Experimental Investigation on Geometric Accuracy …
221
Table 7 Observed and predicted values of R a (µm)
Exp. Run order
Observed R a (µm)
Predicted R a (µm)
Error (%)
1
0.8333
0.8561
2.6691
2
1.2818
0.9916
29.2673
3
1.2195
1.127
8.2076
4
0.9695
1.1165
13.1661
5
1.3015
1.2520
3.9578
6
1.3808
1.3874
0.4793
7
1.1145
1.3769
19.0573
8
1.5258
1.5124
0.8860
9
1.646
1.6478
0.1092
10
0.8873
0.8909
0.4097
11
0.9128
1.0264
11.0683
12
1.1968
1.1618
3.0083
13
0.9713
1.1513
15.6388
14
1.35575
1.28675
5.3623
15
1.09375
1.4222
23.0945
16
1.78025
1.4117
26.1068
17
1.74375
1.54715
12.7072
18
1.6455
1.6826
2.2049
2. Number of forming stages and pitch sizes also have significant effect on surface
roughness. As number of forming stages and pitch size is increased, surface
roughness increases.
3. As feed rate has no influence on surface roughness and geometric accuracy of
formed part, therefore high feed rate should be used to reduce forming time.
Mathematical models for geometric accuracy and surface roughness have been
developed which are in good agreement with experimental results. With multistage
strategy, geometric accuracy of formed parts improves.
References
1. Li JC, Geng P, Pan JJ (2012) Influences of process parameters on forming performance of sheet
metal incremental forming based on numerical simulation. Adv Mater Res 562:294–297
2. Ham M, Jeswiet J (2006) Single point incremental forming and the forming criteria for AA3003.
CIRP Ann 55(1):241–244
3. Echrif SB, Hrairi M (2014) Significant parameters for the surface roughness in incremental
forming process. Mater Manuf Process 29(6):697–703
4. Li J, Bai T, Zhou Z (2014) Numerical simulation and experimental investigation of incremental
sheet forming with an elastic support. Int J Adv Manufact Technol 74(9–12):1649–1654
221
Table 7 Observed and predicted values of R a (µm)
Exp. Run order
Observed R a (µm)
Predicted R a (µm)
Error (%)
1
0.8333
0.8561
2.6691
2
1.2818
0.9916
29.2673
3
1.2195
1.127
8.2076
4
0.9695
1.1165
13.1661
5
1.3015
1.2520
3.9578
6
1.3808
1.3874
0.4793
7
1.1145
1.3769
19.0573
8
1.5258
1.5124
0.8860
9
1.646
1.6478
0.1092
10
0.8873
0.8909
0.4097
11
0.9128
1.0264
11.0683
12
1.1968
1.1618
3.0083
13
0.9713
1.1513
15.6388
14
1.35575
1.28675
5.3623
15
1.09375
1.4222
23.0945
16
1.78025
1.4117
26.1068
17
1.74375
1.54715
12.7072
18
1.6455
1.6826
2.2049
2. Number of forming stages and pitch sizes also have significant effect on surface
roughness. As number of forming stages and pitch size is increased, surface
roughness increases.
3. As feed rate has no influence on surface roughness and geometric accuracy of
formed part, therefore high feed rate should be used to reduce forming time.
Mathematical models for geometric accuracy and surface roughness have been
developed which are in good agreement with experimental results. With multistage
strategy, geometric accuracy of formed parts improves.
References
1. Li JC, Geng P, Pan JJ (2012) Influences of process parameters on forming performance of sheet
metal incremental forming based on numerical simulation. Adv Mater Res 562:294–297
2. Ham M, Jeswiet J (2006) Single point incremental forming and the forming criteria for AA3003.
CIRP Ann 55(1):241–244
3. Echrif SB, Hrairi M (2014) Significant parameters for the surface roughness in incremental
forming process. Mater Manuf Process 29(6):697–703
4. Li J, Bai T, Zhou Z (2014) Numerical simulation and experimental investigation of incremental
sheet forming with an elastic support. Int J Adv Manufact Technol 74(9–12):1649–1654