Mat 6453-9854P

Feasibility study on single point incremental forming
Bachelor of Engineering Thesis

A study of die-less preforming of double curved aluminum sheets for GLARE laminates
Master of Science thesis

Delft University of Technology

Faculty of Aerospace Engineering
Department of Aerospace Structures and Materials
Remko Kuitert
11 October 2016
Feasibility study on single point incremental forming

A study of die-less preforming of double curved aluminum sheets for GLARE laminates
By
Ing. R. Kuitert
In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Science in Aerospace Structures and Materials
At the Delft University of Technology

Faculty of Aeronautical Engineering
Department of Aerospace Materials and Structures
To be defended on Friday, 28th of October, 2016 at 9:00 AM.
Supervisor: Ir. Jos Sinke

Thesis committee: Ir. Jos Sinke, TU Delft
Dr. Ir. Rene Alderliesten, TU Delft
Dr. Ir. Sonell Shroff, TU Delft
Remko Kuitert I|P a g e

Copyright R. Kuitert
All rights reserved
II | P a g e Remko Kuitert
This Master thesis investigates the feasibility of single point incremental

forming as a method to die-less preform double curved aluminum sheets
used in GLARE laminates. A small scale experimental setup was used to
see if this method could achieve the required speed and accuracy. The
results of these experiments were translated to a large scale production
line, such as the Airbus A320. However it was concluded that single point
incremental forming is not a feasible process for large scale production.
Even though the dimensional accuracy is rather good, the process speed
to achieve this accuracy is far too low.
Keywords: single point incremental forming, CNC machining, GLARE

laminates, production speed, dimensional accuracy.
Author: ________________________________
Ing. R. Kuitert
Delft University of Technology Supervisor: ________________________________

Ir. Jos Sinke
Remko Kuitert III | P a g e

IV | P a g e Remko Kuitert
Preface
Preface
In the last year of the Master Aerospace Engineering at Delft University of Technology in Delft, the student
will get the opportunity to perform a thesis project. During this graduation period a thesis has to be written.
This report represents my thesis for the Master of Aerospace Structures and Materials at the faculty of
Aerospace Engineering. I had the opportunity to perform my graduation project at the Delft Aerospace
Structures and Material Laboratory of Delft University of Technology in Delft. The main focus of this project
was to perform a feasibility study on the subject of incremental forming for double curved aluminum sheets
used in GLARE laminates.
This thesis would not have been possible without the guidance of several people who supported me
throughout the graduation period. Their support, feedback and critical eye contributed to the quality of this
thesis report.
In particular I would like to thank my girlfriend, Wouke van Veldhuizen, for standing by my side despite all the
setbacks during this thesis. I would also like to give a special thanks to my supervisor, Jos Sinke, for his
support during the entire project and valuable feedback. Without him the experimental setup would have
never been possible. I would also like to thank Gertjan Mulder and Micha Huizinga for all their help during
the design and construction phase of the experimental setup.
Finally, I would like to say thank you to my mother, my brother, my friends and fellow students for their
support during this Master thesis.
Remko Kuitert
Aalsmeer, The Netherlands
October 28, 2016
Remko Kuitert V|P a g e

Summary
Summary
Although GLARE is now applied on the A380 and considered as a material for future aircraft, several cost and
production issues still have to be solved for future applications of this material. GLARE panels are currently
being produced by a hand lay-up and self-forming method, which is a suitable production method for the low
volume production line of e.g. the Airbus A380. But even with this method the production of double curved
GLARE panels remained a problem as wrinkles occur if the aluminum sheets become too large.
In the aircraft industry double curved metal sheets with large radius, for e.g. fuselage application, are
currently made by stretch forming. This process includes the use of a die which is product specific. But for the
production of GLARE the use of dedicated dies becomes too expensive. At the moment several processes
exist, but none of these processes meet the standards for accuracy and/or cycle time yet. Therefore this
research focused on a new type of process, the incremental sheet forming process, in order to determine its
feasibility for the application of preforming metal sheets.
As a start an analysis was made what kind of production rates and accuracy are to be expected. It turned out
2
that the production rate is in the range of 72-129 m /hour and the required accuracy should be at least 90%
of the forming depth. Thus for the process to be feasible a combination of a feed rate of 600 m/min and a
step size of 0.5 mm/pass is needed at a single machine to meet these requirements.
In order to verify if this is feasible an experimental approach was chosen, due to a lack of accurate computer
models. This started by designing and constructing an incremental forming machine, which was required for
the experiments. This machine was capable of operating at feed rates of 0-3000 mm/min and step sizes of at
least 0.1 mm/pass or larger. The workable area was limited to 100x100 mm by both the machine and the jig,
which was used to clamp the specimens. The specimens used in the Thesis were made of aluminum 2024-T3
and were 0.4 mm thick, which is the same as the aluminum layers used in GLARE.
The experiments were split up in four categories. The first category was the geometrical experiments. These
experiments showed that despite the change of geometry, the repeatability of the process was in the range
of 0.25 mm. The second category of experiments was related to the feed rate. These experiments provided
information of the effects of higher feed rates. It was shown that if the feed rates increase the dimensional
accuracy decreased. This implies that the feed rate could not be increased as easily as thought. The third set
of experiments was related to the step size experiments. These experiments showed that a small step size
gives a higher accuracy and vice versa. The fourth and last set of experiments was the geometric correction
experiments, which were used to increase the accuracy of the process by iteration. It was shown that after
only a single iteration the specimens achieved 97.2% of the input model forming depth, while only 65% was
achieved without iteration.
Even though relative high accuracies were obtained the conclusion of this thesis is that it is not feasible for
single point incremental forming to be applied for large scale industrial applications, like the Airbus A320
production line, in this form. It is therefore recommended that future research should focus on different
strategies for incremental forming, such as an origami approach or the use of multiple forming tools
simultaneously. Also it is suggested that more research should be done for a better prediction model in order
to avoid the iteration step. Last, but not least, it is also recommended that the current experiment setup
should be replaced by a more professional setup in order to improve the control of the spindle speed for
example.
VI | P a g e Remko Kuitert
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 6

1.1 BACKGROUND ............................................................................................................................ 6
1.2 PROBLEM DEFINITION .................................................................................................................. 7
1.3 THESIS OBJECTIVE ........................................................................................................................ 7
1.4 RESEARCH QUESTION ................................................................................................................... 8
1.5 RESEARCH APPROACH .................................................................................................................. 9
CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 12

2.1 GLARE, A FIBER METAL LAMINATE ............................................................................................... 12
2.2 INCREMENTAL SHEET FORMING ................................................................................................... 18
CHAPTER 3 REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... 22

3.1 APPLICATIONS OF GLARE........................................................................................................... 22
3.2 INDUSTRY REQUIREMENTS .......................................................................................................... 23
3.3 THEORETICAL ANALYSIS .............................................................................................................. 25
CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP ............................................................................... 28

4.1 MACHINE SELECTION ................................................................................................................. 28
4.2 MACHINE DESIGN...................................................................................................................... 30
4.3 JIG AND SPECIMENS ................................................................................................................... 39
4.4 MEASURING ............................................................................................................................. 40
CHAPTER 5 EXPERIMENTS ............................................................................................ 41

5.1 CALIBRATION............................................................................................................................ 41
5.2 TEST PROTOCOL ........................................................................................................................ 43
5.3 GEOMETRY EXPERIMENTS ........................................................................................................... 46
5.4 FEED RATE EXPERIMENTS ............................................................................................................ 49
5.5 STEP SIZE EXPERIMENTS.............................................................................................................. 50
5.6 GEOMETRY SPRING BACK CORRECTION .......................................................................................... 52
5.7 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS ............................................................................................................. 53
Remko Kuitert 1|P a g e

Table of Contents
CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 57

6.1 LARGE SCALE APPLICATIONS ........................................................................................................ 57
6.2 LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 59
6.3 IMPROVEMENTS........................................................................................................................ 59
CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 60

7.1 CONSOLIDATION OF THE WORK.................................................................................................... 60
7.2 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................ 61
7.3 RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................................................. 61
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 62
APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 65
APPENDIX A MATLAB SCRIPTS.................................................................................... 66

A.1 3D SKETCH OF A SINGLE CURVED FUSELAGE PANEL .......................................................................... 66
A.2 SCAN GRID GENERATOR SCRIPT................................................................................................... 67
A.3 G-CODE GENERATOR SCRIPT ...................................................................................................... 68
APPENDIX B REPETIER FIRMWARE CHANGES.............................................................. 70

B.1 DISABLE ALL EXTRUDERS ............................................................................................................. 70
B.2 CHOOSING THE CORRECT MOTHERBOARD ...................................................................................... 70
B.3 DISABLE ALL END STOPS.............................................................................................................. 70
2|P a g e Remko Kuitert

List of Figures
List of Figures
Figure 2-1 GLARE Layup [8] ................................................................................................................. 12
Figure 2-2 Different GLARE Grades with their fiber orientation and their specific constituents [16] 14
Figure 2-3 Post stretching effect with Stress Strain curve [20] .......................................................... 15
Figure 2-4 SPIF setup (left) and TPIF setup (right) .............................................................................. 18
Figure 2-5 Back pressure SPIF (left), partial die SPIF (center) and full die SPIF (right) ....................... 19
Figure 2-6 Incremental Stretch Forming with a die ............................................................................ 19
Figure 2-7 Single Point Incremental Forming Inaccuracy [5] .............................................................. 20
Figure 3-1 GLARE on an A380 [34] ...................................................................................................... 22

Figure 3-2 3D sketch of a A320 Fuselage panel generated by the Matlab script in Appendix A-1..... 25
Figure 3-3 3D Sketch of the double curved panel............................................................................... 26
Figure 3-4 Step size vs. Toolpath length for large panels ................................................................... 26
Figure 3-5 Feed rate vs. Production time for large panels ................................................................. 26
Figure 3-6 required step size vs. the feed rate for minimum and maximum production rates ......... 27
Figure 4-1 A 3-axis router machine (left) vs. 3-axis knee milling machine (right) [37] [38] [39] ........ 28
Figure 4-2 HBM BF16 Drilling/Milling machine [39] ........................................................................... 30
Figure 4-3 Conventional Y-axis close up [38] ...................................................................................... 30
Figure 4-4 Catia sketch of the Y-axis stepper motor fitting ................................................................ 31
Figure 4-5 Complete CNC Y-axis of the HBM BF16 ............................................................................. 31
Figure 4-6 Conventional X-axis Close up ............................................................................................. 32
Figure 4-7 Additional Coupling Piece X-axis ........................................................................................ 32
Figure 4-8 Complete CNC X-axis of the HBM BF16 ............................................................................. 32
Figure 4-9 Conventional Z-axis close up [38] ...................................................................................... 33
Figure 4-10 Complete CNC Z-axis of the HBM BF16 ........................................................................... 33
Figure 4-11 Complete Conversion of the HBM BF16 .......................................................................... 33
Figure 4-12 Stepper motor Nema 23 3 Nm [43] .............................................................................. 34
Figure 4-13 Leadshine DM556 - 2 Phase Digital Stepper Drive [42] ................................................... 35
Figure 4-14 PSU 48VDC 6,7A [41] ....................................................................................................... 35
Figure 4-15 Arduino Mega 2560 [38] .................................................................................................. 36
Figure 4-16 Ramps 1.4 Shield [39] ...................................................................................................... 36
Figure 4-17 1SL02 IP66 Wall Box [40] ................................................................................................. 36
Figure 4-18 3D printer wiring scheme [46] ......................................................................................... 37
Figure 4-19 Custom design wiring scheme ......................................................................................... 37
Figure 4-20 Complete Electrical Control Box ...................................................................................... 37
Figure 4-21 Repetier Host interface.................................................................................................... 38
Figure 4-22 The jig............................................................................................................................... 39
Figure 4-23 Example of an aluminum 2024-T3 0.4 specimen............................................................. 39

List of Figures
Figure 5-1 Calibration specimen measurement.................................................................................. 41

Figure 5-2 Calibration Specimen ......................................................................................................... 41
Figure 5-3 Standard deviation between calibration specimens including sheet bending .................. 41
Figure 5-4 Differences between individual measurement cycles in mm............................................ 42
Figure 5-5 Deviations within a single measurement in mm ............................................................... 42
Figure 5-6 Machine used for specimen production ............................................................................ 43
Figure 5-7 Clamping of the specimen with convex side upwards....................................................... 43
Figure 5-8 The jig on the XY Table....................................................................................................... 43
Figure 5-9 Starting point determination X and Y ................................................................................ 44
Figure 5-10 Starting point determination Z ........................................................................................ 44
Figure 5-11 Z-axis with (Left) and without power (Right) ................................................................... 44
Figure 5-12 Test protocol flowchart ................................................................................................... 45
Figure 5-13 Geometry Experiment 1: Average obtained geometry ................................................... 46
Figure 5-14 Geometry Experiment 1: Deviation between the specimens.......................................... 46
Figure 5-15 Geometry Experiment 1: Specimen (red) vs. Model (blue) ............................................. 46
Figure 5-17 Geometry Experiment 2: Deviation between the specimens.......................................... 47
Figure 5-18 Geometry Experiment 2: Specimen (red) vs. Model (blue) ............................................. 47
Figure 5-20 Geometry Experiment 3: Specimen Deviation ................................................................ 48
Figure 5-21 Geometry Experiment 3: Specimen vs. Model ................................................................ 48
Figure 5-22 Feed rate experiment 2: Differences 2000 mm/min vs. 1000 mm/min .......................... 49
Figure 5-23 Feed rate experiment 3: Differences 3000 mm/min vs. 1000 mm/min .......................... 50
Figure 5-24 Step size experiment 2: Absolute differences vs. 0.2 mm/pass ...................................... 51
Figure 5-25 Step size experiment 2: Specimen shape differences between 0.1 mm/pass (red) vs. 0.2
mm/pass (green) ................................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 5-26 Step size experiment 3: Absolute differences vs. 0.2 mm/pass ...................................... 51
Figure 5-27 Step size experiment 3: Specimen shape differences between 0.3 mm/pass (red) vs. 0.2
mm/pass (green) ................................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 5-28 Specimen 1 without correction ....................................................................................... 52
Figure 5-29 Specimen correction 1 ..................................................................................................... 52
Figure 5-30 Specimen correction 2 ..................................................................................................... 52
Figure 5-31 Overview of the contribution of each effect on the accuracy mismatch ........................ 52
Figure 5-32 Correction 1 vs. CAD Model (left), difference iteration 1 (middle) and difference
iteration 2 (right)................................................................................................................................. 52
Figure 5-33 Overview of the contribution of each effect on the accuracy mismatch ........................ 53
Figure 5-34 Achieved forming depth as a % of the computer model depth ...................................... 53
Figure 5-35 Pillow effect as a % of the achieved specimen depth ..................................................... 54
Figure 5-36 Pillow effect in mm for the geometry tests ..................................................................... 54
Figure 5-37 Sheet bending effect in mm for the geometry tests ....................................................... 54
Figure 5-38 Spring back effect in mm for the geometry tests ............................................................ 55
Figure 5-39 Spring back in % for the geometry tests compared to the computer model depth ....... 55
Figure 5-40 Overview of the contribution of each effect on the depth mismatch............................. 56

Abbreviations
Abbreviations
Term Description
2024-T3 Aluminum 2024 with T3 temper
3D Three Dimensional
ARALL Aramid Reinforced Aluminum Laminate
CAD Computer Aided Design
CARALL Carbon Reinforced Aluminum Laminate
CNC Computer Numerical Controlled
DASML Delft Aerospace Structures and Material Laboratory
FML Fiber Metal Laminate
G-Code General Code
GLARE Glass Laminated Reinforced Epoxy
KU Katholieke Universiteit (Catholic University)
LVDT Linear Voltage Displacement Transducer
M6/M8/M12 Metric bolt with 6/8/12 mm diameter
PSU Power Supply Unit
R Radius
Rev Revolution
SLC Structure Laminate Company
SPIF Single Point Incremental Forming
Sym Symbol
TPIF Two Point Incremental Forming
TU Technical University
UV Ultra Violet

Introduction
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1 Background
Since the application of aluminum in aircraft structures around 1930, sheet metals were used extensively
within civil aircraft. The advantages of having high specific properties provided the material to be
economically very attractive. Even today the amount of aluminum used in modern aircraft is still significant
compared to other materials.
However in the 1950s several accidents occurred due to metal fatigue. This resulted in the development of
new aluminum alloys that provided slightly better properties for corrosion resistance (7000 series) and
fracture toughness (2000 series). But these changes did not lead to any significant improvement of the
fatigue life of the material [1].
The real breakthrough for metal fatigue came from Rob Schliekelmann. After experimenting for a few years
at De Havilland with metal bonding, he switched to Fokker. He introduced the metal bonding technique in
the Fokker F-27 project. During fatigue tests with the F-27 wings it was discovered that the metal bonded
parts had favorable resistance to fatigue crack growth, simply because the crack only grew in a single layer.
This effect considerably slowed down the crack growth in the complete structure [1] [2].
This discovery of the improved fatigue properties provided the basis for Schijve and Vogelesang, at Delft
University of Technology, to perform research in the field of bonded structures. In the 1970s they started
experimenting with adding Aramid fibers between the aluminum sheets, which provided even better
properties in terms of fatigue. But the ARALL material had very poor compressive properties. Therefore an
alternative had to be found to make the Fiber Metal Laminate concept successful in the aircraft industry [1].
As an alternative Delft University of Technology developed a new type of FML called GLARE, which was a
combination between glass fibers and aluminum. This material provided to be very promising for fatigue
sensitive aircraft applications; however costs became an issue on applying the material into aircraft industry.
These were partially solved by the weight savings that were possible and the developed spliced method. This
provided the breakthrough for the application of GLARE on a large aircraft, the A380-800 [1].
Although GLARE is now applied on the A380 and considered as a material for future aircraft several cost and
production issues still have to be solved for future applications of this material. Delft University of
Technology has been involved in the development of GLARE from the start of FML laminates. Due to their
involvement the TU Delft noticed that current production methods and standards are no longer sufficient in
terms of speed and accuracy and thus a new method of producing GLARE has to be found.

Introduction
1.2 Problem definition

GLARE panels are currently being produced by a hand lay-up method, which is a suitable production method
for the low volume production line of e.g. the Airbus A380. In 1999 Broest and Sinke have provided the
method to fabricate curved GLARE panels out of non-deformed flat sheets using a self-forming technique [3]
[4]. This self-forming technique, initially invented a few years earlier by Structures Laminate Company, is now
the standard for manufacturing of curved GLARE panels.
Several studies have shown that GLARE can offer significant weight savings in other types of aircraft [1]. As a
result, the demand for GLARE panels is most likely to increase. The current hand lay-up method is not
suitable for dealing with high quantities of production and thus an alternative has to be found.
Other options for forming GLARE focus on deforming post-cured GLARE panels, such as brake forming, roll
forming, stretch forming, laser bending and shot peening. The issue with this method is that only limited out-
of-plane formability is possible as the glass fiber layers significantly limit the post-cured formability of GLARE
panels, especially in thicker laminates.
Another major challenge with GLARE panels is the production of double curved panels. These days double
curved GLARE panels are made of flat sheets with the earlier mentioned hand lay-up method. These flat
sheets are then forced into a double curved mold to their final shape. Yet this method is limited to certain
curvatures as the sheet edges will start to wrinkle due to the enclosed residual stresses. Some of these
wrinkles can disappear and can be translated into internal sheet stresses during vacuum bagging and
autoclave cycles. However, if the curvature is too large or the sheet is too wide, wrinkles will remain within
the product.
In practice the supplier of these sheets can deliver up to 1500 mm in width. But to avoid wrinkles the applied
width is usually smaller. This leads to a large number of splices in large panels, which is unfavorable for both
weight and simplicity. One way of avoiding wrinkles is by preforming the aluminum sheets to obtain a certain
curvature. In theory this preforming should allow the production of larger panels with larger curvatures and
less splices.
In the aircraft industry double curved metal sheets with large radius, for e.g. fuselage application, are
currently made by stretch forming. This process includes the use of a die which is product specific. But for the
production of GLARE the use of dedicated dies becomes too expensive. At the moment several processes
exist, but none of these processes meet the standards for accuracy and/or cycle time yet. Therefore this
research will focus on a new type of process, the incremental sheet forming process, in order to determine its
feasibility for the application of preforming metal sheets.
1.3 Thesis objective

The main goal of this thesis is to determine the feasibility of incremental forming in terms of dimensional
accuracy and process speed to preform the aluminum layers used in GLARE laminates. This starts with a
literature study on GLARE material and incremental forming. The literature study is the basis of the
theoretical analysis in which the process requirements are determined. This is followed by an experimental
phase, which consists of obtaining an experimental setup and performing several experiments. The results of
these experiments are combined with the theoretical analysis to determine to what extend the process is
feasible.
The thesis objective is defined as:
To perform a study on the combination of GLARE material and incremental forming to define
and perform an experimental setup and test plan to determine to what extend incremental
forming is feasible as a method to preform the aluminum sheets used in GLARE.

Introduction
1.4 Research question

The main problem is to figure out to what extend incremental forming can be used to preform aluminum
layers within GLARE laminates. Therefore, the main research question is:
Can die-less incremental forming be a feasible process for preforming the aluminum layers
used within GLARE laminates?
In order to be able to answer the main research question, several sub-questions are formulated. These are
listed below:
1. What is GLARE made of?

1.1. How is GLARE defined?
1.2. How is GLARE produced?
1.3. What are the material properties?
2. What is die-less incremental sheet forming?

2.1. How is incremental sheet forming defined?
2.2. What are the recent developments?
3. What are the process conditions?

3.1. What is the aim for production speed?
3.2. What is the aim for dimensional accuracy?
4. What is the experimental outcome?

4.1. Is the process repeatable, predictable and controllable?
4.2. What are the effects of different process settings on accuracy?
4.3. What are the effects of different process settings on process speed?
5. How can incremental forming be implemented for large scale manufacturing?

5.1. Which settings provided valid results for the process conditions?
5.2. What possibilities are there to improve in terms of dimensional accuracy?
5.3. What possibilities are there to improve in terms of production speed?
5.4. Which limitations does the process have?

Introduction
1.5 Research approach

To accomplish the thesis objective and to answer the research questions, the research will be divided in
several steps.
1.5.1 Literature study

To obtain more knowledge about the material and the incremental sheet forming process a literature study
will be done on these subjects. The knowledge obtained in this literature study can be used for the rest of the
research. This literature study will also provide the answers to the first three sub-research questions and
provide the basis of this research.
1.5.2 Experimental setup

This part will focus on getting familiar with the experimental setup. It will describe the experimental setup,
which includes the sheet material, the forming tool, the choice for the custom designed small size milling
machine and clamping system being used.
The material selected for the specimens is aluminum 2024-T3 with a thickness of 0.4 mm. The specimen
sheet size is 120 x 120 mm.
The forming tool being used is a straight steel tool with a 16 mm diameter. This forming tool is originally from
an impact tower setup, but is sufficient for this research. This forming tool has sufficient wear resistance to
neglect any effects of tool wear during the experiments.
The small size milling machine is capable of moving along the specimen. The movement in X and Y axis are at
least 100 mm in order to cover the area to be processed of the specimens. The movement in Z axis can be
limited as the parts only require small curvature, which limits the depth of the part.
In order to clamp the material, a jig is used to hold the material in place during the process. This jig is already
available in the Delft Aerospace Structures and Material Laboratory at Delft University of Technology as it is
also part of the impact tower setup.
In order to work with this setup, a thorough knowledge of this setup is required. In the first place such a
machine is not available in the Delft Aerospace Structures and Material Laboratory (DASML), thus a custom
designed machine has to be designed and constructed. After which familiarization with the software is
required to provide the input of the process. Therefore an extensive study is done for this special purpose
setup.

Introduction
1.5.3 Experiments
Geometry experiments
Each of the radius experiments will contain a specific pre-determined shape with a 100 mm or 200 mm
longitudinal diameter and a 100 mm or 200 mm diameter in transverse direction. These diameters are much
smaller compared to the diameters encountered in aircraft industry. This downscaling is required in order to
obtain measurable dimensions during the experiments on small scale. During these experiments the other
process parameters are kept constant at 1000 mm/min feed rate and a vertical step size of 0.2 mm per pass.
After these specimens are formed they are measured by means of linear voltage displacement transducer
before being released from the jig. This provides data about the local spring back during the process.
These radius experiments are performed several times for each combination to provide information about
the scatter of the results. In the first option, which consists of a 100 mm diameter in both directions, the
experiments are conducted five times. If the results obtained provide no significant deviations the following
experiments are conducted three times instead of five times.
The reason to perform these experiments three times is to see if any large deviations occur during these
tests. If these three experiments have a significant deviation to one another, the specific experiment is
conducted again to obtain statistical data of the scatter.
Feed rate and step size experiments

In order to see the effects of speeding up the process, the feed rate and vertical step size are adjusted.
During these experiments the geometry is fixed at 100 mm diameter in both directions and only one variable
is changed per experiment.
The feed rate is varied from 1000 mm/min to 3000 mm/min in steps of 1000 mm/min, where the step size is
fixed at 0.2 mm/pass. The step size is varied afterwards from 0.1 mm to 0.3 mm in steps of 0.1 mm, where
the feed rate is fixed at 1000 mm/min. This results in a total of two additional experiments for the feed rate
and two additional experiments for the step size.
At last there will be a geometrical correction experiment according to Micaris method of over bending /
optimized trajectories [5]. In this experiment two iterations will be made to verify to what extend this
method improves the geometrical accuracy. During these test it may be that the vertical step size is variable
depending on the trajectory, while the feed rate remains at 1000 mm/min.
Number Step Size / Feed Rate Number Step Size / Feed Rate
1 0.2 mm / 1000 mm 5 0.2 mm / 3000 mm
2 0.2 mm / 1000 mm 6 0.1 mm / 1000 mm
3 0.2 mm / 1000 mm 7 0.3 mm / 1000 mm
4 0.2 mm / 2000 mm 8 Variable / 1000 mm
Table 1 Test matrix of the geometry, feed rate and step size experiments
10 | P a g e Remko Kuitert
Introduction
1.5.4 Results, outcome and relevance
Data
During the eight different experiments data is generated. This data has to be stored and processed.
Depending on the amount of scatter during the experiments this implies that a minimum of 25 specimens
(1x5, 6x3 and 1x2) is used up to a maximum of 37 specimens (7x5 and 1x2).
In order to collect the geometrical data each specimen is measured four times at first and each point will be
measured twice. If the measurements are proven to be reliable the following specimens will only be
measured once, even though each point is still scanned twice. This is done with the aid of a linear voltage
displacement transducer or LVDT. The data obtained from these measurements can be stored in an excel
sheet containing the following information:
- Process settings
- Intended geometry from the computer model
- Achieved geometry from the actual specimen
- Measured production time by machine
Outcome
The goal of this Master thesis is to determine the feasibility of die-less forming of double curved aluminum
sheets using single point incremental forming. The experiments performed on the different geometries will
show which range of diameters can be achieved and at which accuracy these can be achieved. From these
experiments it is expected that small diameters will provide more accurate results as the ratio between
elastic and plastic deformations becomes smaller.
Regarding the experiments performed with the different settings, different results are expected. It is
expected that lowering the step size provides higher dimensional accuracy with longer production times.
Considering the feed rate, it is expected that increasing the feed rate will decrease the process time, without
affecting the dimensional accuracy.
Relevance
The results obtained from the experiments can be used to link the different settings with the different
process requirements. For example the geometric experiments can be used to obtain a relation between the
intended geometry and the achieved geometry and thus the dimensional accuracy. These experiments also
provide insight in the differences in production times between different forming depths as it requires more
passes to form deeper products. Another important step is that the results of these small scale experiments
have to be translated to large scale production in order to determine the feasibility.
1.5.5 Management
During the research, management is required to keep track of the data, outcomes and the relevance to the
research question. Management is also required for the deliverables required during the research, such as
the interim report, Master thesis and the presentation of the research performed.
Remko Kuitert 11 | P a g e
Literature Review
Chapter 2 Literature Review

2.1 GLARE, a fiber metal laminate
Fiber metal laminates are a group of materials with a metal and a fiber reinforced polymer component. This
allows FMLs to have their properties tailored by changing the direction of the fibers for specific orientations
and applications. GLARE is a so called Fiber Metal Laminate.
2.1.1 Patents
Since the introduction of Fiber Metal Laminates in the 1970s many patents have been filed. The original
patent on FMLs was filed by Delft University of Technology with patent NL8100087 and NL8100088 [6] [7].
The first patent contains the information of the constituents, while the second patent contains the
information regarding the manufacturing process. These patents were based on ARALL, but they also covered
the application of carbon (CARALL) and glass fibers (GLARE).
Nevertheless GLARE has been patented separately with patent

number US5039571 [8]. This patent focusses on the aluminum
layers combined with glass fiber reinforced layers, instead of the
earlier mentioned Aramid fiber. This patent also mentions
specifically that the laminate consists of 3 to 25 layers with a
thickness between 0.3 and 0.7 mm per layer. The aluminum layers
alternate with glass fiber reinforced plastic layers. Therefore the
laminate will always consist of N+1 layers of aluminum vs. N layers
of glass fiber reinforced plastic as can be seen in Figure 2-1 [9].
Though these patents are used as a basis for GLARE in general,

several other patents have been filed with slight deviations to the
Figure 2-1 GLARE Layup [8]
original patent.
Fiber layer deviations

In 1996 Roebroeks and Mattousch filed a patent that includes a concept with fibers in perpendicular
directions between the metallic layers [10]. They specified this concept as an impact resistant material. A
deviation of this concept is made in 2003, when Roebroeks filed a patent that contains cross ply fiber layers
between the aluminum layers, which consisted of two different fibers instead of one as mentioned in the
previous patent [11].
Metal layer deviations

The first patent that was filed with a change in the metallic layer was in 1989 by Vogelesang, Paalvast and
Verbruggen [12]. This patent included ceramic layers at the impact side instead of metallic layers to improve
the impact resistance of the material for armor plate applications. In 1990 Gunnink filed a similar patent to
improve impact resistance; but instead of ceramic layers he filed a patent for a thick aluminum layer at the
impact side [13]. This patent also included a change in bonding thick tapered aluminum layers to a FML with
a prepreg.
Literature Review
2.1.2 GLARE grades

As GLARE developed, the material got standardized with a specific notation: GLARE AA-B/C-D. The AA
indicates the Grade of GLARE and thus the orientation of the fibers and the aluminum alloy being used. The
B/C part indicated the amount of metal / prepreg layers being used in the laminate. The D is used to define
the metal layer thickness.
As can be seen from Figure 2-2, on the next page, the aluminum material is either a 7475- or a 2024-T3
aluminum alloy [8]. The prepreg used is S2 Glass fiber prepreg with an epoxy resin FM94 for aluminum 2024-
T3 or FM906 for aluminum 7475-T761 [1] [14].
Grade 1 has been developed initially as a proof of concept in the research phase of GLARE and was a direct
spinoff of ARALL. This is the only Grade that uses aluminum 7475-T761 and the corresponding FM906 resin.
This material has the highest ultimate tensile stress of the different GLARE Grades; but the material has a
rather low formability.
As a result Grade 2 has been developed with aluminum 2024-T3 and FM94 resin. This material provides a
slight decrease in ultimate tensile stresses, but offers higher strain limits which makes the material easier to
handle in part manufacturing. Both Grade 1 and Grade 2 are mainly used in unidirectional loaded structures
and patching purposes [15].
Nevertheless the unidirectional Grade 1 and 2 werent very useful for the intended applications of fuselage
material and Grade 3 and Grade 4 were developed. Grade 3 is mainly used on top of the fuselage where the
ratio between circumferential stresses and longitudinal stresses is close to one. Grade 4 is used on the sides
of the fuselage, where the loads in one direction are about twice as high compared to the other direction.
Later Grade 5 was developed as an impact resistant material, which proved to be useful for impact sensitive
areas such as lower wing skins, lower fuselage sections and leading edges. Grade 6 is a special Grade
designed for shear areas and is the only Grade that has the fibers in a +/-45 degrees direction. The
applications for Grade 6 are limited to shear webs or door corner doublers.
Literature Review
Figure 2-2 Different GLARE Grades with their fiber orientation and their specific constituents [16]
Literature Review
2.1.3 GLARE production

GLARE Laminates
The aluminum layers in GLARE usually have a surface treatment before being laminated into a GLARE panel.
The pretreatment of these layers consist of first anodizing with either chromic acid or phosphoric acid. Then
the layers are primed with BR-127 corrosion inhibiting bond primer [17]. The fibers are usually delivered in
the form of a prepreg with FM94 for all Grades except GLARE Grade 1 due to its different constituents.
The aluminum layers are bonded together with the prepreg layers inside an autoclave, at temperatures up to
120 degrees Celsius and a maximum pressure of 6 bars [18]. At these temperatures the materials expand and
cure together. Due to the differences in thermal expansion coefficients between the layers, the aluminum
layers want to shrink more compared to the prepreg layers after cooling down. This implies that the
aluminum layers will have tensile residual stresses, while the prepreg layers have compressive residual
stresses. This has to be taken into account when the material is used. If the material is used at elevated
temperatures the residual stresses will become lower; while at lower temperatures the residual stresses
increase.
Post Stretching
A solution to change the unfavorable stress state of GLARE after curing is post stretching of the material.
During this post stretching process one reverses the stress state within the material by straining the metallic
layers plastically. These layers will be elongated permanently, while the elastic fibers remain elastic. As a
result, the residual stresses within the material will be reversed as can be seen in Figure 2-3, which is
favorable for the fatigue life of the material [19].
Figure 2-3 Post stretching effect with Stress Strain curve [20]
But post stretching isnt used in GLARE skin structures, due to the additional and difficult process step. The
benefit of post stretching is that the crack initiation is extended; but the crack initiation is only a minor part
of the fatigue life. Therefore the costs are much higher than the benefits of this post stretching method.
Literature Review
2.1.4 GLARE material properties
Tensile properties
Tensile properties of GLARE have been measured by standardized tensile tests. In Table 2.1 a summary is
made of some typical values found in literature for the most common GLARE Grades and the aluminum alloys
used in these materials [15] [21] [22].
The tensile properties of GLARE are depending on its constituents: the glass fiber orientation, the aluminum
layer and the adhesive or resin. The yield strength of GLARE is dictated by the aluminum alloy, which is the
constituent with plastic behavior. Despite the other parameters, the ultimate strength is dictated by the
failure of the glass fibers.
The limit strain depends on the orientations of the fibers. If there are fibers in the strain direction, the limit
strain will be dictated by the fibers. But if there are no fibers in the strain direction, the strain is dictated by a
combination of the epoxy limit strain, the aluminum limit strain or a consistency failure in the material. This is
only applicable to GLARE Grade 1 or 2.
Another important feature of GLARE is the stress strain relation after the yield point has been reached. The
strain hardening beyond the yield stress is almost linear. This is caused by the elastic deformations of the
fibers; their contribution to the stress is significant after yielding. As a result the stress strain relation
becomes a straight line, resulting in a bilinear stress strain curve.
What can be seen in Table 2.1 is that Grade 1 and 2 have high ultimate tensile stresses compared to the
other GLARE Grades and aluminum. This has to do with the fiber orientation in these Grades, which is
unidirectional. This leads to superior properties in the main direction (L) over the aluminum alloys; in the
secondary direction (LT) however, the material is inferior.
The properties of Grade 3 and Grade 5, in both L and LT direction, are roughly equal to each other. This can
be expected as the fibers are orientated in both directions in equal amounts and the aluminum itself is
isotropic, which should result in a material that is more or less similar in both directions.
Grade 4 on the other hand has twice as many fibers in one direction opposed to the other direction. This
result in higher properties in one direction compared to the other direction. Though the difference between
the two directions is not as large as with Grade 1 and 2. Therefore Grade 4 has in superior properties in both
L and LT directions compared to aluminum.
Table 2.1 Mechanical properties for GLARE laminates and aluminum alloys [15] [21] [22]
Property Sym Dir Dim GLARE 1 GLARE 2 GLARE 3 GLARE 4 GLARE 5 2024-T3 7475-T6
Youngs E L GPa 65 66 58 57 59 72.5 71

Modulus LT 50 50 58 50 59 72.5 71
Yield y L MPa 545 360 305 352 297 324 483
stress
LT 333 228 283 255 275 290 469
Ultimate ult L MPa 1282 1214 717 1027 683 440 538
tensile
LT 352 317 716 607 681 435 538
stress
Failure L % 4.2 4.7 4.7 4.7 4.7 19 8
Strain LT 7.7 10.8 4.7 4.7 4.7 19 8
Literature Review
Fatigue resistance
The most important property of GLARE is its high fatigue resistance. Typically for aluminum alloys the
majority of the fatigue life is required for crack initiation. This implies that once a crack is initiated the crack
grows relatively fast. For GLARE this is the opposite; the minor part is used for crack initiation and the
majority is used for crack growth. And since the amount of cycles to initiate a fatigue crack in both aluminum
and GLARE is almost identical, GLARE has a longer fatigue life at higher stress levels.
The crack growth goes slowly in GLARE, because of the so called fiber bridging. The crack typically initiates in
the metal layers, keeping the fiber layers intact. This means that the load is being bypassed by the fibers,
which reduces the stress concentrations at the crack tips in the metallic layers. Due to the ability to bypass
the load in the fibers instead of the crack tip, the crack grows slower in GLARE compared to monolithic
aluminum, which results in the superior fatigue properties.
Impact resistance
Another good property of GLARE is the impact behavior. Vlot [23] studied the effects of impact on Fiber
Metal Laminates. This research showed that several Fiber Metal Laminates provided smaller post-impact
damage zones compared to fiber reinforced plastic materials due to the metallic layers within FMLs.
An impact damage zone in a monolithic metallic material will leave small local damage in which the region is
plastically deformed absorbing most of the energy. The fibers in a fully composite structure do not have the
ability to deform plastically and absorb the loads. As a result impact on a composite structure will provide a
large impact zone as the energy is spread through the different layers, possibly causing large spread
delamination. In the case of an FML impact will cause the metallic layers to absorb most of the energy as they
deform plastically, which prevents the impact from spreading as much as in a pure composite. This provides a
smaller post-impact damage zone, which results in a higher residual strength after impact damage has
occurred [21].
Fire resistance
FMLs also excel in fire resistance. When a monolithic metal alloy is exposed to a heat source, the heat will
penetrate the entire sheet. In GLARE the heat penetrates the outer metallic layer first. This layer will
distribute the heat and possibly melt away, exposing the glass fiber layer. This glass fiber layer doesnt
conduct heat as well as the metallic layer, resulting in a smaller heat affected area at the next layer.
Therefore this layer will act like insulation for the second metallic layer. Due to this process the second layer
of metal is exposed to less heat and as a result it takes significant longer for heat to penetrate the entire
material [21].
Corrosion resistance
The corrosion resistance is another advantage of FMLs, which is due to the composite layers in between the
metal layers. The composite layers between the metal layers will prevent corrosion to penetrate to the next
metallic layer and thus the corrosion is limited to the outer layer of the FML in general. The composite layers
deteriorate under influence of UV radiation and moisture, but these layers are shielded from these influences
by the metal layers. So the deterioration of the composite layers is limited, which improves the general
corrosion resistance behavior of the entire laminate [21].
Literature Review
2.2 Incremental sheet forming

The single point incremental forming process is part of a group of processes, which are called incremental
sheet forming processes. Basically, an incremental sheet forming process is a process in which a forming tool
follows a specific tool path and while following this tool path the forming tool presses down on the sheet. As
the forming tool presses down on the sheet, the material will locally deform due to the applied pressure. As
the forming tool continuous to follow the tool path eventually the entire sheet will be deformed, piece by
piece. This is where the incremental forming processes are different from conventional processes, as
conventional processes apply the deformation to the whole sheet at once instead of locally.
2.2.1 Origin and classification

Incremental sheet forming finds its origins all the way back in 1967 were Leszak patented an Apparatus and
Process for Incremental Die-less Forming [24]. At that time the incremental sheet forming machine was way
ahead of its time as computers werent advanced enough to make this process competitive. It took until the
90s until computers were advanced enough to allow incremental sheet forming to become a popular topic
for researchers. In 2005 Jeswiet stated in one of the key note papers on this topic that the process has
potential and there are many future applications [25]. But until today the incremental sheet forming is not
yet widely used in industry, except for rapid prototyping. The main arguments are the lack of process speed
and/or the lack of accuracy of the process, which outweigh the flexibility of the process.
Classification
Incremental sheet forming has its origins in stretch forming processes and metal spinning processes. Its a
relative new technique for deforming sheet materials by applying a stepwise increment to the deforming
tool. The main process consists of four elements, which are the sheet material, a blank holder, a single point
forming tool and a CNC machine. Within incremental sheet forming there are two main categories; the
conventional incremental sheet forming techniques and the hybrid incremental sheet forming techniques.
Conventional incremental sheet forming

With the conventional technique the tool moves over the surface of the sheet and determines the shape.
There are no other tools or pressures applied for deforming the sheet into the desired shape. There are two
different options for the conventional technique. The first option is negative die-less forming or single-point
incremental forming (SPIF) and is the most commonly found process and also the process of choice for this
research topic. In this process only one tool moves over the surface. The second option is two point
incremental forming (TPIF) or positive die-less forming, where two tools move over the surface. One of the
tools is used to apply the deformation and another tool to support the surface, which can be used to counter
sheet bending. The two different processes are shown in Figure 2-4.
Figure 2-4 SPIF setup (left) and TPIF setup (right)
Literature Review
Hybrid incremental sheet forming

The hybrid incremental sheet forming techniques are modified forms of the conventional techniques. In
these processes the material is supported by a pressurized hydraulic fluid, partial die or full die on one side.
Therefore three categories can be made within these hybrid techniques, these being the single point
incremental forming with back pressure, two point incremental forming with a partial die and single point
incremental forming with a full die. The single point incremental forming technique with back pressure is
usually in the form of a fluid cell. In the partial die technique a solid partial die is used to provide support for
the sheet material. In the case of a full die the deformation tool moves over one side of the surface and
forms the material according to the shape of the die. The three different processes are shown in Figure 2-5.
Figure 2-5 Back pressure SPIF (left), partial die SPIF (center) and full die SPIF (right)
2.2.2 Incremental stretch forming

During an investigation into a new hybrid forming process Araghi decided to
combine stretch forming with incremental sheet forming [26]. He specifically
mentioned that, in order to find a wider industrial use for incremental sheet
forming, several limitations have to be solved, for example the long process
time, the limited geometrical accuracy and the lack of dedicated process
planning and modelling tools.
In his research he tries to solve the limitations in process speed and geometrical
accuracy with a full die, as can be seen in Figure 2-6. In this process the die is
first pushed into the sheet material and afterwards the incremental forming tool
is used to create the concave parts of the product. This does significantly reduce
the process time as the surface for incremental sheet forming is reduced and the
use of a full die improves the accuracy compared to die-less forming techniques.
Nevertheless the reduction in production time is only applicable if the

incremental sheet forming area is identified in advance, such that only those
parts are processed. For these specimens the production time was reduced from
35 minutes for incremental forming to 20 minutes for the combined process.
Another advantage of this method is that the whole specimen is more uniformly Figure 2-6 Incremental Stretch
deformed as the stretch forming process provides global deformations, this Forming with a die
result in a more uniform thickness distribution.
The down side of this process is that it still requires the use of full dies, where industry is looking for die-less
solutions. The setup for this process does provide a suitable basis for the die-less incremental forming setup.
The main difference between the setup used by Araghi and the setup used in this research is that the die will
be removed.
Literature Review
2.2.3 Deformation principle

The deformation pattern in incremental sheet forming was long assumed to be rather similar to that of a
spinning process, which implies that shear deformations are the dominant deformations. In 2000 Kim and
Yang [27] performed a research to assess and improve the formability in this forming method. They
suggested a double-forming technique, assuming that only shear deformation occurs in the material. Later on
in 2002 Kim and Park [28] showed that several factors play an important role in improving formability. They
stated that to improve formability one can use lower feed rates, ball tools instead of hemispherical tools and
lower friction between the tools and materials by means of improved lubrication.
Till then it was assumed that shear deformation was the only deformation occurring. However, Filice [29]
noticed that if the tool moves straight on a horizontal plane, the deformation is mostly plane-strain
stretching. Except at the beginning and ending of the tool path the deformation is mostly biaxial stretching.
Therefore if the radii of a tool path increase, the deformation mode is more biaxial stretching instead of
plane-strain. Formability in metal is optimal under plane-strain stretching as the minor strain is zero in this
case, providing the largest major strain limit; this implies that small radii of the tool path reduce the
formability of the sheet material. Hussain [30] proved the findings of Filice after conducting several
experiments for formability with different radius of curvatures in which the formability increased as the
curvature decreased.
2.2.4 Accuracy
Cerro [31] did several experiments measuring the geometric accuracy with the process model as compared to
the actual product made in the CNC machine, which showed that the computer model provided very close
resemblances with the actual product.
However, these researches were done using a die or partial die within the process. In the case of die-less
incremental forming there is no tool on the other side of the sheet. This method of single point incremental
forming provided to be less accurate as shown by Micari [5]. The inaccuracy can be split up into three main
effects: the sheet bending effect, pillow effect and sheet spring back effect as can be seen in Figure 2-7.
Figure 2-7 Single Point Incremental Forming Inaccuracy [5]
These inaccuracies are influenced by process parameters, material parameters and design parameters. In the
case of a process parameter the step size, the distance between two successive loops, influences the
accuracy. This implies that a large step size results in less accurate parts. In the case of material parameters
strain hardening and anisotropy influence the accuracy. While in the case of design parameters the blank
thickness and geometry of the part are influencing the accuracy.
Nevertheless the shape and dimensional errors occurring during die-less forming can be reduced using
optimized trajectories as mentioned by Micari [5]. The concept of optimized trajectories is very similar to that
of over bending: the idea is to apply more deformations during the process in order to compensate for the
relaxation. However Micari noticed that the main issue with this method is that there is to-date no
completely accurate model in order to predict the material behavior in single point incremental forming.
Literature Review
2.2.5 Process speed

Typically incremental forming is done at feed rates in the order of 500 mm/min or lower. This forming speed
is usually seen as a negative factor, especially in industry where production rates are important. One of the
first researches on using high speeds for incremental forming was done by Hamilton and Jeswiet [32]. Their
research aimed at speeds from 5080 mm/min up to 8090 mm/min and focused on the effects the different
speeds had on material quality. During this research they also varied the rotational speed and step size to see
the effects of those parameters in combination with high feed rates.
The step size influences both the process time and the surface roughness. A large step size results in a less
repetitive pattern over the surface; this reduced the total length of the toolpath; but it increases the surface
roughness. Considering the surface roughness they noticed that the combination between rotational speed
and feed rates have a major effect. The higher the rotational speed over the feed rate, the smoother the
surface. For the thickness distribution there are no significant changes if the feed rate is increased. Finally,
they investigated the effects on the microstructure of the material; they noticed that the step size is the
dominant factor on the grain size. A smaller step size results in smaller grains. Although they noticed that a
higher spindle speed or feed rate also reduces grain size.
In 2013 Ambrogio continued the study of Hamilton and Jeswiet by expanding the field of research to
different materials and even higher speeds up to 600 m/min [33]. They also considered the microstructure of
the alloys used during their research and stated that the microstructure is very similar to the as received
state. However in the case of 600 m/min feed rate the grain size is slightly larger compared to a feed rate of
60 m/min. This contradicts the findings of Hamilton and Jeswiet earlier as they stated that increased feed
rates result in reduced grain sizes. On the other hand the data from Ambrogio shows that at feed rates up to
60 m/min the statements of Hamilton and Jeswiet are valid.
Nevertheless both researches state that the increased feed rates do not affect the material microstructure,
meaning that the increased mechanical work done on the sheet material is insufficient to cause any changes.
The material roughness is affected by the increased feed rates, but Hamilton and Jeswiet stated that with a
proper choice of step size and spindle speed one can obtain the desired surface roughness. This implies that
the process speed can be increased significantly solving one of the major disadvantage of this process.
Requirements
Chapter 3 Requirements
3.1 Applications of GLARE
3.1.1 Current applications
The current main application of GLARE is on the fuselage of the A380. Due to the superior damage tolerance
properties of GLARE most of the upper fuselage is covered with GLARE, resulting in 27 panels with a total
area of 470 square meters per aircraft. In addition GLARE, due to its good impact behavior, also got applied in
impact sensitive areas, such as the leading edges of the empennage. In Figure 3-1 the application of GLARE
on an A380 is visualized [34].
Figure 3-1 GLARE on an A380 [34]
But the A380 isnt the only application of GLARE. The Learjet 45 has a bulkhead made of GLARE and Comtek
Advanced Structures offers a GLARE based cargo liner interior solution for regional jet aircraft. Also Galaxy
Aviation Security developed a GLARE LD3 luggage container, which is capable of containing blasts of twice the
magnitude of the bomb used in the Lockerbie disaster in December 1988 [1] [34].
3.1.2 Future applications

GLARE and other FMLs are seriously being considered in new aircraft designs due to their unique properties.
A study performed in 1990 showed that application of GLARE on the A320 fuselage could result in a 25.9%
weight reduction at a price of 280 dollar per kilogram saved weight. A study of SLC and Aerospatiale on the
A330 fuselage also showed that a 20% weight reduction was possible with GLARE and a follow up study on
the A340 showed a reduction of 14-17% was possible for this aircraft [1].
So even though the weight savings were possible, each of these studies were declined due to economics or
politics. Considering economics GLARE was 5 to 10 times more expensive per kilogram compared to the
aluminum alloys being used in those aircraft, the weight saving benefits were outnumbered by the added
costs in materials and manufacturing. Considering politics in the 90s Boeing decided to make their new
aircraft, the Dreamliner, out of carbon. As a result Airbus decided that their new aircraft, the A350, also
should contain as much carbon as possible and thus GLARE got neglected. The main reason why GLARE was
applied in the A380 was due to required weight savings in order to make it fly and costs were not as
important [1].
The cost of GLARE limited the possibilities for future applications of this material. But several advances in
manufacturing methods of GLARE, such as the splicing concept and integrating stiffeners into the panel
design, have made the application of the material already much cheaper. These ongoing costs reduction
might result in future applications of GLARE in redesigned fuselage panels of A320s, A330s, A340s and A350s
[1].
Requirements
3.2 Industry requirements

3.2.1 Curvature requirements
Most of the GLARE on the Airbus A380 is located at its fuselage, as can be seen in Figure 3-1. Even though this
fuselage of the A380 has a rather large radius compared to the much smaller Airbus A320s for example, these
radii are not critical in the manufacturing of GLARE as the strains are rather low.
The critical components with respect to curvature for GLARE production will be the double curved
applications at the empennage or leading edges. These parts may have radii in one or both directions of
about 100-200 mm and therefore during the production higher strains will occur to achieve these radii.
Therefore the process should at least be able to form parts with a radius of 100 mm, which occur in leading
edges, up to 2000 mm, which occur in fuselages.
3.2.2 Speed requirements
Production assumptions
In contrast to the production numbers of the Airbus A380, which is currently at around 3 per month, the
Airbus A320, for example, has a production rate of 46 aircraft per month as mentioned by Williams [35]. This
means that a large production volume is required for future applications of GLARE in aircraft as these.
In the current Airbus A380 the fuselage is made of 470 square meters GLARE material, as shown in Figure 3-1.
The cabin length is 49.9 meters with an average diameter of 8 meters, meaning roughly one third of the
entire cabin fuselage is made of GLARE. If kept in mind that the production and manufacturing costs of GLARE
can be lowered successfully the percentage of GLARE used in the fuselage could range between 50% and
90%. If this 50% fuselage material is applied on the smaller Airbus A320, which measures 27.5m cabin length
2 2
and 4m cabin width, the total square meters of GLARE could range from 172 m (50%) to 311 m (90%).
An important notification has to be made that the Airbus A380 is most likely to have 4/3 GLARE lay-up, as the
loads are significant higher compared to the Airbus A320, where a 3/2 GLARE lay-up is most likely. This has
implications for the laminating or preforming to shape method, as fewer layers have to be used. In Table 3.1
an overview is given of the current production numbers of the Airbus A380 vs. the production numbers for
the A320 with either 50% or 90% GLARE Fuselage.
Current (A380) Future (A320 50% GLARE) Future (A320 90% GLARE)
Aircraft Per Year [-] 30 552 552
GLARE Lay-up [-] 4/3 3/2 3/2
2
GLARE / Aircraft [m ] 470 172 311
2
Production / Year [m ] 14100 94994 171662
2
Production / Hour [m ] 7 24 43
2
Aluminum / Hour [m ] 28 72 129
2
Glass Fiber / Hour [m ] 21 48 86
Table 3.1: Production Assumptions Overview
Process speed assumptions

2
As can be seen from Table 3.1 the production of GLARE at this moment is roughly 7 m per hour, where it is
assumed that the production goes on 50 weeks a year and 40 hours a week. This has to be ramped up to 24
2
to 43 m per hour for the A320 production, where it is assumed that the production runs 50 weeks a year and
80 hours a week.
Where hand lay-up is now common practice in the production line of the Airbus A380 for the application of
GLARE, for the Airbus A320 this is no longer viable as the numbers are simply too high. Therefore the process
2 2
has to be capable of producing 24 -43 m of GLARE 3/2 lay-up per hour. This implies processing 72-129 m of
2
aluminum and 48-86 m of glass fiber prepreg per hour.
Requirements
3.2.3 Accuracy requirements

The accuracy requirements are depending on the forming method being used. Basically there are two
forming methods being used for FML panels, which have different requirements for the preforming of the
aluminum panels. These methods are the forming to shape method and the laminating to shape method.
Forming to shape accuracy

The forming to shape method uses flat laminates, which are then formed into the final product. As a result,
this method requires a high degree of dimensional accuracy; though preforming of the aluminum layers is no
longer possible for this production method. Besides this method of producing GLARE parts will result in high
residual stresses enclosed within the part as the glass layers remain elastic during the deformations.
Laminating to shape accuracy

The laminating to shape method is based on lay-up of the individual layers, which can be preformed in
advance. After the lay-up has been complete the materials are placed inside an autoclave, which cures the
laminate by applying temperature and pressure. During this phase the material obtains its final form.
Using this method the layers can be preformed before the laminate is cured. Also the required accuracy
doesnt have to match the exact product dimensions during the preforming of the aluminum layers. The
reason is that during the autoclave process the pressure will correct some of the dimensional inaccuracies
before the product achieves its final shape. Because of this the dimensional accuracy, before the autoclave
process, can be in the order of 80 to 90% of the forming depth.
Spring back
The application of a die-less stretch forming process on slightly double curved panels implies that the elastic
energy within the material is significant, as the deformations are minimal. This implies that the spring back
could be a serious issue regarding the accuracy.
Spring back can occur locally, during incremental forming processes, as the deformations are locally applied.
After the forming tool moves on, spring back occurs on these places locally. On the other hand after the part
has been formed and removed from the clamps global spring back occurs, which implies that the residual
stresses left over after deformation are partially unloaded. This might affect the entire dimensional accuracy,
instead of only the local dimensional accuracy.
The easiest way to compensate spring back is to apply slightly larger deformations to the product. This can be
done after a product has been formed and measured in order to determine the amount of over deformation
required to compensate for the spring back.
Requirements
3.3 Theoretical analysis

3.3.1 Forming parameters
As mentioned before, the parts required to be produced have a large range of radii, ranging from 100 mm to
2000 mm for the Airbus A320 and can be single or double curved. In order to be feasible, the incremental
forming process should be capable of producing these parts with an accuracy of 80 to 90% or higher at a
2
speed of 72-129 m per hour.
This doesnt say anything yet of what kind of feed rate or step size must be reached to achieve these
production volumes with this kind of accuracy. In order to determine the minimum required feed rate or step
size an analysis is required of what kind of parts can be expected and what forming depths are to be
expected.
The speed during incremental sheet forming mainly depends on the step size and the feed rate, where the
accuracy mainly depends on the step size. Therefore, one could for example increase the step size to achieve
higher production rates, at the cost of some accuracy. But one could also increase the feed rate instead of
the step size to achieve the same higher production rates, without sacrificing for accuracy. Therefore if
possible increasing the feed rate is favorable over increasing the step size. But increasing the feed rate is not
always possible, as friction might become an issue during the forming process or the feed rate is already at its
maximum. As a result a higher step size is required in order to increase production rates.
3.3.2 Forming depth

As mentioned before, the forming depth largely determines the process time as for deeper parts more passes
are required to achieve the forming depth. Also the size of the panels to be produced directly influences the
forming depth. If a large panel is made with a similar radius as the smaller panel, the forming depth increases
and the forming area increases as well. Same goes for a panel of similar size, but now the radius is decreased.
In this case the forming area remains the same, but the forming depth increases. In both cases the process
time will significantly increase.
Single curved panels

For fuselage panels its preferred to have as few
splices as possible, thus the size of the panels should
be as large as possible. For a typical Airbus A320, as
used before in this analysis, the fuselage has a radius
of about 2000 mm. In the current production
process the sheet width is limited to a maximum of
1500 mm, which means that to cover an entire
circumferential of an Airbus A320 a minimum of 9
panels and 9 splices is required. This implies that in
order for the incremental forming process to be a
feasible process it should be able to deform
aluminum panels of at least 1500 mm in width
direction to not add any more splices. As a fuselage
panel has almost no double curvature, it is assumed
that the panels are single curved panels for further Figure 3-2 3D sketch of a A320 Fuselage panel generated
analysis. by the Matlab script in Appendix A-1
A panel with a width of 1500 mm with a 2000 mm radius has a forming depth of 139 mm, as can be seen in
Figure 3-2. This implies that with a step size of 0.1 mm/pass a total of 1390 passes are required to achieve
this depth. These 1390 passes do not include any spring back compensation as well, which results in even
more passes that are actually required to obtain the preferred shape.
Requirements
Double curved panels

GLARE can also be applied in leading edges and empennages. These panels have a double curved shape. This
double curved shape, as explained in the introduction, is usually the problematic part for GLARE production
as wrinkles occur in large double curved panels. Also the forming depth of these double curved parts is higher
than those of single curved parts with equal radii.
For example we take a random panel, which is required to have a 400 mm radius in one direction and a 2500
mm radius in another direction. This panel has a width of 500 mm and a length of 2000 mm. As a result, the
depth of the panel, as shown in Figure 3-3, is already 273 mm. This is already double the depth of the
fuselage panel and thus requires 2730 passes of 0.1 mm step size to obtain this depth.
The major benefit of this part is that the area to be processed is

significantly less and therefore a short tool path is required in
order to produce this part. As a result, these parts will not
require high feed rates or step sizes, as compared to the fuselage
panels. Instead it is assumed that the production rate of these
th
panels is 1/10 of that of the fuselage panels.
However the spring back effects and residual stresses in double

curved panels is hard to predict in advance, as the whole material
is strained in multiple directions. This increases the inaccuracies
seen in creating double curved panels with die-less methods. As a
result, the creation of double curved panels provides to be more Figure 3-3 3D Sketch of the double curved panel
difficult compared to the single curved panels.
3.3.3 Forming requirements

The particular panel being shown in Figure 3-2 is a panel of
Toolpath [m]
2
1500 mm and 5000 mm length, covering a total of 7.5 m of
material. In order to achieve the required production speed,
mentioned earlier in 3.2.2, one has to create 9.6 to 17.5 of
these panels per hour or one every 3.5 to 6.25 minutes;
assuming only one machine is being used.
The toolpath length depends on the step size, which implies

Step size [mm]
that larger step sizes will reduce the tool path length. In Figure Figure 3-4 Step size vs. Toolpath length for large
3-4, on the right, a plot is made of the step size vs. the tool panels
path length. As can be seen, the relationship between the two
closely resembles an inverse relation. Yet due to the curvature
Production time [min]
present within the panel the location of the coordinates

changes slightly, making the relation not entirely inverse.
The feed rate, on the other hand, has no effect on the distance,
but it does have an almost inverse relation with the production
time. Due to some accelerating and deaccelerating effects in the
stepper motors of the machines the relationship between the
feed rate and the process time is not entirely an inverse
relation. Though in practice one may assume that if the feed
rate is doubled, the production time is halved. In Figure 3-5 a Feed rate [mm/min]
plot is made which relates the production time in minutes Figure 3-5 Feed rate vs. Production time for large
panels
versus the feed rate.
Requirements
In order to get the production time down to 3.5 to 6.25 minutes per panel, the process either requires a high
feed rate or a high step size or a combination of both. In Figure 3-6 one can see that in order to achieve a
production time of 6.25 min / panel (Red line) one could use much lower feed rate compared to the 3.5 min /
panel production rate (Blue line). However one can also see that a combination of high feed rate and high
step size are required in order to actually create these panels at the desired production rate, whether this is
3.5 minutes/panel or 6.25 minutes/panel.
It has already been proven that feed rates up to 600 m/min

are achievable with special purpose machines [33]. This still
requires a step size of about 0.5 mm/pass in order to create Minimum production (red)
Feed rate [m/min]

these panels at this feed rate. Nevertheless these panels Maximum production (blue)
should not be an issue for incremental sheet forming in
terms of their high volume production, as long as the parts
can be made with reasonable accuracy.
The only possible issue with these large radii panels is that
the amount of elastic deformations is relative large
compared to the plastic deformation, which implies that a
lot of spring back is achieved. But the effects of spring back
in single curved panels are well known and can be Step size [mm]
compensated. Figure 3-6 required step size vs. the feed rate for
minimum and maximum production rates
The small double curved panels might prove more difficult to manufacture. As any small deviation within the
process settings might cause relative large inaccuracies and the complex spring back mechanism within these
double curved shapes also contributes to larger inaccuracies. Therefore it is expected that these small double
curved parts are critical for the feasibility of the incremental sheet forming process.
The above shows that it is important that during the experimental phase of this research the specimens
should resemble this category as much as possible. As the specimen size during the experimental phase is
relative small, the parameters should be compensated for such. This implies that radii of 100 to 300 mm have
to be tested with step sizes up to 0.3 mm and feed rate up to 3000 mm / min.
Experimental Setup
Chapter 4 Experimental Setup

4.1 Machine selection
4.1.1 Background
Incremental forming is usually performed at a modified computer numerical controlled (CNC) milling
machine. The reason why a modified CNC milling machine is required is that during incremental forming the
forces on the forming tool are much higher compared to the traditional milling process.
Typically milling operations are performed at very high cutting speeds, which imply that each cut only
removes a very small portion of the material. Therefore the cutting force remains typically below 10 N in any
direction, despite the high feed rates.
During incremental forming the tool presses on top of the material and is then moved in the XY plane
afterwards. In order to deform the material the tool is first pressed into the material with a certain
predefined tool path, in which the forces are highly depending on the tool path. Duflou et al. [36] have done
research in the field of forming forces during incremental forming and they suggested the following equation:
= 0.0716 1.57 0.41 0.09 cos()
In this formula the force in Z direction thus depends on the tensile strength( ), the thickness of the
plate(), the diameter of the tool( ), the step height() and the forming angle between the forming tool
and the material in degrees (). In their experiments they used aluminum 2024 of 0.4 mm thickness, which is
the same type of material being used in this study. The forces they measured during their experiments were
in the order of 200 N in the Z direction for the 0.4 mm thickness and at angles of 20 degrees, which is similar
to what can be expected during this study.
Even though the forces in X and Y directions are significantly lower compared to the Z direction during
incremental forming, these forces are still much higher compared to the milling forces that a typical CNC
milling machine have to endure.
4.1.2 Delft structures and material laboratory

The DASML has several CNC milling machines, but none of these machines were able to incremental form
due to the forming forces. Most of the CNC machines within the laboratory were so called router CNC
machines, see Figure 4-1.
These CNC routers are simple, accurate machines and are perfect for 3D printing, engraving or milling
operations. However as one can see in Figure 4-1 on the left side, if the Z-axis is exposed to the forces during
incremental forming, the Y axis will bend as it has a rather low stiffness.
Due to the low stiffness within the Y-axis the CNC routers in the laboratory were only capable of achieving
forces in the order of 20 N and below to prevent any deformations within the Y-axis.
Figure 4-1 A 3-axis router machine (left) vs. 3-axis knee milling machine (right) [37] [38] [39]
Experimental Setup
There is also a different type of machine used for CNC milling. These are the so called knee milling machines,
as can be seen in Figure 4-1 on the right side. These machines have their Z-axis separated from their other
axis. The main advantage of these machines is therefore their rigidity.
The X-axis and Y-axis are usually controlled with a solid XY Table, which can hold much higher forces
compared to the rails system of the routers. The Z-axis is capable of delivering more force as the axis is fitted
in a rigid top and fully separated of the other two axes, preventing any deformation to those axes. Therefore
these types of machines are also capable of performing processes which include higher forces, such as
incremental forming.
The DASML has one CNC knee milling machine, the Proxxon Micro Frees MF 70. This is one of the smallest
CNC knee milling machines available and comes with low end stepper motors. As a result this machine was
only able to deliver forces up to 50 N according to the specifications before the stepper engines stop working.
Another problem with this machine was its range, which was limited to 134x46 mm in the XY plane.
4.1.3 Catholic University of Leuven

Because of the absence of a working machine at the DASML another option had to be considered for this
project. Basically two options were available. The first was constructing a larger knee milling machine from
scratch, however this would be highly time consuming and would cause a serious delay to the project. An
alternative was to find a different university that had such machines available. One of these universities was
the Catholic University of Leuven, which is one of the leading universities in the topic of incremental forming.
After several contacts it turned out that the machine they usually used for incremental forming was damaged
beyond repair. But they had other machines, which were available, but after sending more detailed
information about the research there was no more contact and eventually the option of performing the
experiments was dismissed.
4.1.4 Custom design

As timed passed by and no progress was made with other companies or universities to perform the required
experiments at one of their machines, the decision was made to design and construct a custom CNC knee
milling machine within the DASML. This was done to prevent any additional delays to the research; however
this did imply that a lot of information had to be obtained about how these machines are made and how they
are controlled.
Experimental Setup
4.2 Machine design

As explained before the decision was made to design and construct a CNC milling machine capable of
incremental forming within DASML. Therefore the machine should be able to operate at feed rates of 3000
mm/min. The step size in Z-direction should be controllable up to 0.1 mm and the workable area should at
least be 100x100 mm in order to fit the specimens.
4.2.1 Mechanical design

Within the laboratory a manual controlled HBM BF 16 drilling/milling machine was available to be converted
for the incremental forming experiments, as can be seen in Figure 4-2. This simple, yet rigid machine
provided an excellent starting point for the mechanical design.
However, it was required that the machine could be converted back to its original state after this research
has been completed. This provided some challenges as any permanent changes to the machine itself were
prohibited, while still making sure that the machine could be fitted with stepper motors on each axis.
As a result, the mechanical design and assembly basically consists of three steps. The first step is the Y-axis
assembly, which allows back and forward movement. This is followed by the X-axis assembly, which allows
sideways movement, and finally the Z-axis assembly, which allows up and downward movement.
Figure 4-2 HBM BF16 Drilling/Milling machine [39]
Step 1: Y-axis modification

The Y-axis allows the XY Table to move back and forth. The Y-axis
in this machine consisted of a 15 mm rod with a thread pitch of 5
mm on the inside of the machine. This rod was connected to the
machine by a ball bearing on the outside, which fed the rod
towards the black handle visible in Figure 4-3.
As the axis itself was still in good shape, it was decided to keep
the axis as is. The only modification done to the axis itself is the
removal of the black handle to allow a shaft coupler on the axis
in order to close the gap between the different diameters of the
axis itself and the axis of the stepper motor.
Figure 4-3 Conventional Y-axis close up [38]
Experimental Setup
Also the current axis was secured by two bolts just behind the black handle; one of them can be seen in
Figure 4-3. These bolts will be replaced by longer bolts to secure an additional aluminum backing plate at the
same position. This aluminum backing plate will function as a connection point for the stepper motor in order
to avoid any permanent modifications on the machine.
The design of the stepper motor fitting, as can be seen in Figure 4-4, is kept rather simple. The backing plate
(green) will be fixed with two bolts, as mentioned earlier, on the machine itself. In this drawing, the location
of the holes of these bolts are not shown as they were specified later on during the assembly.
A total of four rods (red) with a diameter of 12 mm are used to go from the backing plate of the machine
towards the stepper motor, while in the center the shaft coupler (yellow) is positioned in place to connect
the two different axes to each other. Both the backing plate of the machine (green) and the stepper motor
backing plate (blue) are fixed to the rods (red) by M4 screws.
Figure 4-4 Catia sketch of the Y-axis stepper motor fitting
The shaft couplers, Oldham D25 L30 D1-8 D2-12, were eventually ordered by Hardware CNC and were rather
easy to install. But due to wear the end of the Y-axis of the machine wasnt exactly 12 mm, this resulted in
some slipping between the shaft coupler and the axis itself. In order to solve this issue two-component metal
glue has been applied, which locks the two parts together.
Eventually, this simple design resulted in a fully functioning Y-axis, as can be seen in Figure 4-5, in which the
stepper motor is directly connected to the axis with the use of the shaft coupler.
Figure 4-5 Complete CNC Y-axis of the HBM BF16
Experimental Setup
Step 2: X-axis modification

The X-axis is very similar to the Y-axis, except that this axis
has handles on both sides. This means that, in theory, the
stepper motor could be fitted on both sides. However if one
keeps in mind that its the easiest to keep all the wiring on
the same side of the machine, it has been chosen to attach
the stepper motor to the left side of the machine. As the Z-
axis stepper motor will be added to the left side as well.
Just like for the Y-axis, the axis itself was still in good shape
and there was no need to replace it with a new axis. Again
the axis consisted of a 15 mm rod with a thread pitch of 5
mm on the inside of the machine and an exterior rod of 12
mm, on which the black handles were attached. Therefore
the black handle, on the left side, was removed in order to
make room for a shaft coupler.
After a close inspection of the connection between the

shaft coupler and the axis itself, it was noted that due to
some wear on the axis the shaft coupler couldnt provide
Figure 4-6 Conventional X-axis Close up
sufficient grip on the axis itself. Therefore an additional
coupling piece was required that was able to fit on the axis
shaft (11.8 mm diameter) and then also provide a
connection point for the shaft coupler (12 mm diameter)
as can be seen in Figure 4-7.
But if some torque is applied to this coupling piece it will

loosen itself. The solution for this problem was relative
easy; in order to secure the black handle a small M4 rod
was used in a similar sized hole through the axis. This
same hole was used to secure the coupling piece with a
M4 bolt to the axis. As a result, the coupling piece was
secured to the axis and couldnt be loosened without the
removal of the screw first, which resulted in a fully Figure 4-7 Additional Coupling Piece X-axis
functioning X-axis as can be seen in Figure 4-8.
Figure 4-8 Complete CNC X-axis of the HBM BF16
Experimental Setup
Step 3: Z-axis modification

In the mechanical design the Z-axis provided the most
difficulty as, unlike the X and Y axis, the Z axis lacked any ball
bearing supports. However on the left side of the machine a
safety shield was attached with two screws on the black
mounting, as can be seen in Figure 4-9.
Underneath the mounting of the safety shield were two M6

bolts located, which provided an excellent mounting point for
the Z-axis assembly. Therefore the decision was made to
remove the safety shield.
In order to connect the shaft coupler to the axis itself the

metallic round cap had to be removed, as can also be seen in
Figure 4-9. If this cap is removed a spring will be visible. This
spring prevents the Z-axis from falling down in the
conventional state, but also allows the Z-axis going up
Figure 4-9 Conventional Z-axis close up [38]
automatically when the machine is not being operated.
Removing this spring is a critical step; once the spring is

removed the entire Z-axis will fall downwards, which might
damage the Z-axis or drill head. During this project the
machine was first lowered to its lowest position and the
handlebar with the red ends was secured with tape. This
prevented the Z-axis from coming down as soon as the spring
was removed.
After removing the spring, the Z-axis was clearly visible, in

good shape and easily accessible. With the additional two M6
bolts above as mounting point, the Z-axis could be fitted in the
same way as the X and Y axes basically.
Figure 4-10 Complete CNC Z-axis of the HBM BF16
Once again the same basis is being used as the one that can be
seen in Figure 4-4. But some changes were required in order
for this design to fit. One of the major changes was the size of
the backing plate, which is much larger for the Z-axis. The
reason for this larger plate is that the attachment points, the
two M6 bolts, were located slightly further than those of the X
or Y axis.
Another change was the position of the shaft coupler as this

one was not fitted in front of the backing plate, but partially
behind the backing plate. As a result the length of the four
rods is significantly shorter.
In the end this method provided a fully functioning CNC Z-axis,

as can be seen in Figure 4-10. The completion of the Z-axis
concluded the mechanical conversion of the HBM BF16 from a
conventional machine towards a CNC machine with
displacement control for the three main axes. In Figure 4-11
the entire mechanical design is shown, which includes the
conversion of the X, Y and Z-axis.
Figure 4-11 Complete Conversion of the HBM BF16
Experimental Setup
4.2.2 Electrical design

The electrical part of the experimental setup consists of a control box, which is used to translate the given
computer input to the stepper motors. Typically, a 3-axis CNC milling machine consists of three separate
motors, which are driven by three separate drivers. These drivers and motors are usually powered by a
power supply unit and are connected to the computer via an interface card. The choice of which kind of
motors are being used on the machine determines most of the electrical design. Therefore this part starts
with the selection of which kind of motor will be used.
Stepper motors
There are several types of stepper motors available for CNC purposes, such as servo motors, unipolar stepper
motors and bipolar stepper motors. Servo motors have an advantage over uni- or bipolar stepper motors as
they are capable of delivering a feedback to the system of their actual position. However this comes at a cost,
which makes servo motors much more expensive compared to uni- or bipolar stepper motors.
Even though uni- and bipolar stepper motors do not provide any feedback to the control system of their
current position, they usually do not require it as long as no steps are lost during the process. Loss of steps
occurs when the stepper motor has to deliver more torque than it could. In that case the software will send a
signal to the motor that it should rotate, while physically the motor cant deliver enough torque to actually
rotate. As a result, the software assumed the motor has rotated, while in reality it stood still and only
provided a clicking noise. Loss of steps could thus easily be avoided, if the process itself does not approach
the torque limit of the stepper motor and thus make the feedback option of a servo motor redundant.
This leaves the choice between uni- and bipolar motors. A bipolar motor works basically the same as a
unipolar motor; however it has an additional set of magnets/poles. As a result the bipolar motors are more
efficient and deliver more torque compared to a similar sized unipolar motor. Therefore bipolar motors are
usually preferred for CNC milling operations.
Now the choice has been made to use bipolar stepper motors, the next step is to determine the amount of
torque required for the incremental forming process. As mentioned before Duflou et al. [36] performed
similar experiments on the same type of material to determine a relation between the forming force and
several parameters, with forces of about 200 N in the Z direction.
For the Z-axis a worm drive gear arrangement is being used to transfer the torque of the stepper motor to
the forming tool. Its measured from the mechanical design that for every full rotation of the Z-axis the
forming tool moves 25 mm. This implies that if the forming tool has to press down with 200 N, the torque on
the Z-axis has to be around 0.8 Nm. However this is true for a static situation with 100% efficiency. The
stepper motor will be constantly accelerating and deaccelerating to its correct position and at the same time
the transmission will have some friction. Thus a higher torque is required to achieve this 200 N in reality.
Because of the higher torque needed one might assume that

the bigger the stepper motor, the better. But this is not
always true as bigger stepper motors have larger moments of
inertia. A bigger moment of inertia implies that it will require
more torque to accelerate the motor itself, resulting in a less
efficient motor.
With the above points in mind the choice has been made to
use Nema 23 3 Nm stepper motors from Hardware CNC,
which can be seen in Figure 4-12.
Figure 4-12 Stepper motor Nema 23 3 Nm [43]
Experimental Setup
Stepper drivers
In order to control the stepper motors, a stepper drive is usually required. For this research a certain degree
of precision is required. Typically, a stepper motor has 200 steps per revolution, which implies that for the Z-
axis (25 mm movement per revolution) each step accounts for 0.125 mm and for the other axes (5 mm
movement per revolution) each step accounts for 0.025 mm.
To obtain movement accuracies of 0.01 mm or below the stepper driver should be able to use so called
microsteps. Microstepping is a method to control a stepper motor in such a way that each step on its own is
divided into multiple steps. For example 1/8 microstepping allows a stepper motor 1600 steps/revolution
instead of 200, which increases the precision of the stepper motor by a factor of 8.
In order to achieve accuracies of 0.01 mm and below the Z-axis

requires at least 2500 steps / rotation and the other two axes require
at least 500 steps / rotation. As microstepping occurs in 2, 4, 8, 16,
32 or 64 microsteps per full step the Z-axis is required to have at
least 16 microsteps / rotation and the other two axes require at least
4 microsteps / rotation.
Another important factor is the voltage and amperage that the

stepper drive could handle. In order to fully utilize the Nema 23 3
Nm stepper motors 48 Volts and 4 Amperes is required. This
requirement of voltage and amperage, in combination with the
microstepping requirement, resulted in the choice for the Leadshine
DM556 2 Phase Digital Stepper Drive from Hardware CNC.
This Leadshine DM556 stepper driver is able to provide up to 128

microsteps per revolution, which is more than required 16
microsteps for the Z-axis. Also this stepper drive can withstand a
maximum of 50 Volts and 5.6 Amperes, which is more than the
Figure 4-13 Leadshine DM556 - 2 Phase
stepper motors require.
Digital Stepper Drive [42]
Power supply unit
The power supply unit will be used to power the stepper drivers and the stepper motors separately. The
standard 230 Volts cant be used on the stepper motors or drivers, as the stepper driver has a maximum of
50 Volts and the stepper motors have a maximum of 48 Volts. Therefore a power supply unit of 48 Volts is
the maximum one could use.
Another important factor to keep in mind during the selection of a

power supply is the current it provides. The stepper motors are using
4 Ampere, if they are to run at maximum speed / power. In order to
power all three stepper motors at maximum speed / power, the
system should require 12 Amperes. But the three stepper motors
dont run at maximum speed or power all at the same time.
Therefore one could take a less powerful power supply unit. A rule of
thumb, generally used and advised, is to take a little over 1.5x the
maximum rated current of a single stepper motor for the power
supply unit.
Figure 4-14 PSU 48VDC 6,7A [41]
In this case that would come down to a power supply unit, which has at most 48 Volts and minimum of 6
Amperes. The closest available match, who had more than 6 Amperes, was a 48 Volts 6.7 Ampere power
supply unit offered by Hardware CNC, as can be seen in Figure 4-14.
Experimental Setup
Interface card
Even though the stepper motors, drivers and the power
supply unit can work on their own; this system has to be
connected to a computer in order to have a computer
numerical controlled application. Modern stepper drivers
have the option to directly connect the drivers to a
computer. But since this system requires an external power
supply, this would provide 48 Volt 6.7 Ampere towards the
computer. This would ruin the computer and thus some kind
of separation is required between the computer system and
the machine system.
This separation is usually done with an interface card. An

interface card is able to separate the two electrical systems,
while still transferring information between these systems.
Figure 4-15 Arduino Mega 2560 [38]
One end the interface card will be connected to the
computer, while the other end will be connected to the
stepper drivers.
A commonly used interface card for several applications and

also being used on this machine is; the Arduino Mega 2560 in
combination with a Ramps 1.4 Shield, both from 123-3D. The
Arduino Mega 2560, see Figure 4-15, can be programmed
into whatever the programmers basically wants, which is in
this case an interface card for CNC application.
The Ramps 1.4 Shield, see Figure 4-16, can be used to

connect the wires coming from the stepper drivers to the
circuit in the right positions. The benefit of this shield, over
any other shields, is that this one is made for CNC milling
operations, including clear instructions which axis and wires
Figure 4-16 Ramps 1.4 Shield [39]
should be positioned where on the board. This makes the
assembly of the system much clearer.
Enclosure box
Another important part of the electrical system is the
enclosure box or control box, in which the electrical system is
mounted. Basically, the enclosure box prevents the user from
touching any of the electrical components in order to avoid
damage to the components or the user from being shocked.
As this system will run on 48 Volts and 6.7 Amperes an

electrical shock from the system could injure the user. Thus
the enclosure box used in this project is required to be made
out of a non-conducting material and should be large enough
to fit all the individual components.
The choice was made to go for the 1SL02 IP66 Wall Box of RS
components, as can be seen in Figure 4-17. This box was fully
made out of thermoplastic material, which does not conduct
electricity. Also the interior dimensions are sufficient to
mount all the electrical components inside, while they can still
be modified and/or accessed by opening the door.
Figure 4-17 1SL02 IP66 Wall Box [40]
Experimental Setup
Wiring scheme
Now that all components are selected for the electrical design, they
still have to be properly connected in order to get a working system
and also fitted inside the enclosure box. Considering the wiring, a
wiring scheme is setup in order to successfully connect the
individual components to each other for a working system.
The wiring scheme is based on a 3D printer wiring scheme found

online, as shown in Figure 4-18. In this wiring scheme a Ramps 1.4
card is shown in the center and shows how to connect the stepper
drivers towards the Ramps 1.4 shield.
The difference comes in the power supply units and the amount of
stepper motors. The CNC machine used in this project only has
three stepper motors and one PSU, instead of four motors and two Figure 4-18 3D printer wiring scheme [46]
PSUs. Also the system will not use any extruders, end stops, PSU for
the Ramps 1.4 or any fans to cool the system. If this wiring scheme
is adjusted with the right components, all that remains can be seen
in Figure 4-19. However this only provides a direct system, without
any emergency stops or any on/off switches.
It is required for any machine to have an emergency stop and an

on/off switch, before it may be used within the DASML. The on/off
switch should stop the entire power supply to the whole electrical
system and the same for the emergency button.
As the PSU is the only component being powered from an external

power source, it is most logical to place the on/off switch and
emergency stop directly at this connection. Even though this works Figure 4-19 Custom design wiring scheme
perfectly fine and the machine will stop when the switch is set to
off or the emergency button is pressed, the entire system itself will
still be partially fed. This is due to the Dutch power supply system;
one can insert an electricity plug in two ways, which means that the
flow of the electricity can enter a system on two sides. If the
emergency stop and on/off switch are at the beginning of this
flow the system will be entirely without power. If these switches
are at the end of the flow the system is still connected and any
contact with the electrical components will give the user a shock.
As a result, a relay is used as an additional safety measure. This

relay is active as long as the electricity is flowing. But as soon as the
emergency stop is pressed or the on/off switch is set to off, the
relay is deactivated and the power will be cut on both sides of the
electrical system. Now it doesnt matter which side is the positive
and which side is the negative side within the system, as the power
is cut off at both the beginning and the end. Therefore the entire
system in between will be without any electricity and the user cant
be shocked by accident any longer. This resulted in the complete
and safe electrical control unit, as can be seen in Figure 4-20, which
can be used to control the machine.
Figure 4-20 Complete Electrical Control Box
Experimental Setup
4.2.3 Software
Regarding the software being used in this project, the DASML has been working with Repetier in the past for
3D printers. This software is also compatible for CNC milling operations and can thus be converted towards
an incremental forming process.
In order to convert the software for incremental forming it has to be understood that the software package
comes with two separate units; the Repetier firmware for the Arduino board and the Repetier host software
for the computer itself.
Repetier firmware
The firmware is basically the program that is copied onto the Arduino Mega 2560 card. This software
contains all the information to convert the computer signal, received by the USB cable, into an electronical
signal that can be sent towards the correct pins at the Arduino card. This Arduino card can then transfer the
signal to the Ramps 1.4 card and this Ramps 1.4 card can then transfer the signal towards the stepper drivers.
The first change to this firmware is to switch all extruders off, as the machine will not have any. After this is
done the correct motherboard has to be chosen from a list, included within the Repetier firmware. Last but
not least, all the end stops should be turned off in order for the machine to actually work. All these changes
in the firmware have to be made in the Configuration.h file. The full list of all changed lines of code can be
found in Appendix B Repetier Firmware changes.
If all these changes are done correctly the firmware is ready to be uploaded to the Arduino Mega 2560 and
can be used for any incremental forming operation or other 3-axis CNC milling operations without end stops /
limit switches.
Repetier host
On the other side of the USB cable of the Arduino Mega 2560 is a computer with the Repetier host software
installed. This software package is able to communicate with the Repetier firmware located on the Arduino.
However, this software package also requires some different settings compared to the usual settings in order
to perform incremental forming operations, instead of 3D printing operations.
If the Repetier host software is successfully

connected the printer settings could be selected in
the top right corner, as shown in Figure 4-21.
Normally these settings are set for a Cartesian 3D
printer, which implies that the printer has an X, Y
and Z axis. Therefore, the amount of changes in the
printer settings are limited as only the extruder
options have to be disabled.
In the interface, as seen in Figure 4-21, several

sections are seen. In the middle there is the 3D
sketch of the specimen to be produced. If a G-code is
loaded, the shape that will be created will be
visualized in this screen.
Figure 4-21 Repetier Host interface
In the lower part of the screen the data log is shown. This shows any errors obtained during the process, but
also the position of the machine at a specific point in time. It has to be notified that Repetier host loads
twelve points in advance. So in order to match the time with a location, one has to read twelve lines of G-
code back to match that specific time. This becomes important during the calibration of the measurement
grid later on.
Besides these windows, there are also the control tabs. These are used to load objects, write G-code, slice
objects or move the machine manually to a specific point. During this research the manual movement tab is
used to maneuver the machine into the correct starting position. Also the print preview tab is used to load
the generated G-code into Repetier-Host and to preview and verify the code to see if any flaws are made
within the G-code.
Experimental Setup
4.3 Jig and specimens

As the machine design has been completed, the specimens and jigs have to be chosen in such a way that the
machine is able to work with them. For example, the machine has a limited range in X and Y direction, if the
specimens are too large or the jig is too large the machine couldnt process the entire specimen.
4.3.1 The jig

The jig chosen for this project is usually used for the
impact tower setup, which is present in the DASML.
The main reason to choose this jig is that it actually fits
on the machine without any adjustments. Also the jig
provides an easy way to clamp a specimen of 120x120
mm on four sides, with a process area of 100x100 mm.
As can be seen in Figure 4-22, the jig consists of three

parts, a foot and two clamping plates, which can be
removed. The advantage of this setup is that the foot
can be secured to the machine, while the clamping
plates can be removed to change a specimen without
adjusting the foot location. Therefore, the machine
doesnt have to be adjusted to the right position every
time a specimen is changed. Figure 4-22 The jig
The clamping plates being used for these experiments are 150x150x10 mm and contain nine M12 bolts to
secure them and the specimen in between to the foot. The reason to use two clamping plates is in order to
make sure that the specimen has the same clamping conditions on the lower side as on the upper side, since
the foot only contains nine M12 holes, but not a decent clean clamping surface.
4.3.2 Specimens
The specimens used in this project are made of 2024-
T3 aluminum, which is the aluminum most frequently
used in GLARE laminates. Only the GLARE Grade 1
laminates use a different type of aluminum, but this
type of GLARE is not used in aircraft industry in
general.
The thickness of these aluminum layers is usually 0.3

mm or 0.4 mm. For incremental forming a thicker plate
is usually more critical than a thinner plate, therefore
the choice was made to go for 2024-T3 0.4 aluminum
instead of 2024-T3 0.3 aluminum.
The length and width of the specimens is determined

by the maximum allowable size of the jig, which is
120x120 mm. As a result the specimens for each test
are made of 2024-T3 aluminum and should have a size
of 120x120x0.4 mm. In Figure 4-23 an example of such
a specimen is given. Figure 4-23 Example of an aluminum 2024-T3 0.4 specimen
Experimental Setup
4.4 Measuring
In order to measure the specimens at first a laser scanning setup was preferred. However this system was not
available during the research. Therefore an alternative had to be found to measure the shape of the
produced specimens to compare them with the input model and the other specimens within the same set of
experiments. This resulted in a measurement setup with a linear voltage displacement transducer instead of
the laser.
4.4.1 Linear voltage displacement transducer

A linear voltage displacement transducer is an electrical transformer, which is frequently used to measure
displacements or positions. Inside an LVDT is a variable resistance, which is used to determine the
displacement in the end. Basically, if the LVDT is placed on a surface at the deepest position and afterwards
moved towards a higher position, the LVDT is partially compressed. This results in a resistance change within
the LVDT itself. The change in resistance can then be used to determine the displacement in the Z-direction
and this is a linear relationship.
4.4.1 Measurement grid

In principle the LVDT is capable of measuring continuously. But the data logging system had a delay of 1 to
1.5 seconds per measurement. Therefore, the results of the LVDT cant be logged continuously, but it was
chosen to take the measurement every two seconds. This did imply that a measurement grid had to be
created to make sure that the same points were measured every time.
Also to verify that the LVDT measures correctly, each data point was measured twice. Keeping in mind that
scanning of a specimen shouldnt be too coarse, but also not too slow a compromise had to be made. The
specimens deformed area is 70x70 mm, which means that if the LVDT measures every 5 mm a total of 225
data points are created. The measurement of these 225 data points takes a total of 15 minutes, which is a
reasonable scanning time, and still provides a dense enough grid to extract sufficient detail of the surface of
the specimen. The Matlab script to generate the measurement grid can be found in Appendix A-2.
4.4.2 Calibration
Linear Voltage Displacement Transducer

In this experimental setup two different LVDTs were used. The first had a range of 0-8 mm with an accuracy
of 0.01 mm, where 0.05 mm or below is required, and is sufficient for most experiments. For the later
geometry experiments it is possible that the depth is larger than 8 mm, thus a 0-100 mm LVDT is used. But
this large LVDT doesnt have a complete linear range due to a defect on the inside. But in a range of 32-100
mm this LVDT does provide a linear relation, which implies that an offset of 32 mm is required for this LVDT.
Yet a calibration is still required, as the LVDT provides an output in Volts and not in mm. It was found that for
the small range LVDT one Volt was equal to a change of 4.64252 mm, with an accuracy of +/- 0.01 mm in the
range of 0-8 mm. For the large LVDT it was found that one Volt was equal to 10.03886 mm, with an accuracy
of +/- 0.03 mm in the range of 32-100 mm. It had to be kept in mind that if this LVDT was used, the initial
displacement position was already at 32 mm or higher, to ensure that this LVDT was in its linear range.
Measurement Grid
Besides the LVDT the measurement grid also had to be calibrated as the movement of the machine and the
measurement points had to correspond to each other. Therefore, four dents were made, in every specimen,
at the corner points. These dents were large enough for the LVDT to detect and therefore the location of the
LVDT could be matched with that of the machine coordinates.
Although the dents are detectable, it only provides a correspondence with the first point of the measurement
grid and the machine coordinates. If the LVDT is supposed to be measuring a different point every four
seconds, the machine should change position of the specimen every four seconds. However, due to the non-
linear acceleration of the stepper motors, the time it takes to displace a certain distance is not easily
analyzed. It was experimentally determined that it takes the machine 0.54 seconds to displace 5 mm. This
implies that at every point the machine was paused for 3.56 seconds. This provided a match between the
measurement grid and the corresponding machine locations, which could be used for the measurements.
Experiments
Chapter 5 Experiments
This chapter will cover the experiments performed with the earlier described experimental setup. In this
chapter all the different experiments, as mentioned in the research approach, are described and analyzed.
The results of these experiments are found in the end of this chapter.
5.1 Calibration
Because it is yet unknown what kind of repeatability either the machine or the measurement setup has, a
calibration is required. This set of experiments will be done with 100/100/0.2/1000 specimens. This type of
specimens implies that R1 and R2 equals 100 mm, the step size is 0.2 mm/pass and the feed rate is 1000
mm/min.
5.1.1 Machine repeatability

In order to determine the repeatability of the process five
specimens are tested. Each of these specimens was tested
under the same conditions and with the same tool path.
Therefore the geometric differences between these specimens
can be used to determine the repeatability of the machine.
The average result of the measurements is shown in Figure

5-1. In Figure 5-2 a photograph is shown of the actual
specimen. What can be seen from visual inspection is that the
measurements are in agreement with the actual deformation.
Figure 5-1 Calibration specimen measurement
Although the average results of the measurements doesnt tell

much about the repeatability of the machine itself, it does
verify that the machine is capable of reproducing the tool path
given by the computer.
But if one looks at the deviation between the four specimens,

as can be seen in Figure 5-3, it becomes clearer that the
differences between the specimens are small at just 0.25 mm
at its maximum.
However, as said in the literature review, there are also various

effects which cause differences between parts being produced. Figure 5-2 Calibration Specimen
These effects are the spring back, the sheet bending and the
pillow effect.
Since the specimens are produced with the same shape, the
effect of spring back should ideally be the same and should not
contribute much towards the deviations seen here.
As can be seen, the deviations are relative constant in most of

the specimen. While calibrating the forming tool, the tool itself
is calibrated as soon as it contacts the surface of the specimen.
However the specimens are slightly curved, which causes some
deviations with this calibration method. Therefore the
specimens are sometimes already under strained, before the
Figure 5-3 Standard deviation between
process starts. This causes the deviations seen in Figure 5-3. calibration specimens including sheet bending
A solution to reduce the deviations is not to calibrate the depth of the forming tool at the specimen itself, but
at a solid point such as the jig. By doing so the deviations are reduced, as will be seen in later experiments.
Experiments
5.1.2 Measurement repeatability

In order to determine the repeatability of the measurement and the reliability of the measurement system
each specimen made during the previous part was measured four times and every time each data point was
measured twice. As a result one can see the differences between two measurements at the same point
within the same measurement, but also the differences between the different measurement cycles.
At first the differences between the individual

measurement cycles are analyzed. The results can
be seen in Figure 5-4. The first thing that has to be
notified is that the maximum deviation between
these four measurements is in the order of 0.02
mm, which is significant less than seen in the
deviations made by the machine or other effects.
However the second thing that can be seen is that

the deviations are located at the right side of the
specimen. The scanning pattern starts in the right
bottom and then moves up. It then moves 5 mm
towards the left and scans another line from top to
bottom, moves another 5 mm towards the left and
scans again bottom to top etc.
These small deviations might be caused due to the

Y-axis. At the right side of the Y-axis there is a small
gap, which allows the machine to rotate a little
around the X-axis. This might be the reason for the Figure 5-4 Differences between individual measurement cycles in
deviations within the scanning of the specimens. mm
But the deviations are small enough to be
neglected.
However, this only shows the differences between

the measurement cycles, but doesnt show any
deviations occurring within the same measurement
cycle. As each point is measured twice during each
measurement cycle, the fluctuations within the
measurement cycle can also be analyzed. This is
done in Figure 5-5
Again the first thing that has to be noticed is that

the deviations at almost all points are close to zero
and could be neglected. However, three points
show some deviations during the measurement. It
has been noted that a vibration, for example from
other students performing tests on the other side
of the wall, could already cause such deviations
within a measurement point. This could be the Figure 5-5 Deviations within a single measurement in mm
reason for these deviations. Nevertheless these
deviations can still be neglected as they are in the
order of 0.01 mm or less.
Experiments
5.2 Test protocol

Before any further tests are conducted it is important to have a standardized testing protocol to avoid
unnecessary deviations between the specimens, which might lead to faulty conclusions.
5.2.1 Specimens production

In order to avoid any deviations within material properties
the specimens are standardized. At first the specimens are
all cut from the same batch of 2024-T3 0.4 mm aluminum to
a size of 120x120 mm. This is done with a hydraulic
cutting/shearing machine as shown in Figure 5-6. During this
cutting it was noticed that the specimens were slightly
curved. This happened because the aluminum was
transported on a coil at a certain stage and even while the
plate was straightened a small curvature remained in the
plate.
Figure 5-6 Machine used for specimen production
5.2.2 Specimen clamping
The slight curvature is important to keep in mind, during the
clamping of the specimens, as the small specimens now
have a concave and convex side. In order to avoid large
deviations between the specimens all the specimens are
positioned with the convex side upwards. This can be seen
in Figure 5-7, where the slight curvature is visible due in the
reflection of the light.
Afterwards the specimen is securely clamped in the jig with

eight M8 bolts as can also be seen in Figure 5-7. This ensures
that the specimen will not move during the process. This
Figure 5-7 Clamping of the specimen with convex
phase is repeated every time a new specimen is used. side upwards
5.2.3 The jig

The jig itself also has to be secured to the machine in order
to avoid any unnecessary movement. The machine itself has
an XY table with M12 slots for T-nuts. As the DASML didnt
have any M12 T-nuts or bolts and to avoid any further
delays in the thesis, an improvised method has been
developed as can be seen in Figure 5-8.
This method consisted of four M12 bolts turned upside

down in the T-nut slots. These bolts were combined with
eight M12 nuts and four M12 washers. The washers were
used to grip the jig, while the nuts were used to tighten the
bolts securely in the T-nut slots. This step is only required to
secure the jig onto the XY table. Therefore it doesnt have to
be repeated for every new specimen, unless the jig was Figure 5-8 The jig on the XY Table
removed for some reason.
Experiments
5.2.4 Starting point

As the jig is symmetrical, the center of this jig is being used
as a starting point for the process. However in order to
determine the center one could use a caliper to determine
the forming tool distance to each side.
The jig itself is 159 mm long and wide, thus the center of the
jig is located at 79.5 mm from each side. However once a
specimen is clamped, its not practical to determine the
center based on this 79.5 mm. Since the forming tool also
has to be centered at the same position.
Figure 5-9 Starting point determination X and Y
Instead of measuring and indicating the center of the plate, one could also include the forming tool during
this step, as seen in Figure 5-9. It is known that the diameter of the forming tool is 16 mm. Therefore the
distance from the left side of the forming tool towards the right side of the jig becomes 87.5 mm in total, and
the same for any other sides. As a result the forming tool is positioned at the center of the plate and jig. This
has to be repeated for each specimen.
For the Z-axis a different method is used. As explained in

5.1.1, the sheet bending effect had a large impact on the
deviations between the specimens. Therefore, the starting
point of the Z-axis has to be taken at a solid fixed point
instead of the specimen itself.
As a result, a specific point (X60 Y20) was taken as a

reference point, which is on top of the clamping plates. The
thickness of one of the clamping plates is 10 mm, which
means this point is, in theory, 10 mm above the center of
the specimen if the specimens were perfectly flat. In
practice it is already known that the specimens arent
perfectly flat. Figure 5-10 Starting point determination Z
However if one calibrates the Z-axis at the center of the

specimen, the Z-coordinates for every specimen will be
slightly different. This causes deviations as seen in 5.1.1.
With the method described above, by calibrating the Z-
coordinate at the jig instead of the specimen, the Z-
coordinates of every experiment will be the same.
Another issue with the starting point of the Z-axis is that as

soon as the power is removed from the entire machine, the
Z-axis automatically moves to its lowest position, as can be
seen in Figure 5-11 with the red arrow. As without power
the stepper motor provides less resistance, the weight of
the Z-axis moves the forming tool downwards over time.
Therefore, each time the power is removed from the system
the Z-axis has to be calibrated with the method mentioned Figure 5-11 Z-axis with (Left) and without power (Right)
above. This doesnt apply to the X and Y position, as these
remain in place with or without power.
Experiments
5.2.5 G-code coordinates

The specimen coordinates, or G-code coordinates for the software package, are automatically produced by a
simple Matlab script. This Matlab script can be found in Appendix A-3. This script basically takes the size of
the specimen, the two radii of the specimen, the required step size and the required feed rate.
The script first computes the forming depth of the specimen based on the input radii and the size of the
specimen to be created. Afterwards the first X, Y and Z coordinates are generated and the Z coordinate is
checked with the initially compute forming depth. As long as the Z-coordinate hasnt reached the forming
depth, the loop has to continue to the next set of coordinates.
In order to determine the next set of coordinates the distance between these coordinates and the previous
coordinates is set to 1 mm, to keep the points evenly distributed over the length of the tool path. As a result
the script computes the next set of coordinates with very small increments.
In the end, this list of generated coordinates is stored with a G-code G1 representations within a text file, in
order to run the coordinates in Repetier host, and is also shown in a figure for a visual inspection. Therefore,
for every new specimen with different geometry or machine settings this script is used to generate a G-code
list.
5.2.6 Test protocol flowchart

The above described test protocol can be written in a flow chart, as has been done in Figure 5-12. This
flowchart was used during each experiment in order to avoid mistakes or unnecessary deviations.
Start
Starting position
Create Specimen
Calibrate X
Correct X position No
Specimen Produced No
Yes
Yes Calibrate Y
No
Correct Y position
Secure the jig
Yes
Calibrate Z
Jig Secured No
Correct Z position No
Yes
Yes
Generate G-Code
Clamp Specimen
No
Correct G-code
Specimen Clamped No Yes
Yes
Run Experiment
Figure 5-12 Test protocol flowchart
Experiments
5.3 Geometry experiments

The double curved panels, as explained in the theoretical analysis, are usually found in the leading edges and
empennages instead of within the fuselage sections of an aircraft. The radii of these parts are significantly
smaller compared to that of a fuselage panel radius.
As this research focusses on the feasibility of incremental sheet forming as a die-less solution for preforming
aluminum layers within GLARE laminates, it should focus on those parts with a double curved profile and
therefore the chosen geometries to be tested are as followed:
1. One set of specimens with 100x100 radii
All of these specimens will have the same feed rate (1000 mm/min), same step size (0.2 mm/pass), same size
(120x120x0.4 mm) and material (Aluminum 2024-T3). After these tests the specimens are scanned with the
linear voltage displacement transducer in order to obtain a 3D image of the formed part. This 3D image is
than compared to the input model, which was used for the process.
5.3.1 Geometry experiment 1: 100x100 Radii

In Figure 5-13 the average obtained geometry of
these experiments is shown and already a few things
can be seen within these results. First of all the top
of the obtained geometry has a little dent, this is an
indication of the pillow effect.
Also the area surrounding the deformed area show

some small deformations as well, this is caused by
the sheet bending effect. Besides that, the shape
itself seems relative accurate at first sight.
In the next image, Figure 5-14, the deviations Figure 5-13 Geometry Experiment 1: Average obtained geometry
between the different specimens of the geometry
experiments 1 can be seen. What is most important
here is that using the jig as a reference point for the
Z-axis already provides fewer deviations, compared
to Figure 5-3.
Nevertheless the deviations near the center of the

specimen are still in the order of 0.2 mm. This could
be explained due to already present residual
stresses within the material. However the deviations
are small compared to the maximum forming depth. Figure 5-14 Geometry Experiment 1: Deviation between the
specimens
In Figure 5-15 the computer input model is
compared to that of the created specimen. With this
figure it becomes clear that the sheet bending (+/-
0.15 mm) and pillow effect (+/- 0.34 mm) are only
causing small deviations, when compared to the
spring back (+/- 2.26 mm). However the difference
seems to be related with the forming depth, which
implies that if over bending is applied, the result
should be more accurate. Nevertheless the result of
this specific test is that the forming depth of the
specimen is about 50% off compared to the input
model.
Figure 5-15 Geometry Experiment 1: Specimen (red) vs. Model
(blue)
Experiments

In the 100x200 radii experiments the radius of the Y-
axis is changed to a 200 mm radius compared to the
previous set of experiments. These specimens give
insight in which results can be expected with single
point incremental forming for a shape with two
different radii. In Figure 5-16 the average obtained
geometry of these experiments is shown. The sheet
bending at the edges of the specimens and the
pillow effect in the center are visible, just like with
the 100x100 mm experiment. Also the shape of the
specimen seems to be in line with the input model.
In the next image, Figure 5-17, the deviations Figure 5-16 Geometry Experiment 2: Average obtained geometry
between the specimens are plotted. Even though
the deviations are quite different compared to the
previous set of experiments, the scale of these
deviations is still in the order of 0.2 mm or less.
In Figure 5-18 the computer input model is

compared to that of the created specimen. In this
figure it becomes clear that the obtained shape does
not match the computer model. However just like
the previous experiment it also becomes clear that
the sheet bending (+/- 0.25 mm) and pillow effects
(+/- 0.15 mm) are only causing small deviations,
when compared to the spring back (+/- 1.77 mm). Figure 5-17 Geometry Experiment 2: Deviation between the
specimens
Even though the pillow effect, the effect which
causes the center to pop back up, only plays a minor
role in the total deviations of this experiment, it
does seem to increase for the large radii. This can be
clearly seen in Figure 5-16 and Figure 5-18 by the flat
top. A reason could be that residual stresses are
more easily relieved.
Nevertheless the difference seems to be related

again with the forming depth. Therefore it may be
expected that the deviations with the computer
model could be reduced if over bending is applied.
Figure 5-18 Geometry Experiment 2: Specimen (red) vs. Model

(blue)
Experiments

In the previous two geometry tests it was noticed
that at first sight the shape of the specimen seems to
match the geometry. Again for this test the same
applies, as can be seen in Figure 5-19. This first thing
that has to be noticed is that the obtained specimen
is actually slightly deeper than the previous
experiment. Even though it was expected to be
shallower as the radius in both directions is
increased. However the difference is in the same
order of magnitude as the deviations typically seen,
which might explain why the differences in achieved
forming depth are observed.
Next the deviations between the specimens are Figure 5-19 Geometry Experiment 3: Average obtained geometry
determined, as shown in Figure 5-20. Again the
deviations are almost all below 0.2 mm. Although
this specimen has a small peak at 0.2019 mm, which
means that the scale of the axis is slightly different
compared to the previous two experiments. For now
it seems that the deviations between the specimens
remain the same, no matter the geometry.
Now all that remains is to compare the obtained

geometry with the computer model input, to see if
the differences can be explained. This is done in
Figure 5-21.
The pillow effect is slightly increased again, as

expected from the results of the previous two
experiments. In the first experiments with 100 mm
radii the pillow effect was slightly visible. In the next
set of experiments the pillow effect already became
clearer. However, in this set of experiments the Figure 5-20 Geometry Experiment 3: Specimen Deviation
pillow effect (+/- 0.3 mm) is clearly visible as can be
seen in Figure 5-19 by the dent in the center. This
indicates that the residual stresses are less enclosed
in the sides and thus popping the center of the
specimen back up during unloading of the specimen.
The sheet bending effect on the other hand increases

and is about 0.25 mm in this specific set of
experiments. Comparing this with the previous two
sets of experiments, it seems that the sheet bending
effect becomes larger if the radii are increased.
However, just like with the previous two sets of

experiments, the spring back (+/-1.55 mm) accounts
for most of the differences between the specimen
and the computer model. Therefore it may be
Figure 5-21 Geometry Experiment 3: Specimen vs. Model
expected that if a spring back correction is applied
the deviations between the computer model and the
specimen could be reduced.
Experiments
5.4 Feed rate experiments

In the theoretical analysis it was stated that increasing the feed rate shouldnt have an effect on the
dimensional accuracy. However in order to verify this statement a series of tests is conducted to see if that
actually holds for double curved parts. Therefore the feed rate is increased from 1000 mm/min to 3000
mm/min in steps of 1000 mm/min. If the dimensional accuracy remains more or less the same it may be
assumed that increasing the feed rate any further should have no effect on the accuracy of the process.
5.4.1 Feed rate experiment 1: 1000 mm/min

This experiment is basically the same as Geometry experiment 1: 100x100 Radii, therefore the data
measured at that experiment is used here as a basis for the feed rate experiments.
As can be seen the results didnt provided to be very accurate with respect to the computer model due to
various reasons, such as sheet bending, pillow effect and spring back. However in order to determine the
effect of the feed rate the geometrical accuracy compared to the computer model is not important.
Instead the differences between the obtained geometries with different feed rate provide the required
information. Therefore the specimens of the following feed rate experiments are compared to the data of
the first geometry experiment to determine if the feed rate affects the geometrical accuracy in any way.

In this experiment all the parameters are kept the same, except the feed rate. This is increased to 2000
mm/min to see if any effects occur if the feed rate is increased. As mentioned before, in order to determine
this effect the results have to be compared with the previous experiment set at the regular 1000 mm/min
feed rate.
In Figure 5-22 the differences in shape are

shown between the experiments performed at
2000 mm/min feed rate and at 1000 mm/min
feed rate. What is shown is that there are small
deviations between the two different feed rates,
where the 2000 mm/min achieves less forming
depth compared to the 1000 mm/min
experiments.
However it was earlier mentioned that the

process itself has deviations in the order of 0.2
mm, as can be seen in Figure 5-14. Therefore it is
assumed that the differences are a result of the
process deviations. This implies that the feed Figure 5-22 Feed rate experiment 2: Differences 2000 mm/min
rate itself has no significant effect on the vs. 1000 mm/min
geometry.
Experiments

Just like the previous experiments all parameters have remained the same, except the feed rate. The feed
rate is increased with another 1000 mm/min to 3000 mm/min. Once again the results are compared to the
initial experiment with 1000 mm/min to see if any differences occur in the obtained geometry.
In Figure 5-23 the differences in obtained

geometry are shown between the experiments
performed at 3000 mm/min and those at 1000
mm/min feed rate.
What is most interesting is that there are large

differences between these different feed rates.
Unlike the previous comparison with the 2000
mm/min and the initial 1000 mm/min, the
differences are now much larger than the
deviations within a set of experiments, as seen Figure 5-23 Feed rate experiment 3: Differences 3000 mm/min
vs. 1000 mm/min
earlier in Figure 5-14.
Most of these differences can be found near the center of the specimen. At first it was assumed that local
heating, due to the friction between the tool and the specimen, allowed the material to have a higher spring
back. However the actual reason is that the Z-axis was skipping several steps. It is most likely that the
increase in feed rate increased the force on the Z-axis during the process, which resulted in the loss of steps.
As the process continuous the amount of steps lost accumulates near the center, causing larger deviations. It
was measured that the Z-axis had lost between 0.9 and 1 mm in steps after an experiment at 3000 mm/min.
This explains the majority of the differences seen within Figure 5-23. The remainder of the differences is most
likely caused by either the friction or process deviations.
5.5 Step size experiments

In the theoretical analysis it was mentioned that if the step size is increased, the dimensional accuracy of the
process decreases. This is because the step size influences the tool path location; larger increments in step
size imply shorter toolpaths and thus less local deformations. The benefit of a shorter toolpath is that this
reduces the production time per part. To determine if and how much the dimensional accuracy is reduced by
an increase in step size, experiments are conducted that will compare the achieved forming depths between
different step sizes.
The step size in these experiments is alternated from 0.1 mm per pass to 0.3 mm per pass in steps of 0.1 mm,
all with a feed rate of 1000 mm/min. This provides three data points, which can be used to see the relation
between the step size and the geometrical accuracy.
5.5.1 Step size experiment 1: 0.2 mm

This experiment is the same as the first geometry experiment; therefore the data measured at that
experiment is used here as a basis for the step size experiments, just like with the feed rate experiments.
In the first geometry experiment section the results of these settings didnt provided to be very accurate with
respect to the computer model due to various reasons, such as sheet bending, pillow effect and spring back.
However to determine the effect of the step size the geometrical accuracy compared to the computer model
is not important.
Instead the differences between the obtained geometries with different step size provide the required
information. Therefore, just like the feed rate experiments, the specimens of the following step size
experiments are compared to the data of the first geometry experiments in order to determine to effect of
the step size on the geometrical accuracy.
Experiments

In this experiment all the parameters are kept the same, except the step size. This is halved to 0.1 mm per
pass to see if the geometrical accuracy increases if the step size is decreased. As mentioned before, in order
to determine this effect the results have to be compared with the first geometry experiments performed at
0.2 mm/pass step size.
In Figure 5-24 the differences in shape are shown

between the experiments performed at 0.1 mm/pass
step size and at 0.2 mm/pass step size. What is shown is
that there are deviations between the two different step
sizes, which are significantly larger than the expected
deviation of the process, as seen in Figure 5-14.
This implies that the decrease in step size actually has an Figure 5-24 Step size experiment 2: Absolute differences
effect on the accuracy. However Figure 5-24 doesnt vs. 0.2 mm/pass
provide any information whether the accuracy is
increased or decreased. To determine if the accuracy is
increased, the data obtained from this set (red) is
plotted against the data of the first geometry
experiment (green), as can be seen in Figure 5-25.
In this figure it can be seen that the red figure is deeper

compared to the green shape. This implies that the 0.1
mm/pass data set is slightly more accurate compared to
Figure 5-25 Step size experiment 2: Specimen shape
the 0.2 mm/pass data set.
differences between 0.1 mm/pass (red) vs. 0.2 mm/pass
(green)
In this experiment all the parameters are kept the same, except the step size. This is increased to 0.3 mm per
pass to see if the geometrical accuracy decreases if the step size is increased. This could be expected after
the results of previous step size experiment. As mentioned before, to determine the effect the results have
to be compared with the first geometry experiments.
In Figure 5-26 the differences in shape are shown

between the experiments performed at 0.2 mm/pass
and at 0.3 mm/pass step size. In this figure it is shown
that there are again deviations between the two
different step sizes, which are significantly larger than
the expected deviation of the process, as shown in
Figure 5-14. These deviations are in similar size as the
deviations seen in the previous step size experiment,
where 0.1 mm/pass and 0.2 mm/pass were compared.
Figure 5-26 Step size experiment 3: Absolute
This implies that the increase in step size also has an differences vs. 0.2 mm/pass
effect on the accuracy. However Figure 5-26 once again
doesnt provide any information whether the accuracy
is increased or decreased. Therefore Figure 5-27 is used,
which plots the specimen coordinates of the 0.3
mm/pass (red) against those of the 0.2 mm/pass
(green).
In this figure it can be seen that the green shape is

slightly deeper compared to the red shape. This implies
that the 0.3 mm/pass data set is slightly less accurate
compared to the 0.2 mm/pass data set. This is in line Figure 5-27 Step size experiment 3: Specimen shape
with what could have been expected after step size differences between 0.3 mm/pass (red) vs. 0.2
experiment 2. mm/pass (green)
Experiments
5.6 Geometry spring back correction

In order to verify the earlier claim that the accuracy could be
increased by adding the difference, between the specimen
and the input model, to the computer model as a method of
over deforming a part; a series of tests has been conducted.
In this particular case the experiments of 5.3.1 were taken as

a reference to verify the method Micari proposed earlier in
his paper [5]. This data set will be iterated with his method to Figure 5-28 Specimen 1 without correction
obtain the first correction specimen. This correction basically
implies that a specimen is first formed with the normal input
model. Then the difference between the obtained geometry
and the input model will be added to the input model and
this new corrected input model will be used on the same,
already formed, specimen. Afterwards this is done again for
the second correction to see if any improvements are made
with an additional iteration. Figure 5-29 Specimen correction 1
The results have been made visual in Figure 5-28, Figure 5-29
and Figure 5-30. The first thing that has to be noted is that
after only a single correction the forming depth is significantly
increased, compared to the initial specimen. The initial
specimen has about 3-4 mm forming depth, where the first
correction already has 6-8 mm forming depth. For the second
correction hardly any visual changes are directly seen Figure 5-30 Specimen correction 2
compared to the first correction.
Also just like the geometry experiments the different effects,

which contribute to the inaccuracies can be analyzed for
these samples. This is done in Figure 5-31 and shows a shift in
the contributing factors. In the first experiments the spring
back was always the dominant factor in explaining the
differences. However after only a single iteration, as proposed
by Micari, the effects of this iteration already become clear.
The second correction doesnt add much more in terms of
accuracy, yet some small improvements are still made.
Even though the spring back effect is actually increased, the

correction compensates. This results in a more accurate result
with respect to the forming depth. At the same time the sheet
bending effect is slightly increased due to this correct Figure 5-31 Overview of the contribution of each
method, while the pillow effect is slightly decreased. effect on the accuracy mismatch
In order to provide insight in the overall accuracy improvement Figure 5-32 has been made. This figure clearly
shows in the left image that the first correction specimen is rather accurate compared to the initial input
model. The forming depth is matched up to 97.2% in fact. But this figure also that the differences between
first (middle) and second (right) iteration are very minimal (97.2% vs. 98.3%). Therefore it is probably best to
apply the correction only once, as the results from a second pass correction are minimal.
Figure 5-32 Correction 1 vs. CAD Model (left), difference iteration 1 (middle) and difference iteration 2 (right)
Experiments
5.7 Experimental results

5.7.1 Geometry experiments
As has been shown during the geometry
experiment the differences between the
specimens and the computer models got less if the
radius was increased in absolute values. In which
the spring back is the most dominant factor in the
difference between the computer model and the
actual specimen, while the sheet bending and
pillow effect only play a minor role. This is
visualized in Figure 5-33, where geometry
experiments 1, 2 and 3 are shown on the X-axis
and the different effects in mm are shown on the
Y-axis.
However if the radius is increased the total forming

depth is decreased. Therefore it may be logical
that the difference between the computer model
and the actual geometry actually becomes less.
Instead it might be better to compare the relative Figure 5-33 Overview of the contribution of each effect on the
error between the computer model and the actual accuracy mismatch
obtained geometry. This provides a certain
percentage, which can be used to compare the
effect of different radii with respect to the forming
depth. In order to provide such comparison the
forming depth of the specimen is divided by the
forming depth of the actual mode, to see what
kind of percentage of the depth is achieved. The
results can be seen in Figure 5-34. The numbers on
the X-axis represent the number of the
experiments, thus number 1 corresponds with
geometry experiments 1.
From this data it becomes clear that specimens

with larger radii actually have quite a bit less
accuracy in forming depth. However whether a
specimen has two different radii or two of the
same hardly influences the forming depth
accuracy, as can be seen in the small difference
between experiment 2 and 3. This implies that the
amount of spring back is mostly influenced by the Figure 5-34 Achieved forming depth as a % of the
largest radii within the specimen, where a larger computer model depth
radius usually allows more relaxation afterwards.
Therefore the achieved depth is usually less in
larger radii parts.
Experiments
The pillow effect

As mentioned earlier several reasons exist for the
difference between the computer model and the
actual specimen. One of those is the pillow effect,
which causes the center of the specimen to pop
back up. It was stated earlier that this pillow effect
would increase with higher radii in both directions,
which is also shown by the data in Figure 5-35.
In this figure the pillow effect is divided by the

achieved depth of the specimen. One can clearly
see that the pillow effect increases if the radius in
one direction is increased already. But also that if
both radii are increased the effect increases.
Figure 5-35 Pillow effect as a % of the achieved specimen depth
An interesting fact is that it also seems that the
pillow effect does have a relative constant value if
the radii are equal. For example in the first
geometry experiments the pillow effect was 0.34
mm and in the geometry 3 experiments the pillow
effect was 0.3 mm, as can be seen in Figure 5-36.
But if the radii are unequal the pillow effect is
limited to 0.12 mm. Therefore the pillow effect may
have a constant value if the radii are equal. This is
due to the residual stresses, which are enclosed
inside the geometry if a specimen has two different
radii instead of two identical radii. Since the
specimen with equal radii are symmetrical it
requires less force to pop back the center of the
plate. Therefore the pillow effect tends to increase
within these specimens, as the residual stresses are Figure 5-36 Pillow effect in mm for the geometry tests
released easier. However the pillow effect remains
small compared to the spring back effect for
example.
The sheet bending effect

The sheet bending effect may also play a role in the
deviations seen between the computer model and
the obtained geometry. During the geometry tests
it was stated that the sheet bending effect seems to
increase if the forming depth was decreased, which
is unexpected. One would assume that if the
forming depth is increased, the sheet bending
would increase as well. Nevertheless the opposite
seems true as can be seen in Figure 5-37.
However the sheet bending effect is small and in

the same order of magnitude as the deviations seen
between specimens in the same set. This might be
the cause of the unexpected trend seen in Figure
5-37. Yet the order of magnitude of the sheet
bending effect remains small; especially compared
Figure 5-37 Sheet bending effect in mm for the geometry tests
to the differences between the computer model
and the obtained specimens.
Experiments
The spring back effect

The spring back, as mentioned earlier, is the main reason
for the large deviations between the specimens and the
computer model. While the previously mentioned pillow
effect and sheet bending effect account for 0.15-0.35
mm deviations, the spring back accounts for 1.55-2.26
mm deviations. The spring back is visualized in Figure
5-38. It is important to mention that the spring back
during each of these experiments is measured, with the
specimen still clamped inside the jig. If the specimen is
unclamped, the spring back will be even higher. However
it becomes impossible to measure the shape of the
specimen after being released from the jig with a certain
degree of accuracy.
It seems that the spring back effect reduces, if the radii

of the specimens are increased. However this is only true
Figure 5-38 Spring back effect in mm for the geometry
for the absolute displacement caused by the spring back. tests
The relative spring back with respect to the computer
model depth is therefore shown in Figure 5-39.
In this figure it becomes obvious that for the first

geometry experiment the absolute spring back might
have been higher, although the relative spring back is
much lower. It also becomes clear that spring back might
be more of an issue with double curved specimens with
two different radii compared to specimens with equal
radii. This can be seen between data point 2 and 3. The
computer model depth is in these cases equal; but the
spring back within experiment 2 is almost 10% more.
This might be caused by the 100 mm radius being
present, which causes more internal stresses, which in
turn causes the specimen to have more spring back in Figure 5-39 Spring back in % for the geometry tests
the end. compared to the computer model depth
5.7.2 Feed rate experiments

From the first two sets of experiments it seems that the feed rate doesnt have any influence on the
geometrical accuracy as earlier predicted. But the third experiment clearly shows that the feed rate has an
influence on the geometrical accuracy.
The main reason for this deviation was that the machine itself had problems running at these feed rates,
which caused a deviation of 0.9 to 1 mm in total. But this only partially explains the differences seen between
the different feed rates. Another reason might be that the friction between the forming tool and the material
causes the material to become warm. An increase in temperature usually increases the ductility of the
material, which results in less plastic deformations. If one has the ability to either freely rotate this forming
tool or control the spindle speed, the friction between the forming tool and the material could be reduced. In
order to minimize friction the following formula could be if the spindle speed can be controlled:

=
1
(1 cos(2 )
2
Nevertheless the current results do imply that the feed rate has a negative effect on the dimensional
accuracy and is thus cant be increased over and over to achieve higher production speeds achieving the
same dimensional accuracy as initially assumed.
Experiments
5.7.3 Step size experiments

In order to determine the effect of the step size, the same parameters are compared as with the geometrical
experiments. Therefore the total maximum difference between the obtained specimen and the computer
model is analyzed and then split up into the pillow effect, the sheet bending effect and the spring back effect.
Total difference
The total difference is once again the maximum
difference between the obtained specimen and the
computer model and is the summation of the pillow
effect, the sheet bending effect and the spring back
effect. In Figure 5-40 this is visualized.
Pillow effect
Most surprisingly what can be seen is that if the
step size is decreased sufficiently the pillow effect
seems to play a rather large role in the inaccuracies,
approaching the spring back effect. However as
soon as the step size is increased, the pillow effect
fades away.
Sheet bending effect

From the same figure it can also be seen that the
sheet bending effect hardly changes with a different
step size and could be assumed independent of the
step size. As a result the inaccuracies caused by the
sheet bending effect cant be changed by
alternating the step size, but have to be counter
with other process settings. Figure 5-40 Overview of the contribution of each effect
on the depth mismatch
Spring back
The spring back on the other hand increases with each increment of the step size, resulting in higher
inaccuracies at higher step sizes. This is in line with the earlier mentioned expectations of what could happen
when the step size is increased. However it seems the behavior between the spring back and the increase in
step size is not linear and actually might have a horizontal asymptote. This implies that after a certain step
size has been reached, the inaccuracies remain constant. Nevertheless further research is required in order
to determine whether this holds, as only limited results are shown here.
Discussion
Chapter 6 Discussion
This chapter will cover the discussion regarding the results obtained in Chapter 5 and how these relate to the
large scale application as mentioned in Chapter 3.
6.1 Large scale applications

6.1.1 Process repeatability
At first the repeatability of the process is discussed. In Chapter 5, during the calibration tests, a series of tests
were conducted to establish the repeatability of both the machine and the measurements. In this calibration
process it became clear that the process has a deviation of approximately 0.25 mm for a 100x100 mm
specimen.
After the calibration phase, the deviations seen were still in the same range of 0.20-0.25 mm as can be seen
in Figure 5-14, Figure 5-17 and Figure 5-20. However the average deviation was decreased significantly. The
magnitude of these deviations is similar to the data found by Singh and Agrawi during their experiments at
similar sized specimens with different geometry [40].
For the large scale application it is assumed that the deviations, seen at the repeatability of the experiments,
are linear with respect to the size of the specimens. This implies that the deviations become in the order of 3
to 4 mm for 1500x1500 mm panels. This size of deviations is not uncommon for aircraft industry in fuselage
panels. Therefore the repeatability shouldnt be an issue for large scale products as long as the assumption
that the deviations behave linear holds.
6.1.2 Process predictability

The predictability of the process is basically implies to what extend the specimens resemble the input file /
goal. This is different compared to the repeatability, as in the repeatability one wants the specimens close to
each other, but not necessarily close to the goal. The main problem with the predictability for incremental
sheet forming is that there are no accurate computer models that can predict the material behavior
correctly.
Nevertheless after a specimen has been formed, the repeatability of the process allows a rather accurate
prediction of the next specimen. With the help of the correction method one could come much closer to the
actual aim, which increases the predictability. Therefore the initial predictability is low based on computer
models, but within a series production one could achieve predictable results after a first sample has been
made and corrected.
The problem arises if one wants to produce large panels in small series. As the process lacks a good initial
prediction, the production of the first panel will be very difficult. However after the first panel has been
successfully formed within its tolerances, the second panel can be made the same way. But the predictability
might become an issue in large scale manufacturing, due to its lack of a good initial prediction by an accurate
computer model.
6.1.3 Process controllability

The controllability of the process is related to how well the process can be controlled, either by hand or by
computer. In this case the controllability of the process is done with a CNC method. As long as the G-code of
the CNC controller is written correctly, one should have no unwanted movements or flaws in the
controllability of the process.
The only possible deviation in the controllability arises from the backlash in the axes of the machine itself.
The backlash occurs when the axes turns in the opposite direction. A small gap between the bearing and the
threaded rod allows some backlash. However the backlash in most of these machines is limited to 0.01 mm
or less. Therefore the controllability should not be an issue in large scale manufacturing.
Discussion
6.1.4 Dimensional accuracy

One of the research questions was related the effect the process settings had on the dimensional accuracy. In
the experimental phase the feed rate and the step size have been varied in order to provide some insight.
Initially it was stated that the step size had an influence on the dimensional accuracy. This statement has
been verified by the results of the step size experiments. There is a clear trend that if the step size is
decreased, the dimensional accuracy is increased and vice versa.
It was also stated that the feed rate has no influence on the dimensional accuracy. This statement has been
proven wrong. The experimental results showed that, with increasing feed rates, the dimensional accuracy
went down. Where the 3000 mm/min feed rate experiment shows this best.
Nevertheless the overall dimensional accuracy at each of these experiments was still low and did not even
approach the input model given. This was solved with the correction method experiment. This experiment
used an iteration to correct the spring back in a specimen. As a result the forming depth approached the
depth of the input model up to 97.2%. But at certain places the difference between the input model and the
obtained specimen was still +/- 0.8 mm.
These differences do provide an issue for large scale implementations. In these experiments the best case
scenario was achieved with a single iteration, but still provided +/- 0.8 mm variation at certain places in the
specimen. For the large scale implementation, larger sheets will be formed at a time and therefore the
variations will most likely increase. As a result the dimensional accuracy of these plates may have such large
variations that the process itself is not accurate enough.
But if the predictability of the process becomes better, one could predict the material behavior of these large
plates during the process. This could provide much higher dimensional accuracies and solve this problem.
This does require more research on the different effects that cause these variations, which could result in an
improved computer model for the process.
6.1.5 Process speed

The process speed was another crucial factor being tested as for the large scale application a high process
speed is required. Earlier in Figure 3-4 it was shown that the toolpath for a 1500x2000 mm panel is several
km in length. Initially it was stated that the feed rate had a minimum effect on the dimensional accuracy and
that one could increase the speed to the required speed.
During the step size experiments it was shown that increasing the step size affects the dimensional accuracy.
Therefore there are clear limitations towards the step sizes in order to stay within the dimensional accuracy
limitations, which limit the maximum process speed.
Regarding the feed rate experiments it was expected that doubling or even tripling the feed rate should have
a minimum effect or even no effect to the dimensional accuracy and thus the feed rate could be increased up
to the required feed rate. However the feed rate does influence the dimensional accuracy, as seen in the
experiments. A higher feed rate cause more friction, which heats up the material and allows more relaxation
and therefore less dimensional accuracy.
The specimens in these experiments were processed between 1.5 and 5 minutes. For the large scale
implementation a much higher process speed is required, which implies a much higher step size and feed
rate. The experiments have shown that in order to reach these step sizes or feed rates, the dimensional
accuracy gets affected. Therefore its not possible to obtain the required feed rate and step size.
In order to obtain the required process speed a different approach is required. For example the process could
use an origami method to fold or bend the material at certain locations, which requires much less toolpath
length. Or multiple forming tools can be used at once by the same machine, which reduced the toolpath
length per forming tool. Another solution would be to use multiple machines. But with the current limitations
in feed rate and step size the amount of machines required would be tremendous in order to produce
enough panels per hour.
Discussion
6.2 Limitations
So far there have been several limitations with respect to the large scale implementation of incremental
sheet forming. The typical arguments against applying single point incremental forming in large industrial
applications are that the process is too slow and inaccurate.
2
In order to produce the required 72-129 m aluminum per hour, the feed rate should be in the order of 600
m/min and the step size should be in the order of 0.5 mm per pass. Even though machines exist that are
capable of performing at these feed rates and step sizes, its most unlikely that the results are accurate.
As seen in the experiments a step size of 0.5 mm per pass would be feasible, but would decrease the
dimensional accuracy quite a bit. The main issue is the feed rate of 600 m/min. These feed rates cause a lot
of friction, which decrease the overall accuracy. The friction can be reduced, by allowing the forming tool to
freely rotate or have a controlled rotation. But even if this is done, the feed rate is usually limited to 10 to 30
m/min to avoid friction/heating problems or material surface damage.
These results severely limit the feasibility of incremental forming for large scale applications like the one
proposed in this research. But it might be possible that in the near future a better prediction model is
developed. This prediction model can then be used to predict the material behavior at higher feed rates to
compensate the input model in advance.
6.3 Improvements
There are several improvements or ideas that can be used to make incremental forming more feasible for
large scale applications, like the one suggested in this research.
Improved Prediction model

The first major improvement that should be made is the understanding of how incremental forming
influences the material. This could result in a better computer model, which could predict the material
behavior during the process. This would also result in higher dimensional accuracies and possibly in much
higher feed rates. Therefore an improved prediction model could solve the issues that avoid incremental
forming from being used in industry.
Origami method
A second improvement can be made, as already mentioned on the previous page, by changing the toolpath
philosophy. Right now the toolpath is a spiraling toolpath that goes from the outside in, with equal steps in
vertical direction. But one might want to investigate the option to use an origami folding method to reduce
the toolpath tremendously. The main issue with this method is that it does require a thorough knowledge of
the process and material behavior. But it could significantly reduce the required feed rate.
Multi-point incremental forming

A third improvement can be made by using multiple forming tools, multi-point incremental forming, that
simultaneously cover the toolpath. This could significantly reduce the distance each forming tool has to cover
and thus reduce the feed rates. The problem with this solution is that it requires a complicated setup and
steering system to ensure that the forming tools do not interfere with each other.
Back tool incremental forming

Regarding the dimensional accuracy, one could increase the dimensional accuracy by using a second forming
tool on the other side of the sheet. This second tool can then be used to shear the material between the
forming tools. This could result in a much higher accuracy as the sheet bending effects becomes much less.
Even though this would not solve the problem with the process speed, it can be used in combination with the
multi-point forming method to improve both process speed and accuracy.
Iteration Method
Even though the iteration method is used in this research on an existing formed specimen, one might be able
to use the new toolpath obtained by the iteration method and apply it to a new flat specimen directly to see
if the dimensional accuracy is also increased. If successful, this method could be used, while an improved
prediction model is being developed.
Conclusions
Chapter 7 Conclusions
7.1 Consolidation of the work
The main goal of this thesis was to determine the feasibility of incremental forming in terms of dimensional
accuracy and process speed for preforming aluminum sheets used in GLARE laminates. This was done with a
literature study on GLARE and incremental forming. After a theoretical analysis was done in which the
process requirements were determined. This was followed by an experimental phase, which consists of
obtaining an experimental setup and performing several experiments. The results of these experiments were
than combined with the theoretical analysis to determine to which extend the process was feasible or not.
The thesis objective was defined as follows:
To perform a study on the combination of GLARE material and incremental forming to define
and perform an experimental setup and test plan to determine to what extend incremental
forming is feasible as a method to preform the aluminum sheets used in GLARE.
During the literature study, the definition of GLARE was described with the different Grades and their specific
applications. Also the current production of GLARE, the hand lay-up method, was analyzed and in
combination with the material properties it became clear why this current method was not feasible for
double curved panels as described in this research. It was also shown that the material most likely to be used
for these applications was either GLARE Grade 3 or 4.
In the second part of the literature study the die-less incremental forming sheet is described and the most
recent developments in the field of single point incremental forming were mentioned. It was shown that feed
rates up to 600 m/min were achievable. But it was also shown that the accuracy depends on the sheet
bending effect, the pillow effect and the spring back, and that there are no accurate computer models.
Afterwards the literature study was used as a basis for the process conditions, where it was found that, in
theory, the production speed of large fuselage panels shouldnt be a problem as long as the combination
between feed rate and step size doesnt affect the accuracy. However for the small double curved panels,
with radii between 100-2000 mm, the accuracy might become an issue, therefore this research was focused
at these smaller, more curved panels.
The experimental setup in combination with the experiments has proven that the process itself is repeatable,
predictable and controllable, as seen during the calibration experiments. However, at first the dimensional
accuracy of the process was around 60% with respect to the forming depth. The correction method,
suggested by Micari, was proven to be useful to increase the accuracy of the process with a single iteration to
97.2% of the forming depth.
It was also shown that the feed rate had a negative effect on the accuracy and that increasing the step size
also had a negative effect on the accuracy. This implied that the step size could be increased to a certain
limit, before the accuracy becomes too low. The same applies to the feed rate, where higher feed rates cause
a decrease in dimensional accuracy. Therefore the feed rate could only be increased to a certain limit.
The experimental results were used to analyze the feasibility of incremental sheet for large scale
manufacturing, such as the Airbus A320 production line. According to the results the accuracy drops if either
the feed rate or step size is increased and therefore limited. Therefore it is suggested to stay below a feed
rate of 30 m/min and a step size of 0.3 mm/pass, to stay within the required dimensional accuracy.
For large scale industrial applications, e.g. the production line of the Airbus A320, the above mentioned
combination is not fast enough with respect to the required production rates. Especially if the splices are
supposed to be reduced, the forming depth increases and the production time per panel increases. This
makes the process, at this moment, not feasible to be used for the Airbus A320 production line. But for the
smaller, lower volume, double curved parts the process might be feasible if multiple machines are used.
Conclusions
7.2 Conclusion
The conclusion of this report is the answer to the main research question stated in Chapter 1, and repeated
below, which is:
Can die-less incremental forming be a feasible process for preforming the aluminum layers
used within GLARE laminates?
In order to be feasible the process should be able to produce parts with an accuracy of 90% or higher and at
rates fast enough to keep up with the production rate of the Airbus A320. The experiments have shown that
the accuracy can be achieved with the correction method suggested by Micari. But the main issue lies within
the process speed, which requires a combination of a high feed rate and step size. As a result the incremental
sheet forming process is not feasible for the fuselage panel production of the Airbus A320. Yet it is feasible to
produce the smaller, highly double curved parts of the leading edges and empennage with this process, due to
the lower required production volumes of these parts.
7.3 Recommendations
As could be read in the conclusions the incremental forming process as used in this thesis is not a feasible
method to be applied for large scale industrial applications, such as the Airbus A320 fuselage. However the
author would like to provide a few recommendations for future research.
Toolpath variation
Various methods exist to decrease the toolpath length, as mentioned in section 6.3. One of these solutions is
to use the art of origami to bend thin aluminum sheets into certain shapes. This could significantly reduce the
required toolpath length. So far, no research exists with incremental forming being applied in such a way and
could be the key solution to preform aluminum sheets.
Forming tools variation

For now it has been shown that the forming tool used in this research is capable of delivering relative
accurate parts, but at a low rate. Future research could include the options of using multiple forming tools
working simultaneously at the same product, as commonly seen in robotic welding operations in car industry.
This decreases the amount of toolpath per forming tool, which decreases the overall production time.
Another possibility is the use of a backing plate or tool, as seen earlier in Figure 2-4. This doesnt decrease the
process speed, but it could increase the process accuracy. At this moment such as machine is used for
research at Ford, namely the F3T. Even though it seems promising the application has not be used for series
production yet [41].
Prediction and iteration

It is also recommended that the prediction models are improved for incremental forming processes. Right
now the prediction models are too inaccurate to be useful. But if these prediction models are increased, it
allows less errors and/or deviations when it is applied for large scale industry. The iteration method can also
be used in the meantime to improve the dimensional accuracy of the products after a single pass. But
eventually, the prediction model should become advanced enough to avoid any iteration passes in order to
save valuable production time.
Machine selection
Last, but certainly not least, the machine used in this research was handmade by the student itself. This
implies that the machine doesnt have the same specifications as professional machines, as seen in Leuven
and Ford. It is therefore recommended that, if future research is done at the DASML, an investment should
be made in a more advanced machine. For example, the machine used in this research was not able to
control the spindle speed, which increased the friction between the forming tool and the specimen. A
dedicated professional machine is usually capable of controlling the spindle speed.
References
References
Picture used on the front-page of the report: http://www.lamieranews.it/files/2015/06/fig.2.jpg
[1] A. Vlot and J. W. G. , Fibre Metal Laminates: An Introduction, Dodrecht: Kluwer Academic Publisher,
2001.
[2] R. v. d. Veen, "Sprekende Machines," Delft Integraal, 4 2005. [Online]. Available:

http://www.tudelft.nl/fileadmin/UD/MenC/Support/Internet/TU_Website/TU_Delft_portal/Actueel/
Magazines/Delft_Integraal/archief/2005_DI/2005-4/doc/DI05-4-10sprekendemachines.pdf. [Accessed
8 September 2015].
[3] P. Broest, Assembling 3d-fml panels of undeformed aluminium sheets. estimation of internal stresses.,
Delft: Delft University of Technology, 1999.
[4] J. Sinke, "The production of 3d glare panels," Delft University of Technology, Delft, 1999.
[5] L. Filice, G. Ambrogio and F. Micari, "Shape and dimensional accuracy in Single Point Incremental,"
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 191, p. 390395, 2007.
[6] T. H. D. A. L.-. E. RUIMTEVAARTTECHNIEK, "Laminate of aluminium sheet material and aramid fibres.".
Nederland Patent NL8100087, 2 Augustus 1982.
[7] T. H. D. A. L.-. E. RUIMTEVAARTTECHNIEK, "Laminate of metal sheet material and threads bonded
thereto, as well as processes for the manufacture thereof.". Netherlands Patent NL8100088, 2 August
1982.
[8] L. B. Vogelesang and G. H. Roebroeks, "Metal-resin laminate reinforced with S2-glass fibres". United
States of America Patent US5039571 A, 11 Oktober 1988.
[9] TU Delft, [Online]. Available:

http://www.lr.tudelft.nl/fileadmin/Faculteit/LR/Organisatie/Afdelingen_en_Leerstoelen/Afdeling_AM
M/Structural_Integrity/Research/Ph.D_Projects__old_/Impact_behaviour_of_Fiber_Metal_Laminates;
_Impact_and_dent_damage_Resistance/img/lay-up.jpg. [Accessed 7 September 2015].
[10] G. Roebroeks and A. Mattousch, "Impact resistant laminate". Patent US5547735, 20 August 1996.
[11] G. Roebroeks, "Laminaat uit metaalplaten en elkaar kruisende dradenlagen uit verschillende
materialen in kunststof.". Patent NL1022706, 17 February 2003.
[12] L. Vogelesang, L. Verbruggen and C. Paalvast, "Armour plate composite with ceramic impact layer".
Patent US4836084, 6 June 1989.
[13] J. Gunnink, "Composite laminate of metal sheets and continuous filaments-reinforced synthetic
layers". Patent US4935291, 19 June 1990.
[14] R. Alderliesten, "On the Development of Hybrid Material Concepts for Aircraft Structures," Recent
Patents on Engineering, vol. 3, pp. 25-38, 2009.
[15] W. Guocai and J. Yang, "The Mechancial Behaviour of GLARE laminates for Aircraft Structures," in
Failure in Structural Materials, JOM, 2005.
References
[16] Fiber Metal Laminate Company, [Online]. Available: http://www.fmlc.nl/research-

development/results-cases/. [Accessed 7 September 2015].
[17] Cytec Industries Inc., "BR127 Corrosion Inhibiting Primer Datasheet," Cytec Industries Inc., 2003.
[18] E. Kroon, "Influence of general quality on Glare material performance," FMLC, The Netherlands, 2002.
[19] C. Pegels, "A study on the Residual Stress of GLARE 1," Delft University of Technology, Delft, 1995.
[20] R. Alderliesten, "Fatigue Crack Propagation and Delamination Growth in Glare," Delft University Press,
Delft, 2005.
[21] J. Sinke, Forming technology for composite/metal hybrids, Abington: Woodhead Publishing Limited,
2007.
[22] J. Schijve, "Development of fibre-metal laminates, ARALL and GLARE new fatigue resistant materials,"
TU Delft, Delft, 1993.
[23] A. Vlot, "Impact loading of fiber-metal laminates," Journal of Impact Engineering, vol. 18, pp. 291-307,
1996.
[24] E. Leszak, "Aparatus and Process for Incremental Dieless Forming". Patent US3342051A1, 19
September 1967.
[25] J. Jeswiet, F. Micari, G. Hirt, A. Bramely, J. Duflou and J. Allwood, "Asymmetric Single Point Incremental
Forming of Sheet Metal," CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 88-114, 2005.
[26] B. Araghi, G. Manco, M. Bambach and G. Hirt, "Investigation into a new hybrid forming process:
Incremenal sheet forming combined with stretch forming," CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology,
vol. 58, pp. 225-228, 2009.
[27] T. Kim and D. Yang, "Improvement of formability for the incremental sheet metal forming," Int J Mech
Sci, vol. 42, pp. 1271-1286, 2000.
[28] Y. Kim and J. Park, "Effect of process parameters on formability in incremental forming of," J Mat
Process Technol, vol. 130, pp. 42-46, 2002.
[29] L. Filice, L. Fratini and F. Micari, "Analysis of material formability in incremental forming.," CIRP Annual
Manufacturing Technology, vol. 51, pp. 199-202, 2002.
[30] G. Hussain, L. Gao, N. Hayat and L. Qijian, "The effect of variation in the curvature of part on the," Int J
Mach Tools Manuf, vol. 47, pp. 2177-2181, 2007.
[31] I. Cerro, E. Maidagan, J. Arana, A. Rivero and P. Rodriguez, "Theoretical and experimental analysis of
the dieless incremental sheet forming process.," Material Process Technology, vol. 177, pp. 404-408,
2006.
[32] K. Hamilton and J. Jeswiet, "Single point incremental forming at high feed rates and rotational speeds:
Surface and structural consequences," CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, vol. 59, pp. 311-314,
2010.
[33] G. Ambrogio, F. Gagliardi, S. Bruschi and L. Filice, "On the high-speed Single Point Incremental Forming
of Titanium Alloys," CIRP Annals - Manufacturing Technology, vol. 62, pp. 243-246, 2013.
References
[34] R. Hallet and P. Camanho, Composite Joints and Connections: Principles, Modelling and Testing,
Philadelphia: Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2011.
[35] Airbus, " Airbus to raise A320 Family production to 46 a month by Q2 2016," Airbus, 26 February 2014.
[Online]. Available: http://www.airbus.com/presscentre/pressreleases/press-release-
detail/detail/airbus-to-raise-a320-family-production-to-46-a-month-by-q2-2016/. [Accessed 5
November 2015].
[36] J. Duflou, R. Aerens, P. Eyckens and A. Van Bael, "Force prediction for single point incremental
forming," The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 46, no. 9, pp. 969-
982, 2009.
[37] "Wood Cnc Router Table Machine Kit Plans PDF Plans," [Online]. Available: http://pcria.org/MjI0Yjc1-
cnc-router-table-machine-kit-plans.html. [Accessed 8 June 2016].
[38] Trochilidesign, "Building your own CNC router/milling machine," [Online]. Available:
http://www.instructables.com/id/Building-your-own-CNC-milling-machine/. [Accessed 8 June 2016].
[39] "HBM 16 Boormachine / Freesmachine," [Online]. Available: https://www.hbm-

machines.com/producten/metaalbewerking/metaalfreesmachines/metaalfreesmachinesssub/hbm-16-
boor-freesmachine. [Accessed 8 June 2016].
[40] A. Singh and A. Anupam , "Comparison of Dimensional Repeatability and Accuracy for Deformation
Machining Stretching Mode with Sheet Metal Componen," in 5th International & 26th All India
Manufacturing Technology, Rupnagar, 2014.
[41] P. Ponticel, "Ford sheet-metal-forming technology on journey from lab to application," SAE
International, 14 Augusts 2013. [Online]. Available: http://articles.sae.org/12385/. [Accessed 30 June
2016].
[42] "Arduino Mega 2560," Riecktron Embedded Solutions, [Online]. Available:

https://www.riecktron.co.za/en/product/211. [Accessed 20 June 2016].
[43] "Ramps 1.4 Shield," 3D printers, [Online]. Available: http://3d-printers.co.za/products-

page/electronics/ramps-1-4-shield/. [Accessed 20 June 2016].
[44] "1SL02 IP66 Wall Box," RS-Components, [Online]. Available: http://nl.rs-online.com/web/p/wall-

boxes/4939930/. [Accessed 20 June 2016].
[45] "Voedingen: Voeding 48VDC 6,7A," Hardware-CNC, [Online]. Available: https://www.hardware-

cnc.nl/nl/winkel/voedingen/voeding-48vdc-6,7a-detail. [Accessed 20 June 2016].
[46] "Driver Stappenmotoren: Leadshine DM556 - 2 Phase Digital Stepper Drive; Max 50 VDC / 5.6A,"
[Online]. Available: https://www.hardware-cnc.nl/nl/winkel/drivers-stappenmotor/leadshine-dm556-
2-phase-digital-stepper-drive-max-50-vdc-56a-detail. [Accessed 20 June 2016].
[47] "Stappenmotoren: Stappen Motor Nema 23 - 3Nm," [Online]. Available: https://www.hardware-

cnc.nl/nl/winkel/stappenmotoren/stappenmotoren-1/stappen-motor-nema-23-3nm-detail. [Accessed
20 June 2016].
[48] "Arduino-Controlled-CNC-3D-Printer," Instructables, [Online]. Available:

http://www.instructables.com/id/Arduino-Controlled-CNC-3D-Printer/step12/Wiring-the-Electronics/.
[Accessed 22 June 2016].
Appendices
Appendices
Appendix A Matlab Scripts
A.1 3D Sketch of a single curved fuselage panel

%% 3D Sketch of a single curved fuselage panel
PanelWidth = 1500; %mm
PanelLength = 5000; %mm
RadiusX = 2000; %mm

RadiusY = 99999999999999; %mm, can be assumed straight
ThethaX = ((PanelWidth/2) / (2 * pi()* RadiusX))*360; %Angle in degrees

ThethaY = ((PanelLength/2) / (2 * pi()* RadiusY))*360; %Angle in degrees
%Computes the effect panel length, width

ProcessWidth = RadiusX*(sind(ThethaX)); %The multiplier is being used as
the panel is symmetrical
ProcessLength = RadiusY*(sind(ThethaY)); %The multiplier is being used as
the panel is symmetrical
%Generates a grid of data points in X, Y of the panel

XCoords = linspace(-ProcessWidth,ProcessWidth,100);
YCoords = linspace(-ProcessLength,ProcessLength,100);
[X,Y] = meshgrid(XCoords,YCoords);
%Now compute the correct depth at each coordinate

ProcessDepthMax=(RadiusX*(1-sind(acosd(-
ProcessWidth/RadiusX)))+RadiusY*(1-sind(acosd(-ProcessLength/RadiusY))));
Z = ProcessDepthMax-(RadiusX*(1-sind(acosd(X./RadiusX)))+RadiusY*(1-
sind(acosd(Y./RadiusY))));
surf(X,Y,Z)
zlim([0 140])
A.2 Scan Grid Generator Script

clc
clear
%Scan Area
XDir = 35; %mm half side
YDir = 35; %mm half side
Step = 5; %mm per step
Coords=[];
Round=1;
for XCoords=-XDir:Step:XDir;
Round=Round+1;
if Round/2==round(Round/2);
for YCoords=YDir:-Step:-YDir;
Coords=[Coords;XCoords,YCoords];
end
else
for YCoords=-YDir:Step:YDir;
Coords=[Coords;XCoords,YCoords];
end
end
end
%Graphical interpretation of the shape

plot(Coords(:,1),Coords(:,2));
title(['The process time is: ',num2str(length(Coords)),' seconds']);
%Now just reverse all coords and write them to file!

fid=fopen('Scancoords.txt','wt');
fwrite(fid,['G0 F600', char(10)]);
for i=length(Coords):-1:1;
XCoord = mat2str(Coords(i,1));
YCoord = mat2str(Coords(i,2));
%fwrite(fid,['G1', ' X', XCoord, ' Y', YCoord, char(10)]);

fwrite(fid,['G1', ' X', XCoord, ' Y', YCoord, char(10), 'G4 P3456',
char(10)]);
end
fclose(fid);
A.3 G-Code Generator Script

clc
clear
%Diameter definition:
XRadius = 100; %mm (Radius of curvature X 200 300 or 400mm)
YRadius = 100; %mm (Radius of curvature Y 200 300 or 400mm)
XStart = 35; %mm (Start position tool)

YStart = 35; %mm (Start position tool)
StepSize = 0.2; %mm (Stepsize)

DistanceOriginal =1; %mm (Distance between coords in G-Code)
%Forming Depth
XDepth = XRadius-(XRadius^2-XStart^2)^0.5;
YDepth = YRadius-(YRadius^2-YStart^2)^0.5;
Depth = min(XDepth,YDepth);
%Initial XYZ Coords

Step = 1;
t=0;
Z=0;
Coords=[Step 0 0 -Depth DistanceOriginal];
while (Z<Depth);
Distance=0;
%Calculate the first location
X = -((2*XRadius*StepSize*t-StepSize*StepSize*t*t)^0.5)*cos(2*pi()*t);
Y = -((2*YRadius*StepSize*t-StepSize*StepSize*t*t)^0.5)*sin(2*pi()*t);
Z = StepSize*t;
while Distance<DistanceOriginal; %1mm

%Now move to the next part of the curve
t=t+0.0001; %Determine the accuracy of the Distance
%Calculate the new position

XNew = -((2*XRadius*StepSize*t-
StepSize*StepSize*t*t)^0.5)*cos(2*pi()*t);
YNew = -((2*YRadius*StepSize*t-
StepSize*StepSize*t*t)^0.5)*sin(2*pi()*t);
ZNew = StepSize*t;
%Calculates the distance from the previous position

Distance = ((X-XNew)^2+(Y-YNew)^2+(Z-ZNew)^2)^0.5;
end
%Defines which step within the loop this is
Step = Step+1;
%To prevent any coords being addedon the list above the limited depth
if (Z<Depth);
%If Z is still below the allowed depth
%Add the step, x coord, y coord, z coord and the distance to the
%previous point into the list
Coords=[Coords;Step XNew YNew -(Depth-ZNew) Distance];
end
end
%Graphical interpretation of the shape

plot3(Coords(:,2),Coords(:,3),Coords(:,4));
%In order to view the specimen in scale enable the following limits
xlim([-50 50])
ylim([-50 50])
zlim([-10 10])
%Now just reverse all coords and write them to file!

fid=fopen('Specimen.txt','wt');
fwrite(fid,['G0 F1500', char(10)]);
%First point move the head towards zero

fwrite(fid,['G1 Z5', char(10)]);
fwrite(fid,['G1 X0 Y0 Z0', char(10)]);
%Adds all the coordinates of the shape

for i=length(Coords):-1:1;
XCoord = mat2str(round(Coords(i,2)*10^3)/(10^3));
YCoord = mat2str(round(Coords(i,3)*10^3)/(10^3));
ZCoord = mat2str(round(Coords(i,4)*10^3)/(10^3));
%Adds coords to the script

fwrite(fid,['G1', ' X', XCoord, ' Y', YCoord, ' Z', ZCoord,
char(10)]);
end
%Reference points to be added for measuring

%Reference point 1 X35 Y35

fwrite(fid,['G1 X35 Y35 Z-3', char(10)]);
%Reference point 2 X35 Y-35

fwrite(fid,['G1 X35 Y-35 Z5', char(10)]);
fwrite(fid,['G1 X35 Y-35 Z-3', char(10)]);
fwrite(fid,['G1 X35 Y-35 Z5', char(10)]);
%Reference point 3 X-35 Y-35

fwrite(fid,['G1 X-35 Y-35 Z5', char(10)]);
fwrite(fid,['G1 X-35 Y-35 Z-3', char(10)]);
fwrite(fid,['G1 X-35 Y-35 Z5', char(10)]);
%Reference point 4 X-35 Y35

fwrite(fid,['G1 X-35 Y35 Z5', char(10)]);
fwrite(fid,['G1 X-35 Y35 Z-3', char(10)]);
fwrite(fid,['G1 X-35 Y35 Z5', char(10)]);
%Moves head back to the zero position

fwrite(fid,['G1 X0 Y0 Z0',char(10)]);
%Close the script

fclose(fid);
Appendix B Repetier Firmware changes
Appendix B Repetier Firmware changes
B.1 Disable all extruders

#define NUM_EXTRUDER 0
#define HAVE_HEATED_BED false
B.2 Choosing the correct motherboard

#define MOTHERBOARD 33
B.3 Disable all end stops

#define ENDSTOP_PULLUP_X_MIN false
#define ENDSTOP_PULLUP_Y_MIN false
#define ENDSTOP_PULLUP_Z_MIN false
#define ENDSTOP_PULLUP_X_MAX false
#define ENDSTOP_PULLUP_Y_MAX false
#define ENDSTOP_PULLUP_Z_MAX false
#define ENDSTOP_X_MIN_INVERTING false
#define ENDSTOP_Y_MIN_INVERTING false
#define ENDSTOP_Z_MIN_INVERTING false
#define ENDSTOP_X_MAX_INVERTING false
#define ENDSTOP_Y_MAX_INVERTING false
#define ENDSTOP_Z_MAX_INVERTING false
#define MIN_HARDWARE_ENDSTOP_X false
#define MIN_HARDWARE_ENDSTOP_Y false
#define MIN_HARDWARE_ENDSTOP_Z false
#define MAX_HARDWARE_ENDSTOP_X false
#define MAX_HARDWARE_ENDSTOP_Y false
#define MAX_HARDWARE_ENDSTOP_Z false
#define max_software_endstop_x false
#define max_software_endstop_y false
#define max_software_endstop_z false
#define ENDSTOP_X_BACK_MOVE 0
#define ENDSTOP_Y_BACK_MOVE 0
#define ENDSTOP_Z_BACK_MOVE 0
#define ENDSTOP_Y_RETEST_REDUCTION_FACTOR 0
#define ENDSTOP_Z_RETEST_REDUCTION_FACTOR 0
#define ALWAYS_CHECK_ENDSTOPS false

Mat 6453-9854P

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Mat 6453-9854P

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Feasibility study on single point incremental forming

Bachelor of Engineering Thesis

Master of Science thesis

Delft University of Technology

Feasibility study on single point incremental forming

In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

At the Delft University of Technology

To be defended on Friday, 28th of October, 2016 at 9:00 AM.

Supervisor: Ir. Jos Sinke

Remko Kuitert I|P a g e

Delft University of Technology

This Master thesis investigates the feasibility of single point incremental

Keywords: single point incremental forming, CNC machining, GLARE

Delft University of Technology Supervisor: ________________________________

Remko Kuitert III | P a g e

Remko Kuitert V|P a g e

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................................. 12

CHAPTER 3 REQUIREMENTS ......................................................................................... 22

CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENTAL SETUP ............................................................................... 28

CHAPTER 5 EXPERIMENTS ............................................................................................ 41

Remko Kuitert 1|P a g e

CHAPTER 6 DISCUSSION ............................................................................................... 57

CHAPTER 7 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................... 60

APPENDIX A MATLAB SCRIPTS.................................................................................... 66

APPENDIX B REPETIER FIRMWARE CHANGES.............................................................. 70

2|P a g e Remko Kuitert

Figure 3-1 GLARE on an A380 [34] ...................................................................................................... 22

Remko Kuitert 3|P a g e

Figure 5-1 Calibration specimen measurement.................................................................................. 41

4|P a g e Remko Kuitert

Remko Kuitert 5|P a g e

6|P a g e Remko Kuitert

1.2 Problem definition

1.3 Thesis objective

The thesis objective is defined as:

Remko Kuitert 7|P a g e

1.4 Research question

1. What is GLARE made of?

2. What is die-less incremental sheet forming?

3. What are the process conditions?

4. What is the experimental outcome?

5. How can incremental forming be implemented for large scale manufacturing?

8|P a g e Remko Kuitert

1.5 Research approach

1.5.1 Literature study

1.5.2 Experimental setup

Remko Kuitert 9|P a g e

Feed rate and step size experiments

1.5.4 Results, outcome and relevance

Chapter 2 Literature Review

Nevertheless GLARE has been patented separately with patent

Though these patents are used as a basis for GLARE in general,

Fiber layer deviations

Metal layer deviations

2.1.2 GLARE grades

2.1.3 GLARE production

2.1.4 GLARE material properties

Youngs E L GPa 65 66 58 57 59 72.5 71

2.2 Incremental sheet forming

2.2.1 Origin and classification

Conventional incremental sheet forming

Figure 2-4 SPIF setup (left) and TPIF setup (right)