wang J, Verma S, Alexander R, Gauc J. Spring-back control of sheet metal air
bending process. J Manuf Process 2008;10:21–7.
[4] Tekaslan O, Gerger N, Seker U. Determination of spring-back of stainless steel
sheet metal in ‘‘V’’: bending dies. J Mater Des 2008;29:1043–50.
[5] Meinders T, Burchitz IA, Bonte MHA, Lingbeek RA. Numerical product design:
springback prediction, compensation and optimization. Int J Mach Tool Manuf
2008;48:499–514.
[6] Kim HS, Koc M. Numerical investigations on springback characteristics of
aluminum sheet metal alloys in warm forming conditions. J Mater Process
Technol 2008;204:370–83.
[7] Yu HY. Variation of elastic modulus during plastic deformation and its
influence on springback. J Mater Des 2009;30:846–50.
[8] Kazan R, Firat M, Tiryaki AE. Prediction of springback in wipe-bending process
of sheet metal using neural network. J Mater Des 2009;30:418–23.
[9] Ozturk F, Toros S, Kilic S. Tensile and spring-back Behavior of DP600 advanced
high strength steel at warm temperatures. J Iron Steel Res Int 2009;16:41–6.
[10] Parsa MH, Nasher al ahkami S, Ettehad M. Experimental and finite element
study on the spring-back of double curved aluminum/polypropylene/
aluminum sandwich sheet. J Mater Des 2010;31:4174–83.
[11] Panthi SK, Ramakrishnan N, Ahmed M, Singh SS, Goel MD. Finite element
analysis of sheet metal bending process to predict the springback. J Mater Des
2010;31:657–62.
[12] Thipprakmas S, Rojananan S. Investigation of spring-go phenomenon using
finite element method. J Mater Des 2008;29:1526–32.
[13] Thipprakmas S. Finite element analysis of punch height effect on V-bending
angle. J Mater Des 2010;31:1593–8.
[14] Thipprakmas S. Effect of ratio of punch height to workpiece length in partial V-
bending process. Steel Res Int 2010;81:769–72.
[15] Bakhshi-Jooybari M, Rahmani B, Daeezadeh V, Gorji A. The study of springback
of CK67 steel sheet in V-die and U-die bending processes. J Mater Des
2009;30:2410–9.
[16] Yanagimoto J, Oyamada K. Mechanism of springback-free bending of
highstrength steel sheets under warm forming conditions. Ann CIRP
2007;56:265–8.
[17] Kim H, Nargundkar N, Altan T. Prediction of bend allowance and springback in
air bending. ASME 2007;129:342–51.
[18] Garcia-Romeu ML, Ciurana J, Ferrer I. Springback determination of sheet
metals in an air bending process based on an experimental work. J Mater
Process Technol 2007;191:174–7.
[19] Panthi SK, Ramakrishnan N, Pathak KK, Chouhan JS. An analysis of springback
in sheet metal bending using Finite Element Method (FEM). J Mater Process
Technol 2007;186:120–4.
[20] Song JH, Huh H, Kim SH. Stress based springback reduction of a channel shaped
auto-body part with high-strength steel using response surface methodology. J
Eng Mater Technol 2007;129:397–406.
[21] Dongjuan Z, Zhenshan C, Xueyu R, Yuqiang L. An analytical model for
predicting springback and side wall curl of sheet after U-bending. Comput
Mater Sci 2007;38:707–15.
[22] Chen C, Ko M, Wenner ML. Experimental investigation of springback variation
in forming of high strength steels. J Manuf Sci Eng 2008;130:1–9.
[23] Thipprakmas S. Application of Taguchi technique to investigation of geometry
and position of V-ring indenter in fine-blanking process. J Mater Des
2010;31:2496–500.
[24] Thipprakmas S. parameter design for the counter-blanking process using the
finite element method and the Taguchi approach. Key Eng Mater
2010;443:134–9.