Application of Response Surface Analysis and Genetic Algorithm for the Optimization of Single Point Incremental Forming Process

Single point incremental forming (SPIF) is a modern method of forming sheet metal, where parts can be formed without the use of dedicated dies. The ability of SPIF to form a part is based on various forming parameters. Previous work was not accomplished with the help of design of experiments (DOE), thus reducing the number of parameters varied at any time. This paper presents a Box-Behnken experimental design, which develops the numerical plan, formalizes the forming parameters critical in SPIF and analyse data. The most critical factors affecting SPIF were found to be wall inclination angle, incremental step size, material thickness and tool size. The main effects of these parameters on the quality of the formed parts were studied in detail. Actually this work aims to “optimize the thinning rate and the maximum force by considering the tool diameter and the vertical pitch as unknown parameters for two different wall angles and thicknesses”. To this purpose, an optimization procedure based on the use of response surface methodology (RSM) and genetic algorithms (GA) have been proposed for application to find the optimum solutions. Finally, it demonstrated that the developed methods can solve high non-linear problems successfully. Associated plots are shown to be very efficient for a quick localization of the region of the search space containing the global optimum values of the SPIF parameters.

[1]  G. Hussain,et al.  A new formability indicator in single point incremental forming , 2009 .

[2]  Serge Samper,et al.  Optimization method for stamping tools under reliability constraints using genetic algorithms and finite element simulations , 2010 .

[3]  Henia Arfa,et al.  Process analysis based on experimental tests and numerical modelling of single point incremental forming of sheet metal: effect of the principal process parameters , 2011 .

[4]  L. Hua,et al.  A hybrid of back propagation neural network and genetic algorithm for optimization of injection molding process parameters , 2011 .

[5]  Aldo Attanasio,et al.  Asymmetric two points incremental forming: Improving surface quality and geometric accuracy by tool path optimization , 2008 .

[6]  Matthieu Rauch,et al.  Tool path programming optimization for incremental sheet forming applications , 2009, Comput. Aided Des..

[7]  J. Gelin,et al.  Experimental Investigations and Numerical Analysis for Improving Knowledge of Incremental Sheet Forming Process for Sheet Metal Parts , 2009 .

[8]  S. Thibaud,et al.  Influence of the initial grain size in single point incremental forming process for thin sheets metal and microparts: Experimental investigations , 2013 .

[9]  R. Bahloul.  Optimisation of process parameters in flanging operation in order to minimise stresses and Lemaitre’s damage , 2011 .

[10]  J. Duflou,et al.  Material data identification to model the single point incremental forming process , 2010 .

[11]  Jacob Jeswiet,et al.  Single Point Incremental Forming Limits Using a Boxbehnken Design of Experiment , 2007 .

[12]  C. Henrard,et al.  Forming forces in single point incremental forming: prediction by finite element simulations, validation and sensitivity , 2011 .

[13]  R. Bahloul,et al.  Finite element modelling and experimental investigation of single point incremental forming process of aluminum sheets: influence of process parameters on punch force monitoring and on mechanical and geometrical quality of parts , 2013 .

[14]  Riadh Bahloul,et al.  Comparison between three optimization methods for the minimization of maximum bending load and springback in wiping die bending obtained by an experimental approach , 2010 .

[15]  Nadhir Lebaal,et al.  Tool path optimization for single point incremental sheet forming using response surface method , 2012, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.