Chinese Journal of Aeronautics, (2021), 34(4): 174–191

Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics

& Beihang University
Chinese Journal of Aeronautics
cja@buaa.edu.cn
www.sciencedirect.com

Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization

of process parameters for plunger components:
Simulation and experimental study
Yang WANG a, Honghua SU a,*, Ning QIAN a, Kui LIU b, Jianbo DAI c,
Zhengcai ZHAO a, Wenfeng DING a

a
College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing 210016, China
b
Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology,73 Nanyang Drive, Singapore 637662, Singapore
c
School of Mechatronic Engineering, China University of Mining and Technology, Xuzhou 221116, China

Received 5 June 2020; revised 6 July 2020; accepted 3 August 2020

Available online 2 September 2020

KEYWORDS Abstract The plunger component is a key part of the plunger pump in the aircraft hydraulic sys-
Fuzzy method; tem. Neck-spinning process is commonly used to fabricate plunger components, of which the qual-
Neck-spinning quality; ity of the spinning process significantly affects the performance of plunger pumps. One of the
Plunger component; bottlenecks faced by the industry in the spinning process is to choose a suitable neck-spinning pro-
Range analysis; cess so as to ensure the quality of plunger components. It is necessary to propose a reliable method
Simulation to optimize the process parameters which affect the neck-spinning quality of plunger components.
In this study, a calculable finite element analysis (FEA) model is established to simulate the three-
roller neck-spinning process of the plunger component, which includes six typical slipper structures,
two roller structures, and two spinning parameters. The FEA model is then validated by comparing
the simulated spinning forces with the corresponding experimental results. The influence of the pro-
cess conditions on the neck-spinning quality is investigated. And the orthogonal simulation results
are analyzed by a combination of range method and fuzzy mathematical analysis method to recom-
mend a reasonable slipper structure, roller structure and neck-spinning parameters. This study pro-
vides a promising method to improve the manufacturing quality of the typical plunger components.
Ó 2020 Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd. This is
an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: shh@nuaa.edu.cn (H. SU).
Peer review under responsibility of Editorial Committee of CJA.
Production and hosting by Elsevier
1. Introduction
The aircraft plunger pump is a key power component in an
aircraft hydraulic system due to its excellent properties, such
as compact structure, small rotational inertia, large flow and
easy to control variables, etc. 1–4 The plunger component is a
critical part of the plunger pump since the reciprocating
movements of a plunger in the chamber can change the volume

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2020.08.040
1000-9361 Ó 2020 Chinese Society of Aeronautics and Astronautics. Production and hosting by Elsevier Ltd.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters
to absorb and drain oil, and its processing quality will directly
affect the volumetric and mechanical efficiencies, reliability,
durability and lifetime of the plunger pump.5,6 At present,
the popular necking-in method of the plunger components is
the neck-spinning process which has the advantages such as
excellent stability, high efficiency, low loading, cost saving
and high precision.7–9 However, the spinning process of the
plunger component is a complex plastic deformation process,
the forming mechanism is complex, the spinning process and
spinning precision are affected by many factors and technolog-
ical conditions, and consequently the spinning process of the
plunger component often has exposed quality problems of
large variance and instability. Therefore, it is urgent to develop
scientific and effective methods to optimize the size of base
structure and neck-spinning process, so as to improve the qual-
ified rate of the products.10,11
At present, the research on the reliability and optimization
of the spinning process has been paid many attentions by many
scholars, but there is still a blank in the formulation and opti-
mization of spinning process for the plunger components.
Whereas many early scholars conducted researches on the
mechanism of metal spinning and the optimization of spinning
process parameters for axisymmetric and non-axisymmetric
parts, which is still of great help in the development of this
study. Previous numerical analysis and experimental methods
were the main means of studying the spinning forming mech-
anism and flow control, which primarily involves the spinning
force, torque and surface damage.12–19 In recent years, more
scholars get interested in the finite element method (FEM),
because it can provide detailed solutions to revealing the form-
ing characteristics20,21 and defecting forming mechanisms.22
Wang and Long23 used the method of FE analysis and exper-
iment to investigate the wrinkling failure of cylindrical cup
during conventional spinning, and the results show that the
severity of wrinkles increased with the increase of roller feed
ratio. Huang et al.24 carried out the experiments and simula-
tions the neck-spinning process of the circular pipe at elevated
temperature by FEM. Zhang et al.25 proposed an optimized
neck-spinning technique to improve the inner surface quality
of cylindrical workpieces by reversing the material flow direc-
tion. Luo, et al.26 presented a kind of compound spinning pro-
cess which is composed of a counter-roller spinning, multi-
neck spinning and hot spinning by FE method. Takahashi,
et al.27 used experiments and three-dimensional FE simula-
tions to study the effect of neck length on tube cracking during
the spinning process. Guo, et al.28 studied the spinning force
law in counter-roller spinning, and analyzed the effects of thin-
ning rate, feed speed and roller angle on spinning, and deter-
mined reasonable process parameters. The FE model was
established by Zeng, et al.29 was used to study the typical
deformation characteristics and forming defects in the flow
forming process of tubular parts with crossed internal ribs.
Li and Shu30 established the mathematical model of the invo-
lute curve roller trajectory and the spinning FE model, and
used forming clearance compensation in the attaching-
mandrel process. It is proposed that forming clearance com-
pensation can greatly shorten the forming time and the crack
location is analyzed. Ye, et al.31 conducted a simulation study
on the spinning process of non-axisymmetric inclined flange
cylinder, the effect of the axial roller feed along the wall on
175
the thickness distribution and stress–strain during the forming
process was analyzed, and deduced the roller path formula.
However, in the above literatures, the research on the opti-
mization of spinning parameters mainly focused on the parts
with mandrel which shares the same shape, after the spinning
process, the mandrel is removed from the part, the main con-
cern is also the spinning quality of the workpiece itself. While
in the neck-spinning process of the plunger component, the
plunger ball functions as a mandrel, and after the process
the plunger ball needs to be kept inside the slipper to work
with the slipper to form the final product.32 Moreover, it raises
high precision requirements about the matching between the
slipper and the plunger in the plunger component, these
include a sufficient pulling-out force and plunger swing angle
and a suitable axial clearance. However, due to the lack of sci-
entific and efficient methods to develop a reasonable workpiece
structure and neck-spinning process to improve the spinning
quality of the plunger component, so it is necessary to carry
out the related research.
The present study is devoted a dependable and sophisti-
cated FEA model of the plunger component neck-spinning
process by the commercial software ABAQUS 6.14/Explicit,
and the correctness of the FE model was verified by spinning
experiments. Besides, the FE model is used to analyze the
neck-spinning process of different roller structure (front angle,
diameter), slipper structure and spinning parameters (feed rate,
rotational speed), and the influence law of the processing con-
ditions of the neck-spinning quality (axial clearance, pulling-
out force, swing angle) is analyzed. Finally, the orthogonal
simulation results are analyzed by combining range method
and fuzzy mathematical analysis method, the reasonable
neck-spinning parameters and structure of the roller are pre-
sented. For an easy understanding of the optimization process
of the neck-spinning process parameters, a research flowchart
is first demonstrated in Fig. 1.
2. Development of FEA model
2.1. Introduction of neck-spinning process
The neck-spinning process of the plunger components, mainly
includes a squeeze of the convexity of the slipper by the rollers,
so that the convex continuously deforms and wraps the plun-
ger. A schematic diagram of the necking process of the plunger
component is demonstrated in Fig. 2. Firstly, the rear part of
the slipper is fixed, and then the ball of plunger is inserted into
the slipper, and the plunger is fixed through the tailstock. The
three rollers are evenly distributed at 120° in the peripheral
direction of the slipper and press the surface of the slipper.
The spindle of the machine tool drives the slipper to rotate,
the convex of the slipper deforms with the axial infeed of the
rollers, during the neck-spinning process. When the rollers
leave the slipper, the whole process completes.
2.2. FEA model
In this study, the ABAQUS 6.14/Explicit module is used to
establish the Elasto-plastic FEA model of the plunger compo-
nent under the three rollers distribution modes in the neck-
spinning process, as shown in Fig. 3(a). The simulation con-
176
Fig. 1 A flowchart of neck-spinning process optimization of plunger component.
Fig. 2 Schematic of neck-spinning process.
tains slipper, plunger and three rollers. The slipper is made of
AISI 5135 steel elastoplastic material with a density of
8000 kg/m3,33 the mechanical properties of this material are
tabulated in Table 1. In our previous study,32 the stress–strain
relationship in the plastic deformation stage of the slipper
material has been experimentally measured under room tem-
perature by using a tensile testing machine, so the stress–strain
curve are not repeated in this study.
As shown in Fig. 3(a), the boundary conditions include the
movement and constraints of the plunger, slipper, and rollers.
According to the production experience, the slipper only
retains the degree of freedom (DOF) of the rotation around
its own axis. Because the plunger is affected by the friction
on the inner surface of the slipper, the plunger only retains
the DOF of rotation around its own axis. The rollers can move
along the Y-axis direction and rotate around its central axis
freely, while the DOF in other directions is fixed. According
to the Coulomb friction model, the friction coefficient is
0.1532 when no lubrication is used between the rollers and slip-
Y. WANG et al.
per, slipper and plunger. The roller can be rotated by the slip-
per due to the friction.
For the spatial discretization of the FEA models, the slip-
per of the plunger component is divided with 3D 8-node brick
elements with reduced integration (C3D8R), the total mesh
number reached 36652, as shown in Fig. 3(b). In order to save
calculation time, local mesh refinement is carried out in the
contact area (convex shape) between the roller and the slipper,
and relatively coarse mesh is used for other areas of the slipper.
The Arbitrary Lagrangian Eulerian (ALE) adaptive meshing
technique is adopted to automatically regenerate the finite-
element mesh and control element distortion at each time
increment during neck-spinning process of the plunger compo-
nent. The slipper is considered as a deformable body and the
plunger and rollers were represented by analytical rigid bodies.
The penalty contact method was adopted to simulate the con-
tact between the material and tools, and the Coulomb friction
law was selected to model the sliding behavior between them.
2.3. Neck-spinning quality evaluation index measurement
The quality evaluation indexes of the plunger component are
axial clearance C, pulling-out force P and the swing angle a
of the plunger. The schematic diagram of each quality evalua-
tion indexes is shown in Fig. 4. As shown in Fig. 4(a), the
pulling-out force is the minimum force P required for the plun-
ger to pulling out from the slipper after the slipper is spun, it is
to evaluate the bonding strength standard between plunger
and slipper. As shown in Fig. 4(b), the axial clearance C refers
to the maximum axial displacement of the plunger in the slip-
per after the slipper is spun, it affects the vibration and stabil-
ity of the plunger component in use. As shown in Fig. 4(c), the
swing angle a is the maximum angle that the plunger can swing
in the slipper after the slipper is spun, it directly affects the flex-
ibility of the oil pump. These three indicators are all influenced
by the forming quality of plunger component. However, cur-
rent quality testing methods mainly rely on high cost and inef-
ficient manual measurement. Therefore, it is necessary to
optimize the spinning process and provide a reliable combina-
tion of process parameters to improve the quality of the
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters 177

Fig. 3 FEA model of neck-spinning process for plunger component.

axial spinning force acquisition system is shown in Fig. 5(a),

Table 1 Mechanical properties of AISI5135 the experimental setup is displayed in Fig. 5(b). In order to
steel.32 successfully complete the neck-spinning experiments on the
Parameters Values lathe, a set of special fixtures designed with simple structure
and convenient installation are used for the installation of
Young’s modulus (GPa) 200
Poisson’s ration 0.3
the three rollers and the Kistler 9272 dynamometer, as shown
Yield strength (MPa) 932 in Fig. 5(b). The slipper is located in the center of scaffolds, the
Tensile strength (MPa) 1066 slipper and the plunger are mounted with the tailstock of the
lathe and the micro clamp respectively. The three rollers are
uniformly installed on the side of scaffolds, and the scaffolds
are fixed on the dynamometer. The dynamometer is connected
with the feeding system of the lathe, so as to drive the rollers to
neck-spinning process, the FE method shows a greater advan-
complete the axial feed motion (z axis direction), and the roll-
tage from the perspective of economy and time.
ers will rotate due to the action of friction. Until the rollers
completely leaves the surface of the slipper, and the whole
3. Experimental design neck-spinning process is completed.
The single factor experiment method was used in the pre-
The neck-spinning experiments were carried out on a high pre- sent spinning experiments. The feed rate f of the rollers was
cision CNC lathe (SK-50P), and no coolant is used during the changed to analyze the influence on the axial spinning force
experiments. Axial spinning force (z axis direction) was mea- Fa and analyze the reliability of the finite element model.
sured by the dynamometer (Kistler 9272) and charge amplifiers Fig. 6 shows the schematic diagram of slipper and roller, as
(Kistler 5070A). The data from the dynamometer were shown in Fig. 6(a), where ls is the straight edge length of slip-
acquired and treated using DynoWare on a computer, and per and Ds is the slipper diameter and Rs is the slipper circular
the low pass cutoff frequency is 30 Hz. The principle of the radius. As shown in Fig. 6(b), where h is the front angle of

Fig. 4 A schematic diagram of quality evaluation indexes for plunger component neck-spinning.
178 Y. WANG et al.

Fig. 5 Schematic diagram and experimental setup of axial spinning force acquisition system.

Fig. 6 Schematic diagram of slipper and roller structure.

Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters 179

the PEEQ distribution of slipper at each deformation stage.

Table 2 Parameters of neck-spinning experiments.
Processing parameters
Slipper diameter Ds (mm)
Slipper straight edge length ls (mm)
Slipper circular arc radius Rs (mm)
Roller diameter Dr (mm)
Front angle of roller h (°)
Feed rate f (mm/r)
Rotational speed n (r/min)
Table 3 Simulation parameters for structural
optimization of slipper.
Parameters
Roller diameter Dr (mm)
Front angle of roller h (°)
Feed rate f (mm/r)
Rotational speed n (r/min)
Table 4 Simulation parameters for optimization of rollers
structure and spinning parameters.
Parameters
Roller diameter Dr (mm)
Front angle of roller h (°)
Feed rate f (mm/r)
Rotational speed n (r/min)
It can be found that the maximum strain value is almost the
Values same, the position of the maximum strain appears in the con-
10 tact position of the rollers and the slipper. It can be seen from
4.5 the strain distribution in different time periods that the spin-
1 ning process is stable and reliable.
40 Fig. 9 shows the distribution of the tangential, axial and
20 radial stress and strain of the formed slipper. These analyses
0.15 can explain the development and occurrence of deformation
100, 200, 300, 400,500
in the neck-spinning process. It can be seen from Fig. 9(a) that
the outer surface of the slipper is subject to tensile stress in the
x-direction, while in the inner blue area, the stress is negative,
indicating that it is subject to compressive stress, which is help-
ful to compress the plunger. Fig. 9(b) shows that the tangential
strain occurs mainly at the convex of the slipper, is the tensile
strain, and the maximum tangential strain value is 0.43.
Values It can be seen from Fig. 9(c) that the blue area on the upper
40 part of the ball socket inside the slipper is mainly subject to the
20 compressive stress in the y-direction, while the convex is
0.21 mainly subject to the tensile stress in the y-direction caused
400 by the extrusion of the rollers. As shown in Fig. 9(d), the con-
vex of the slipper is mainly affected by tensile strain in the y-
direction. The axial strain of the outer layer is greater than that
of the inner layer, and the maximum axial strain value is 0.918.
Fig. 9(e) shows that the blue area inside the slipper is sub-
jected to radial compressive stress, while Fig. 9(d) shows that
the strain value at the outer convex of the slipper is negative,
So the convex of the slipper is under radial compressive stress,
Values and the maximum radial strain value is 0.476.
30, 35, 40, 45, 50 In addition, by comparing the strain values of the three
10, 15, 20, 25, 30 directions, it is found that the axial strain value is almost twice
0.03, 0.12, 0.21, 0.30, 0.39 as much as the tangential and radial strain value, so the axial
100, 200, 300, 400, 500 stretch of the slipper convex plays a major role in the neck-
spinning process.

4.2. Validation of the FE model

Fig. 10 compares the simulated and experimental axial spin-

roller and Dr is the roller diameter. Table 2 lists the processing
parameters applied in experiments.
Table 3 shows the simulation parameters selected for the
optimization of slipper structure, and Table 4 shows the simu-
lation parameters selected for the optimization of roller struc-
ture and spinning parameters.
4. Results and discussion
4.1. The simulation analysis
The simulation analysis is conducted to evaluate the equivalent
plastic strain (PEEQ) and stress distribution of the slipper
under the processing parameters of n = 100 r/min and
f = 0.15 mm/r. The PEEQ and stress distribution of neck-
spinning process at each completion ratio r of the slipper are
shown in Figs. 7 and 8. The rollers and plunger are hidden.
Figs. 7(a) and 8(a) show the initial state of the slipper without
contact with the rollers. As shown in Fig. 7(b)–(e), the mises
stress of the slipper acts in the spinning process. With the
spinning process, the maximum stress of slipper almost
remains unchanged, and the stress is concentrated in the
contact area between slipper and rollers. Fig. 8(b)–(e) shows
ning forces at different rotational speeds. The rotational speeds
are selected within the range of 100–500 r/min, the constant
interval is 100 r/min. The feed rate is constant at 0.15 mm/r.
From Fig. 10(a)–(e), the simulated and experimental axial
spinning forces share a resemblance, but with different peak
values. The change in the maximum axial spinning force with
respect to the rotational speed is plotted in Fig. 10(f). By com-
paring the maximum axial spinning force Fa max measured by
the simulations and experiments, it is found that the maximum
error is smaller than 15%, which is acceptable. Therefore, the
accuracy of the FE model is verified. In addition, as shown in
Fig. 11, the experimental and simulated axial elongation L and
diameter of the convex d of the formed slipper are respectively
compared. It can be seen from Fig. 11 that the simulation
results are very similar to the experimental results, and the
maximum error is also smaller than 15%. Therefore, based
on the comparison between the above results of the experiment
and simulation, the accuracy of the FE model is verified.
4.3. Structural optimization of the slipper
Due to the complicated structure of the slipper itself, there are
many types of convex shape. The convex shape of the slipper
180
Fig. 7 Stress distribution at various simulation stages.
Fig. 8 Strain distribution at various simulation stages.
has an important influence on the neck-spinning quality (axial
clearance, pulling-out force and swing angle) after the neck-
spinning process. The main types of convex shape are shown
in Fig. 12(a)
(f), where Type a indicates that the convex shape
is a combination of bevel edge and bevel edge. Type b indicates
that the convex shape is a combination of bevel edge and arc.
Type c indicates that the convex shape is a combination of
bevel edge, straight edge and vertical edge. Type d indicates
that the convex shape is a combination of arc and bevel edge.
Type e indicates that the convex shape is a combination of arc
and arc. Type f indicates that the convex shape is a combina-
tion of arc, straight edge and vertical edge. The simulation
parameters of structural optimization of the slipper are shown
in Table 3.
Fig. 12 shows the different convex shapes of the slipper and
corresponding simulation results. It can be found that the
stress in the forming process of different slipper types is mainly
concentrated in the contact area between the rollers and the
slipper. In addition, different convex shapes will lead to differ-
ent forming processes, when the completion ratio r of the neck-
spinning process reaches 75% and 100%, it can be found that
the plunger sphere is not completely covered by slipper, indi-
cating that the axial elongation of Type a and Type d is smaller
than that of other types of slipper. It is further explained that
the structure of different slipper convex has an important influ-
ence on the neck-spinning process, and the influence of the dif-
ferent convex shape of the slipper on the neck-spinning quality
evaluation index of the plunger component will be analyzed
below.
4.3.1. Comparison of the pulling-out forces in different convex
shape types
In this study, a new analysis step was added to the FE model,
that is, an axial pulling force Pa which increases linearly in the
axial direction is applied to the plunger. When the plunger is
Y. WANG et al.
pulled out, the time t is recorded. The product of time t and
axial pulling force Pa can be used to obtain the value of the
minimum pulling-out force P of the plunger component. As
shown in Fig. 13, the method of obtaining the pulling-out force
P is introduced by taking the spinning parameters of 400 r/
min, 0.21 mm/r, the diameter of the roller of 40 mm and the
front angle of 20°, type f as an example. The detailed method
to obtain the pulling-put force P is to add a new analysis step
to the FE model. That is, an axial pulling force Pa, which
increases linearly in the axial direction is applied to the plun-
ger, the axial loading rate is 2000 N/s. Fig. 13(a) shows the
different pulling-out stages as the axial displacement of the
plunger increases. Fig. 13(b) the black solid line shows
the change of the contact force between the outer surface of
the plunger and the inner surface of the slipper, while the
red dashed line shows the axial displacement of the plunger.
As shown in Fig. 13, when the time reaches t1 (2.844 s), the
contact force between the plunger and the slipper reaches the
peak value, and the plunger displacement increases suddenly,
indicating that the plunger has been completely detached from
the slipper. The loading rate 2000 N/s is multiplied by time t1
2.844 s to obtain the pulling-out force P is 5688 N.
Fig. 14 shows the results of pulling-out forces in the neck-
spinning simulation of each convex type. As can be seen from
the Fig. 14, the pulling-out force is significantly higher when
the arc of the convexity is replaced by the bevel edge. The rea-
son is that when a bevel edge is used instead of an arc, the
material of the inward contraction after the neck-spinning pro-
cess will increase, which leads to the tighter packing of the
plunger in the slipper. Therefore, the result of increasing the
pulling-out force appears. Since the spinning quality of the
plunger component is positively correlated with the pulling-
out force, the convex shape of different types of slipper is in
the order of best to worst: Type c, Type b, Type a, Type f,
Type e and Type d.
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters
Fig. 9 Stress and strain distributions in three directions.
4.3.2. Comparison of the axial clearance in different convex
shape types
As shown in Fig. 15(a), the axial clearance can be obtained by
setting a constant axial movement speed 1 mm/s is set for the
plunger after the neck-spinning process, when the axial contact
force Fc direction between the inner surface of the slipper and
the outer surface of the plunger sphere is changed, the time of
movement of the plunger is recorded. Fig. 15(b) shows the
axial contact force Fc and axial displacement of the plunger l
versus the simulating time under the condition of
f = 0.21 mm/r, n = 400 r/min, Dr = 40 mm, a = 20° and the
convex shape of the slipper is Type f. When the simulating time
reaches 0.12968 s, the magnitude of the axial contact force
transits from negative into a positive value. That is, the plun-
ger moves from the lower to the upper surface of the slipper.
The axial movement speed 1 mm/s is multiplied by the time t
of 0.12968 s to obtain the axial clearance is 0.12968 mm.
In order to avoid too large axial clearance of the plunger
component resulting in vibration during operation, the axial
clearance of the plunger component after a neck-spinning pro-
cess should be kept as small as possible. However, if the axial
181
clearance is 0, it will cause severe friction between the slipper
and the plunger. Therefore, the axial clearance after the
neck-spinning process should be larger than 0. Fig. 16 shows
the axial clearance results obtained by neck-spinning FE sim-
ulation for each convex shape of the slippers. Among them,
the axial clearance of Type a, b and c does not meet the
requirement of greater than 0. Therefore, the remaining three
types are in the order from best to worst according to the rea-
son of smaller axial clearance. They are: Type e, Type f and
Type d.
4.3.3. Comparison of the swing angle in different convex shape
types
The approach to obtain the swing angle is to extract the slipper
model after the neck-spinning simulation through the software
ABAQUS, then to export the input file of the extracted model
into the software Hypemesh, and export each surface into the
software UG NX as an entity. Finally, the 2D solid model
exported to UG NX software is exported to AutoCAD, and
the swing angle can be obtained directly and conveniently.
Fig. 17 shows a flowchart of swing angle measurement.
182
Fig. 10 Comparison of experimental and simulated axial spinning force at different rotational speeds.
The swing angle is one of the key parameters related to the
normal operation of the plunger components in the oil pump.
If the swing angle is too small, it is easy to cause the plunger
stuck. Therefore, the scheme with a larger swing angle is pre-
ferred. The swing angle results in the neck-spinning simulation
of each convex shape are shown in Fig. 18, each convex type is
in the order of good to bad: Type e, Type d, Type b, Type a,
Type f and Type c.
Besides, it is also found from the results of the Fig. 18 that
the swing angle obtained by using the arc at the convex shape
is obviously larger than that obtained by using the bevel edge.
This is because when the bevel edge is adopted at the convex
shape, the material of the slipper is increased, which limits
Y. WANG et al.
the rotation range of the plunger in the slipper, so the swing
angle of the plunger will become smaller.
4.3.4. Optimization results of the slipper
Since the convex shape optimization of the slipper needs to
consider multiple indexes, for the multi-index test, the evalua-
tion of the experimental treatment scheme becomes compli-
cated and difficult due to the incompatibility and
contradiction among the indexes, the convex shape scheme
of the slipper is optimized based on the fuzzy analysis method.
According to the membership principle of fuzzy mathematics,
the comprehensive evaluation method transforms qualitative
evaluation into quantitative evaluation, that is, fuzzy mathe-
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters 183

Fig. 11 Comparison of experimental and simulated geometry size of forming results of slipper.

Fig. 12 Different structural types of slipper.

184
Fig. 13 Method of measuring pulling-out force.
Fig. 14 Comparison of pulling-out forces in different convex
shape types.
matics makes an overall evaluation of things or objects
restricted by various factors. It has the characteristics of clear
results and strong systematicness, and can solve vague and
hard-to-quantify problems well, so it is suitable for solving
various non-deterministic problems.34
Fig. 15 Method of measuring axial clearance.
Y. WANG et al.
The above six types are respectively represented by X1, X2,
X3, X4, X5 and X6, since Type a, Type b and Type c have been
excluded, only the remaining three schemes need to be ana-
lyzed, denoted as X = [X4, X5, X6]. The evaluation indexes
mainly include pulling-out force P, axial clearance C and swing
angle a, which are denoted as k1, k2, k3 respectively. The multi-
index analysis matrix is denoted as k = [k1, k2, k3]. Mean-
while, the No. i index in the No. j scheme is denoted as kij,
and the multi-index analysis matrix is obtained as shown in
Eq. (1).
2 3 2 3
k1 k11 k12 k13
6 7 6 7
k ¼ 4 k2 5 ¼ 4 k21 k22 k23 5 ð1Þ
k3 k31 k32 k33
The first and third columns in the matrix respectively repre-
sent the values of pulling-out force, axial clearance and swing
angle obtained by neck-spinning simulation of the three
schemes, as shown in Table 5.
According to the above analysis, the optimization criteria
of each evaluation index are different, that is, the smaller the
axial clearance is, the better, while the larger the pulling-out
force and the swing angle is, the better. It is difficult to get con-
sistent evaluation results if we directly analyze these three indi-
cators. In order to solve this problem, the reciprocal values of
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters 185

represents the satisfaction of the No.i scheme. According to

the analysis process, the smaller the value, the better. There-
fore, according to e2 < e3 < e1, the best scheme is the Type
e, that is, the type of arc and the combination of arc should
be preferred for the convex shape.
E ¼ W  k ¼ ðe1 ; e2 ; e3 Þ ¼ ð0:4440; 0:2122; 0:3438Þ ð6Þ

4.4. Optimization of the rollers structure and spinning

parameters

4.4.1. Prioritization scheme

Based on the optimization of slipper structure, the optimiza-
tion of the roller structure and spinning parameters are carried
Fig. 16 Comparison of axial clearance in different convex shape out. The primary condition for optimizing the process param-
types. eters of the plunger component is that the forming quality of
the plunger component after the neck-spinning process must
meet the relevant technical requirements of the actual produc-
the pulling-out force and swing angle were used as the new tion. The main technical requirements are shown in Table 6.
evaluation indexes, so the smaller each evaluation index is, Based on the reliable finite element model, the orthogonal
the better. optimization, simulation of neck-spinning process parameters
In addition, there are differences in units and orders of are carried out in this paper. The main optimized process
magnitude in each evaluation index, the evaluation indexes parameters are feed rate f, rotational speed n, roller diameter
can be normalized, that is, the mapping method is adopted Dr and front angle of roller h. The orthogonal optimization
to map each evaluation index of the interval [0, 1]. Since the scheme is shown in Table 7.
reciprocal values of the pulling-out force and the swing angle
are used as the new evaluation indexes, the reciprocal values 4.4.2. Orthogonal simulation, optimization results and analysis
of each side shall be used in the normalization, as shown in
The results of each evaluation index obtained according to the
Eq. (2), and the normalized treatment of the axial clearance
above orthogonal simulation, optimization scheme is shown in
is shown in Eq. (3), and the mapped analysis matrix k is shown
Table 8.
in Eq. (4).
  X According to the simulation results, range method is
n  
1 1 adopted to analyze the influence degree of each factor on each
kij ¼ = i ¼ 1; 3 ð2Þ
Kij j¼1
Kij index. The specific method is to add the results obtained by
each factor at the same level, so as to obtain the result analysis
X
n of the orthogonal simulation experiment, as shown in Table 9.
kij ¼ Kij = Kij i¼2 ð3Þ The K1, K2, K3, K4 and K5 represent the sum of the results of
j¼1




the same simulation level respectively. K1 , K2 , K3 , K4 and
2 3 2 3 2 3

k1 k11 k12 k13 0:373 0:317 0:310 K5 are the average of the same level of various factors. R is
6 7 6 7 6 7 the range of factors.
k ¼ 4 k2 5 ¼ 4 k21 k22 k23 5 ¼ 4 0:535 0:105 0:360 5
According to the results in the Table 9, the relationship
k3 k31 k32 k33 0:323 0:323 0:354
between the different levels of feed rate, rotational speed, roller
ð4Þ diameter and swing angle and the evaluation indexes of the
According to the importance of each evaluation index, the neck-spinning process of the plunger component is shown in
fuzzy weight vector W is set as: Fig. 19.
As can be seen from the range in Table 9 and Fig. 19(a), the
W ¼ ðw1 ; w2 ; w3 Þ ¼ ð0:3; 0:5; 0:2Þ ð5Þ order of the influence of various factors on the pulling-out
where w1, w2 and w3 represent the importance of the pulling force from large to small is: f, Dr, n, and h. According to the
force, axial clearance and swing angle respectively. According strategy that the greater the pulling-out force is, the better
to the fuzzy analysis method, the Satisfaction matrix E is the parameters are selected, and a set of optimal parameters
obtained by multiplying the fuzzy weight vector W and the are obtained: f = 0.3 mm/r, n = 400 r/min, Dr = 35 mm,
mapped analysis matrix k, as shown in Eqs. (4)–(6), where ei and h = 15°.

Fig.17 Flowchart of swing angle measurement.

186 Y. WANG et al.

as shown in Fig. 19(b). With the increase of the rotational

speed, the axial clearance decreases obviously. It can be seen
from Fig. 19(c) that the swing angle is hardly affected by the
spinning parameters and the structure of the roller.
From the above analysis, it can be seen that when parame-
ters are selected from different evaluation indexes, the
obtained optimal parameters are difficult to be unified, so
fuzzy analysis method is still adopted for the optimization of
the neck-spinning parameters and the roller structure. The
acquisition of evaluation results of the fuzzy analysis method
mainly includes two key steps, one is the normalization of
data, and the other is the setting of the fuzzy weight vector.
Since the reciprocal values of the pulling-out force and the
swing angle are used as the new evaluation indexes, the recip-
rocal values of each side shall be used in the normalization, as
Fig. 18 Comparison of swing angle in different convex shape shown in Eq. (2), and the normalized treatment of the axial
types.
clearance is shown in Eq. (3), and the mapped analysis matrix
k is shown in Eqs. (7)–(10).
2 3 2 3
k1 k11 k12 k13 k14 k15
Table 5 Simulation results of different types of convex shape.
6 7 6 7
Type Pulling-out force Axial clearance Swing angle
k1 ¼ 4 k2 5 ¼ 4 k21 k22 k23 k24 k25 5
(N) (mm) (°) k3 k31 k32 k33 k34 k35
2 3 ð7Þ
d 4720 0.1931 33 0:225 0:198 0:191 0:192 0:194
e 5560 0.0380 33 6 7
f 5688 0.1297 30 ¼ 4 0:180 0:258 0:255 0:153 0:154 5
0:204 0:201 0:199 0:197 0:199
2 3 2 3
k1 k11 k12 k13 k14 k15
6 7 6 7
k2 ¼ 4 k2 5 ¼ 4 k21 k22 k23 k24 k25 5

Table 6 Plunger component neck-spinning quality k3 k31 k32 k33 k34 k35
2 3 ð8Þ
requirements. 0:208 0:200 0:201 0:192 0:199
6 7
Spinning quality index Evaluation standard ¼ 4 0:420 0:343 0:146 0:048 0:043 5
Axial clearance C (mm) <0.025 0:202 0:199 0:196 0:200 0:203
Pulling-out force P (N) >2500
Swing angle a (°) 35° 2 3 2 3
k1 k11 k12 k13 k14 k15
6 7 6 7
k3 ¼ 4 k2 5 ¼ 4 k21 k22 k23 k24 k25 5
k3 k31 k32 k33 k34 k35
2 3 ð9Þ
0:195 0:192 0:211 0:197 0:205
6 7
As shown in Fig. 19(b), the order of the influence of various ¼ 4 0:186 0:240 0:199 0:190 0:185 5
factors on the axial clearance from large to small is: n, f, h, and
0:200 0:197 0:200 0:201 0:202
Dr. According to the strategy that the smaller the axial clear-
ance is, the better the parameter selection, a set of optimal 2 3 2 3
k1 k11 k12 k13 k14 k15
parameters are obtained: f = 0.3 mm/r, n = 500 r/min, 6 7 6 7
Dr. = 50 mm, and h = 30°. k4 ¼ 6 7 6 7
4 k2 5 ¼ 4 k21 k22 k23 k24 k25 5
As shown in Fig. 19(c), the order of the influence of various
k3 k31 k32 k33 k34 k35
factors on the swing angle from large to small is: f, h, Dr and n. 2 3 ð10Þ
According to the strategy that the smaller the swing angle is, 0:203 0:191 0:200 0:202 0:204
the better the parameter selection, a set of optimal parameters 6 7
6
¼ 4 0:236 0:220 0:193 0:196 0:155 7
are obtained: f = 0.03 mm/r, n = 100 r/min, Dr. = 50 mm, 5
and h = 25°. 0:200 0:200 0:200 0:200 0:200
In addition, as shown in Fig. 19(a), under the same spinning
According to the fuzzy mathematical analysis method, the
conditions, the impact of feed rate on the pulling-out force is
Satisfaction matrix E is obtained by multiplying the fuzzy
more significant than other spinning parameters. The
weight vector W and the mapped analysis matrix k, as shown
pulling-out force will increase with the increase of the feed rate,
in Eqs. (13)–(16), where ei represents the satisfaction of the No.
and there is a certain upper limit of the pulling-out force.
i scheme. According to the analysis process, the smaller the
When the feed rate increases to a certain value, the variation
value, the better.
of the pulling-out force will gradually decrease. The largest
parameter affecting the axial clearance is the rotational speed, E ¼ Wk ð11Þ
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters 187

Table 7 Orthogonal optimization scheme of process parameters.

Case No. f (mm/r) n (r/min) Dr (mm) h(°)
1 0.03 100 30 10
2 0.03 200 35 15
3 0.03 300 40 20
4 0.0 400 45 25
5 0.03 500 50 30
6 0.12 100 35 20
7 0.12 200 40 25
8 0.12 300 45 30
9 0.12 400 50 10
10 0.12 500 30 15
11 0.21 100 40 30
12 0.21 200 45 10
13 0.21 300 50 15
14 0.21 400 30 20
15 0.21 500 35 25
16 0.30 100 45 15
17 0.30 200 50 20
18 0.30 300 30 25
19 0.30 400 35 30
20 0.30 500 40 10
21 0.39 100 50 25
22 0.39 200 30 30
23 0.39 300 35 10
24 0.39 400 40 15
25 0.39 500 45 20

E1 ¼ W  k1 ¼ ðe1 ; e2 ; e3 ; e4 ; e5 Þ
Table 8 Results of orthogonal simulation optimization. ¼ ð0:1983; 0:2286; 0:2246; 0:1735; 0:1750Þ ð12Þ
Case Pulling-out force Axial clearance C Swing angle a For the optimization of feed rate, according to e4 < e5 < -
No. (N) (mm) (°) e1 < e3 < e2, the best scheme is type 4, that is, feed rate shall
1 3032 0.19713 35 be given priority to 0.3 mm/r.
2 3392 0.15039 35
E2 ¼ W  k2 ¼ ðe1 ; e2 ; e3 ; e4 ; e5 Þ
3 2744 0.01945 35
4 3440 0.01698 34 ¼ ð0:3128; 0:2713; 0:1725; 0:1216; 0:1218Þ ð13Þ
5 3024 0.01498 33
6 3688 0.27346 35 For the optimization of rotational speed, according to e4 -
7 3320 0.20750 35 < e5 < e3 < e2 < e1, the best scheme is type 4, that is, rota-
8 3512 0.03046 36 tional speed shall be given priority to 400 r/min.
9 3456 0.03196 35
10 3816 0.02797 34 E3 ¼ W  k3 ¼ ðe1 ; e2 ; e3 ; e4 ; e5 Þ
11 3336 0.18031 35 ¼ ð0:1915; 0:2170; 0:2028; 0:1943; 0:1944Þ ð14Þ
12 3648 0.20500 35
13 3760 0.13890 36 For the optimization of roller diameter, according to e1 -
14 3888 0.02297 35 < e4 < e5 < e3 < e2, the best scheme is type 1, that is, roller
15 3760 0.01898 36 diameter shall be given priority to 30 mm.
16 3680 0.15207 35
17 3696 0.09548 36 E4 ¼ W  k4 ¼ ðe1 ; e2 ; e3 ; e4 ; e5 Þ
18 3728 0.06165 36 ¼ ð0:2189; 0:2073; 0:1965; 0:1986; 0:1787Þ ð15Þ
19 3768 0.01548 36
20 3504 0.01498 35 For the optimization of the front angle of roller h, accord-
21 3272 0.12964 34 ing to e5 < e3 < e4 < e2 < e1, the best scheme is type 5, that
22 3640 0.10206 36 is, front angle of roller h shall be given priority to 30°.
23 3776 0.07377 36 To sum up, the optimal results of spinning parameters and
24 3832 0.01798 36
roller structural parameters obtained through orthogonal sim-
25 3648 0.01748 35
ulated optimization are: f = 0.3 mm/r, n = 400 r/min,
Dr = 30 mm, and h = 30°.
188 Y. WANG et al.

Table 9 Result of orthogonal simulation is optimized by range method.

Quality index Test number Feed rate f (mm/r) Rotational speed n (r/min) Roller diameter Dr (mm) Front angle of roller h (°)
Pulling-out force K1 15,632 17,008 18,104 17,416
K2 17,792 17,696 18,384 18,500
K3 18,392 17,520 16,736 17,664
K4 18,376 18,384 17,928 17,520
K5 18,168 17,752 17,208 17,300


K1 3126.4 3401.6 3620.8 3483.2


K2 3558.4 3539.2 3676.8 3700.0


K3 3678.4 3504.0 3347.2 3532.8


K4 3675.2 3676.8 3585.6 3504.0


K5 3633.6 3550.4 3441.6 3460.0
R 552.0 275.2 329.6 240.0
Axial clearance K1 0.39893 0.93261 0.41178 0.52284
K2 0.57135 0.76043 0.53208 0.48700
K3 0.56616 0.32423 0.44022 0.42884
K4 0.33966 0.10537 0.42199 0.43475
K5 0.34093 0.09439 0.41096 0.34300


K1 0.07979 0.18652 0.08236 0.10457


K2 0.11427 0.15209 0.10642 0.09740


K3 0.00323 0.06483 0.08804 0.08577


K4 0.06793 0.02107 0.08440 0.08695


K5 0.06819 0.01888 0.08219 0.06860
R 0.04634 0.16764 0.02422 0.03597
Swing angle K1 172 174 176 176
K2 175 177 178 176
K3 177 179 176 175
K4 178 176 175 176
K5 177 173 174 176


K1 34.4 34.8 35.2 35.2


K2 35.0 35.4 35.6 35.2


K3 34.0 35.8 35.2 35.0


K4 35.6 35.2 35.0 35.2


K5 35.4 34.6 34.8 35.2
R 1.2 1.2 0.8 0.2

4.5. Confirmation simulation (2) Axial clearance

The combination of the optimized slipper structure, spinning
parameters and roller structure obtained above is applied in
the FEA model for the validation process. The simulation
results of pulling-out force P, axial clearance C and swing
angle a were obtained as follows.
(1) Pulling-out force
Fig. 20(a) demonstrates the curves of the axial pulling force
Pa and plunger displacement l obtained by FEM after the
neck-spinning process under the optimized process parameters
above. It can be seen that a constant loading rate of 2000 N/s
is applied to the plunger, when the plunger moves 1.962 s, the
plunger reaches the critical point of breaking away from the
slipper. That is, the pulling-out force P reaches the peak value
of 3924 N, it meets the technical requirement that the pulling-
out force should be more than 2500 N.
Fig. 20(b) shows the curves of the axial contact force Fc
between the plunger and slipper contact inner surface and the
plunger displacement l obtained by FEM after the neck-
spinning process of the plunger component under the optimized
process parameters above. In this FEA model, a constant mov-
ing speed of 1 mm/s is applied to the plunger, it can be seen that
when the plunger moves 0.0145 s, the direction of the axial
force has changed, indicating that the displacement of the plun-
ger moves at this time is the axial clearance (about 0.0145 mm),
which can be obtained from the intersection point on the red
dotted line at 0.0145 s. It meets the technical requirement of
axial clearance not exceeding 0.025 mm.
(3) Swing angle
Fig. 20(c) shows the swing angle of the plunger component
obtained by neck-spinning simulation under the optimized
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters 189

Fig. 19 Effect of spinning parameters and roller structure on neck-spinning quality.

process parameters. Its value is 36°, which meets the technical results are in good agreement with the experimental
requirement that the swing angle is not less than 35°. results within 15% errors.
(2) The neck-spinning simulations have been carried out on
5. Conclusions the slipper with different convex shapes under the same
spinning conditions, and the simulation results are ana-
lyzed and calculated based on the mathematical fuzzy
In this study, a reliable finite element model for the quality
analysis method. It is found that the best neck-
analysis of the plunger component after the neck-spinning
spinning quality can be obtained when the convex shape
process has been proposed. The neck-spinning tests were car-
of the slipper is a combination of arcs and arcs.
ried out on the plunger component to verify the finite element
(3) The orthogonal simulations have been carried out to
analysis (FEA) model, which is used to analyze the neck-
analyze the influence of roller structure and spinning
spinning process of different roller structure (front angle of
parameters on the neck-spinning quality. And the roller
the roller and roller diameter), slipper structure and spinning
structure and spinning parameters are optimized by the
parameters (feed rate and rotational speed). The influence of
combination of range method and fuzzy mathematical
process conditions on the neck-spinning quality (axial clear-
analysis method. It is found that the reasonable spinning
ance C, pulling-out force P and swing angle a) is analyzed.
parameters and structure of roller for the plunger com-
And the neck-spinning process parameters were optimized
ponent are: feed rate f of 0.3 mm/rev, rotate speed n of
through the combination of range method and fuzzy mathe-
400 rev/min, roller diameter Dr of 30 mm, and front
matical analysis method. The main conclusions are as
angle of the roller of 30°.
follows:
(4) Under the same spinning conditions, the impact of feed rate
(1) A novel FEA model for the prediction of the neck- on the pulling-out force is more significant than other spin-
ning parameters. Rotational speed has the largest impact on
spinning quality of the plunger component is established
and verified by the experimental results. The simulation the axial clearance, and the swing angle is hardly affected by
spinning parameters and the structure of the roller.
190
Fig. 20 Confirmation simulation results.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing
financial interests or personal relationships that could have
appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
This study was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China for Creative Research Groups (Grant
No. 51921003).
References
1. Liu G, Zhou Z, Qian X, et al. Multidisciplinary design optimiza-
tion of a swash-plate axial piston pump. Appl Sci 2016;6
(12):399–413.
2. Xu B, Zhang JH, Yang HY. Investigation on structural optimiza-
tion of anti-overturning slipper of axial piston pump. Sci China
Technol Sci 2012;55(11):3010–8.
Y. WANG et al.
3. Xing T, Xu Y, Ruan J. Two-dimensional piston pump: principle,
design, and testing for aviation fuel pumps. Chin J Aeronaut
2020;33(4):1349–60.
4. Zeman P, Kemmetmuller W, Kugi A, et al. Nonlinear model
predictive control of axial piston pumps. J Dyn Syst Measur
Control 2017;139(8):1–15.
5. Guo S, Chen J, Lu Y, et al. Hydraulic piston pump in civil aircraft:
current status, future directions and critical technologies. Chin J
Aeronaut 2020;33(1):16–30.
6. Chen J, Ma J, Li J, et al. Performance optimization of grooved
slippers for aero hydraulic pumps. Chin J Aeronaut 2016;26
(3):814–23.
7. Tang HS, Yin YB, Ren Y, et al. Impact of the thermal effect on
the load-carrying capacity of a slipper pair for an aviation axial-
piston pump. Chin J Aeronaut 2018;31(2):395–409.
8. Wu H, Xu WC, Shan DB, et al. An extended GTN model for low
stress triaxiality and application in spinning forming. J Mater
Process Technol 2019;263:112–28.
9. Xia Q, Xiao G, Long H, et al. A review of process advancement of
novel metal spinning. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2014;85:100–21.
10. Thanapat S, Surangsee D. Spinning process design using finite
element analysis and taguchi method. Procedia Eng
2017;207:1713–8.
11. Dai W, Lian YN, Xiao JL. Analysis and optimization of plunger
necking-in process based on finite element simulationFirst Inter-
national Conference on Reliability Systems Engineering (ICRSE).
Beijing. p. 1–6.
12. Chi JX, Cai ZY, Li LL. Optimization of spinning process
parameters for long thin-walled cylinder of TC11 alloy based on
processing map. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2018;97:1961–9.
13. Kobayashi S, Thomsen EG. Theory of spin forging. Ann CIRP
1962;10(2):114–23.
14. Jia Z, Fan ZJ, Han RZ. Study on die-less spinning of square
section cone with fillets. Int J Adv Manuf Technol
2020;106:5149–57.
15. Han ZR, Xiao Y, Zhou SY, et al. Modification of roller path for
square cone by die-less asymmetric spinning. J Braz Soc Mech Sci
Eng 2020;42(5):269.
16. Liang W, Lv QY, Guan L, et al. Spinning process test and optical
topography measurement technology for the shell with longitudi-
nal and latitudinal inner ribs. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2019;2:1–14.
17. Hayama M, Kudo H. Analysis of diameter growth and working
forces. Bull JSME 1979;22(167):776–84.
18. Ma ZE. Optimal angle of attack in tube spinning. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 1993;37:217–24.
19. Jia Z, Han ZR, Xu Q, et al. Effects of processing parameters on
the surface quality of square section die-less spinning. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 2015;80:1689–700.
20. Huang L, Yang H, Zhan M, et al. Forming characteristics of
splitting spinning based on the behaviors of roller. Comput Mater
Sci 2009;45:449–61.
21. Wang L, Long H. Investigation of material deformation in multi-
pass conventional metal spinning. Mater Des 2011;32:2891–9.
22. Xia QX, Lai ZY, Long H, et al. A study of the spinning force of
hollow parts with triangular cross sections. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 2013;68(9–12):2461–70.
23. Wang L, Long H. Effects of the roller feed ratio on wrinkling
failure in conventional spinning of a cylindrical cup. Proc Inst
Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 2011;225(11):1991–2006.
24. Huang CC, Hung JC, Hung C. Finite element analysis on neck-
spinning process of tube at elevated temperature. Int J Adv Manuf
Technol 2011;56:1039–48.
25. Zhang X, Zhao L, Wen T, et al. An optimized neck-spinning
method for improving the inner surface quality of titanium domes.
Procedia Eng 2017;207:1731–6.
26. Luo W, Chen F, Xu BB, et al. Study on compound spinning
technology of large thin-walled parts with ring inner ribs and
curvilinear generatrix. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2018;98:1199–216.
Neck-spinning quality analysis and optimization of process parameters
27. Takahashia Y, Kiharaa S, Nagamachib T, et al. Effects of neck
length on occurrence of cracking in tube spinning. Procedia Manuf
2018;15:1200–6.
28. Guo YM, Li MZ, Huang T, et al. Research on counter-roller
spinning force based on finite element simulation and experiment.
IOP Conf. Ser Mater Sci Eng 2019;563:42–69.
29. Zeng X, Fan XG, Li HW, et al. Flow forming process of thin-
walled tubular parts with cross inner ribs. Procedia Manuf
2018;15:1239–46.
30. Li ZX, Shu XD. Involute curve roller trace design and optimiza-
tion in multipass conventional spinning based on the forming
clearance compensation. J Manuf Sci Eng 2019;141(9):1–14.
191
31. Ye T, Jia Z, Han ZR, et al. Numerical simulation study on multi-
pass non-axisymmetric spinning of cylindrical parts with oblique
flange. J Eng Manuf 2020;234(1–2):75–83.
32. Wang Y, Su HH, Lu GS, et al. Quality prediction of plunger
components based on the finite element method during the neck-
spinning process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 2020;106(11):1509–20.
33. Selvan JS, Subramanian K, Nath AK. Effect of laser surface
hardening on En18 (AISI 5135) steel. J Mater Process Technol
1999;91:29–36.
34. Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 1965;8:338–53.