See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/263894446

Flow forming optimization based on diametral growth using finite element

method and response surface methodology

Article  in  Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B Journal of Engineering Manufacture · August 2012
DOI: 10.1177/0954405412461328

CITATIONS READS

20 4,146

3 authors, including:

Abdolhossein Jalali Aghchai Nabi Allah Razani

Khaje Nasir Toosi University of Technology Amirkabir University of Technology
22 PUBLICATIONS   348 CITATIONS    7 PUBLICATIONS   101 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Flow forming View project

Formability of FML sheets View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Nabi Allah Razani on 30 January 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical
Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture
http://pib.sagepub.com/

Flow forming optimization based on diametral growth using finite element method and response
surface methodology
Abdolhossein Jalali Aghchai, Nabi Allah Razani and Bijan Mollaei Dariani
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture published online 25
October 2012
DOI: 10.1177/0954405412461328

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://pib.sagepub.com/content/early/2012/10/24/0954405412461328
A more recent version of this article was published on - Dec 7, 2012

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Institution of Mechanical Engineers

Additional services and information for Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering
Manufacture can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://pib.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://pib.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Version of Record - Dec 7, 2012

>> OnlineFirst Version of Record - Oct 25, 2012

What is This?

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
Original Article

Proc IMechE Part B:

J Engineering Manufacture
0(0) 1–11
Flow forming optimization based on Ó IMechE 2012
Reprints and permissions:
diametral growth using finite element sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0954405412461328

method and response surface pib.sagepub.com

methodology

Abdolhossein Jalali Aghchai1, Nabi Allah Razani2 and Bijan Mollaei

Dariani3

Abstract
Flow forming as a precise locally plastic deformation is applied to fabricate thin-walled seamless tubes. Diametral growth
as a dimensional defect that occurrs in a flow-formed tube is studied numerically and experimentally in this article. Flow
forming of an AISI 321 steel tube is investigated using a finite element method with a dynamic explicit approach. The effi-
cient parameters on the diametral growth are determined using experimental outcomes. The parameters considered
are the thickness reduction (%), the feed rate of the roller (mm/min) and the roller nose radius (mm). Response surface
methodology is employed to draw out a mathematical model of the diametral growth with regard to the significant para-
meters. The gained equation reveals that the thickness reduction is the most significant parameter and feed rate has the
slightest effect on the diametral growth. The diametral growth increases with the rise in the thickness reduction and the
roller nose radius and it leads to a decrease with a high value of feed rate. The innovation point of view is related to the
fact that the high level of roller nose radius covers the efficiency of feed rate.

Keywords
Flow forming, diametral growth, response surface methodology

Date received: ; accepted: 24 August 2012

Introduction deformation area in the axial, radial and tangential

Flow forming is a kind of metal spinning process to
manufacture thin-walled high-precision and seamless
tubular parts. In flow forming, a metal blank or pre-
form is formed over a rotating mandrel. Thickness of
the pre-form reduces when one or more rollers spin
around their own axis and move axially along the rotat-
ing pre-form axis.
In recent years, many researchers have performed
experimental and numerical studies on the flow form-
ing process. Hayama and Kudo1 developed a theory
for forward and backward tube spinning and studied
the diametral growth (DG) and strain rate in the defor-
mation region and examined the evaluation of the dia-
meteral preciseness of the flow-formed tubes. Kemin
et al.2 developed an elastic–plastic finite element (FE)
model to simulate the tube spinning process in order to
comprehend the properties of tube spinning and experi-
mentally studied the DG. A FE model of tube spinning
was presented by Xu et al.3 so as to categorize the
directions. Finite element method (FEM) results were
in good agreement with the practical deformity condi-
tion and the experimental outcomes of Hayama and
Kudo.1 Hua et al.4 executed a practical spinning pro-
cess of Hastelloy C alloy pre-form and simulated a
three-dimensional (3D) elastic–plastic model. They
showed that there are imperfections in the contact
zone between the pre-form and the mandrel, such as
1
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, K. N. Toosi University of Technology,
Iran
2
Engineering and High Tech Department, Iran University of Industries and
Mines, Iran
3
Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of
Technology, Iran
Corresponding author:
Abdolhossein Jalali Aghchai, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, K. N.
Toosi University of Technology, No. 17, Pardis St., Mollasadra Ave.,Vanak
Square, Tehran 19991-43344, Iran
Email: jalali@kntu.ac.ir

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
2 Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 0(0)
bell-mouth, build-up, bulging and DG. Groche and
Fritsche5 used flow forming as a recently developed
technique to fabricate internally geared wheels with
high precise dimensions.5
Davidson et al.6 investigated the quality of flow-
formed annealed AA6061 tubular pre-form and evalu-
ated the accrued imperfections. They used the Taguchi
method to forecast the maximum elongation of flow-
formed AA6061 tubular pre-form.7 Furthermore, they
implemented a response surface methodology (RSM)
tool to improve the surface roughness of flow-formed
AA6061 tubular pre-form empirically.8
Parsa et al.9 evaluated the influences of the roller
attack angle and feed rate on the flow formability of
the forward flow-forming process. They showed that the
S/L ratio (ratio of the contact length in the circumferen-
tial direction to the contact length in the longitudinal
direction in the interface area between pre-form and
roller) increases while the values of attack angle and feed
rate increase. Debin et al.10 Simulated backward flow
forming by the FEM and investigated the dependency of
microstructure and texture to deformation records.
Roy et al.11,12 accomplished experimental and
numerical examinations on the flow-forming process
and illustrated the contribution of the local equivalent
plastic strain on the roller and mandrel. They investi-
gated the correlation between the plastic strain and
micro-indentation hardness. Furthermore, a general-
ized interpretation was developed considering the con-
tact area between roller and pre-form during a single
roller flow-forming operation.
Mohebi and Akbarzadeh13 investigated the local
plastic deformation of AA 6063 alloy during a flow-
forming process using only one roller. They attained
that high shear strains happened in both the longitudi-
nal and traverse direction of pre-form.
It is well known that the pre-form rotational speed,
roller nose radius and attack angle, feed rate, and thick-
ness reduction have important roles in specifying the
characteristics of the flow-formed tube. A comprehensive
article general study illustrated that there is no reported
investigation about AISI 321 tubes and their quality
aspects using the flow-forming principle. The purpose of
this study is to predict the DG for flow-formed AISI 321
stainless steel tube using the FEM. The selected para-
meters affecting DG as the response are the thickness
reduction, the feed rate and the roller nose radius. An
experimentally validated FE model is used for perform-
ing parametric analysis. The utilized layout for numerical
runs is based on Box-Behnken design as a RSM’s tool.
Hence, the problem of getting optimized process para-
meters to achieve minimum DG of the flow-formed tube
is endeavored in this investigation.
Three-roller forward flow forming
The three-roller forward flow-forming system is com-
posed of a tubular pre-formed, three rollers and
Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
mandrel. The mandrel is a shaft with a morse end
embedded on a headstock chuck. In the flow-forming
process, the tubular pre-form is fastened on the mandrel
shaft and pre-form flanged end fixed by a tailstock. The
axial and radial movements of the pre-form are con-
strained and the pre-form rotation is achieved by man-
drel rotation. The three rollers are arranged around the
tubular pre-form symmetrically. The axes and motion
directions of the mandrel and pre-form tube are
aligned. When the flow-forming process begins, the
mandrel and pre-form rotation speeds are equal and
constant, and the rollers move from the flange end of
rotated pre-form to the headstock chuck uniformly.
Because of the friction between the rollers and pre-form
interfaces, the rollers passively rotate with no, or slight,
circumferential slip on pre-form.
The ratio of the wall thickness reduction of the pre-
form to the initial wall thickness is named as the thick-
ness reduction ratio.4 According to the volume con-
stancy of the pre-form, the reduction in wall thickness
leads to increase in the length of the pre-formed tube.7
Methodology
In the present work, a three-roller forward flow-
forming process is simulated numerically using com-
mercial FE software. The FE model is utilized to carry
out simulation runs for each dictated set of input para-
meters of the RSM’s Box-Bankhen matrix. The influ-
ences of selected input parameters of the flow-forming
process are then analyzed using analysis of variance
(ANOVA) technique. Eventually, by applying the
developed mathematical model of DG as the response,
the optimum conditions are predicted and verified
experimentally.
Experimental details
Tooling
A common numerically controlled lathe was used as a
flow-forming machine. A three-roller tool apparatus
was designed and built as shown in Figure 1. The appa-
ratus was installed on the support of the lathe. Owing
to the imposed pressure on flow-forming components,
flow-forming tools (rollers and mandrel) must be made
of high-strength steel. The mandrel morse end was
fixed on lathe chuck and the pre-form was clamped on
the mandrel. For roller shape determining, four rollers
with different attack angle (15°, 20°, 25° and 30°) were
manufactured.
Pre-form
The AISI 321 stainless steel (DIN 1.4541) that has high
strength and excellent corrosion resistance was used for
experimental studies. The chemical composition of
AISI 321 is given in Table 1. In the flow-forming pro-
cess the dimensional preciseness of the final product is
Jalali Aghchai et al. 3

Figure 1. (a) Pre-form and mandrel installing on headstock chuck; (b) three-roller tool apparatus with a typical roller.

Table 1. Chemical composition of the AISI 321.

Material Si Ni Mo Mn Ti Cr C S P Fe

AISI 321 0.67 8.39 – 1.44 0.68 17.84 0.068 0.003 0.052 Bal

influenced by the dimensions and profile shape of the

pre-form. The pre-form with an outer diameter of 50.5
mm and a length of 65 mm was manufactured by press
forming of a circular blank with 1.5 mm of thickness
and 139 mm of diameter. The initial pre-form and flow-
formed tubes, after one pass, are shown in Figure 2.
The hardness of the pre-formed tube was increased
after each pass. Therefore, to decrease the hardness of
the flow-formed tubes and prepare them for the next
pass, the pre-forms were annealed at a temperature of
1050 °C for 20 min and then they were quenched in a
vacuum furnace. Figure 2. (a) Initial pre-form; and (b) flow-formed tube.
In this article, the DG of the flow-formed tubes as a
response was measured with an ultrasonic wall thick-
ness gage of 60.001 mm accuracy.
form could be attained at a mandrel rotation speed of
350 r/min.
Experimental conditions
In order to find out the main parameters affecting
Simulation procedure
the DG of the flow-formed tube, preliminary tests
were carried out. It was clear that the thickness reduc- Material definition
tion (%), the feed rate of the rollers (mm/min) and The flow-forming process was applied to an AISI 321
the roller nose radius (mm) have sensible effects on stainless steel tube. Throughout flow forming there are
the DG. To obtain the favorite attack angle of the large deformations, intensive rotation, complicated
roller, the surface roughness of the flow-formed tubes contact condition and nonlinearity encountered.14 The
produced with different attack angles of the roller behavior of anisotropic plasticity is studied by using
(15°, 20°, 25° and 30°) were measured. Finally, the Hill’s yield criterion.15 Hill’s yield potential is an exten-
roller with attack angle of 25°, which produced a sion of the Von-Mises yield function used to model ani-
flow-formed tube with high surface finish (Ra = 0.9 sotropic metal plasticity. Holloman’s16 law was used to
m m) was selected for the proposed experiments. Also, explain the stress dependence on effective plastic strain.
several experiments of the flow-forming process of Considering ASTM E8M-97, the material properties
AISI 321 stainless steel tubes indicated that the maxi- were determined from tensile tests that are provided in
mum deformation with high surface finish of the pre- Table 2.

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
4 Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 0(0)

Table 2. Mechanical properties of annealed AISI 321 stainless steel.

Material sy (MPa) su (MPa) E (GPa) n r (Kg/m3) Elongation (%) Hardness (HRB) R0 R45 R90

AISI 321 230 625 193 0.3 7830 53 86 0.88 0.92 0.91

The stress–strain curve of the pre-form material is

presented in Figure 3. The roller and mandrel were
assumed as 3D analytical rigid bodies and the pre-form
was modeled as a deformable part.

Solving method
Elastic–plastic FEM is used in order to examine the
influence of process parameters on the formability of
the pre-form. Large plastic deformation occurs in the
pre-form that is in contact with the rollers and mandrel
in the tube spinning process. Owing to high non-
Figure 3. The engineering stress–strain curve of AISI 321. linearity deformation behavior, both the geometrical
and material non-linearity was noticed in the FEM
analysis of tube spinning.4 Also, the explicit solving
procedure was chosen.9 The geometrical dimensions of
pre-form, rollers and mandrel are shown in Table 3.
Table 3. Dimensions of tools and pre-form and the process
conditions.
The tubular blank in the FE model of the process,
which is presented in Figure 4, was meshed with a
Parameter Value C3D8R element.10 Owing to large contact interfaces in
the flow-forming process, surface to surface contact was
Pre-form applied in this model.9 Owing to using lubricant oil during
Inner diameter (mm) 47.5
Wall thickness (mm) 1.5
the process, a frictionless interface mode was selected.13
Initial length (mm) 65 In the simulation presented here, the mass scaling
Roller element was selected so that the time consuming was
Diameter (mm) 50 decreased. Eventually, for the FE model validation,
Attack angle (°) 25 predicted thicknesses were compared with the experi-
Smoothing angle (°) 25
Roller nose radius (mm) 3, 5, 7
mental results. In addition, using experimentally
Mandrel acquired longitudinal strains of the flow-formed tube
Diameter (mm) 47.4 the credibility of the FE model was confirmed
Length (mm) 240 (Table 4). In Table 4 the comparison between experi-
mental and the FEM longitudinal strains imply the
error value between 2.1% and 8.8%. The given accep-
table errors consider the validity of the model.

Figure 4. Schematic of forward flow forming by three rollers.
Design of experiments
The design of experiments (DOE) method is used to
identify the planning of an experimental information
gathering when the system is affected by a set of vari-
able parameters.17 RSM, as a DOE tool, has recently
noticed as an optimization technique in a numerical
analysis area, was presented by Box and Wilson.18
The RSM is a type of optimization method that uses
a function called a response surface to predict the opti-
mum status. A response surface is applied as a function
that approximates a response related an to independent
variable and state quantities of response using several
analyses of DOE results. With the RSM, optimal con-
ditions are first determined, and then a response surface
is created between the design variables and objective
functions considering constraint condition limits. By

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
Jalali Aghchai et al. 5

Table 4. Obtained longitudinal strains of experimental and FEM in thickness reduction of 33 (%) and roller nose radius of 5 (mm).

Run no. Rotational speed (r/min) Feed rate (mm/min) Longitudinal strain Error (%)
Exp. FEM

1 300 45 0.22 0.21 4.5

2 300 60 0.24 0.225 6.2
3 300 75 0.235 0.23 2.1
4 350 45 0.225 0.21 6.6
5 350 60 0.245 0.225 8.1
6 350 75 0.25 0.24 4
7 400 45 0.225 0.205 8.8
8 400 60 0.24 0.22 8.3
9 400 75 0.265 0.245 7.6

FEM: finite element method.

Table 6. Experimental layout for the Box-Behnken matrix.

FE run no. Parameters FE: DG (m m)

Dc Fr Rnr

1 33 60 5 165
2 20 60 7 75
3 33 60 5 165
4 46 60 7 175
5 33 45 7 162
6 20 60 3 51
7 33 60 5 165
8 33 75 3 101
9 46 75 5 156
10 33 75 7 161
11 33 45 3 156
12 46 60 3 138
13 20 45 5 78
14 46 45 5 186
15 20 75 5 67
16 33 60 5 165
17 33 60 5 165

FE: finite element; DG: diametral growth.

Figure 5. Response surface methodology.
FEM: finite element method.
The Box-Behnken design matrix displays factors lev-
els in the experimental layout (Table 6). This matrix
was dictated for a layout run of the FE models.
Table 5. Variable levels in Box-Behenken matrix.

Numerical factors Low level High level Results and discussion

Dc: thickness reduction (%) 20
Fr : feed rate (mm/min) 45
Rnr : roller nose radius (mm) 3 7
using the created response surface, an optimal solution
can be attained with a conventional optimization tech-
nique (Figure 5).
In this article, the Box-Behnken matrix dictates the
experimental layout in 17 sets of runs for evaluation of
three numerical factors and quantifying the mathemati-
cal model of DG attained by flow forming of AISI 321
steel tube. The variable levels of the Box-Behenken
matrix are presented in Table 5.
46 With the Box-Behnken design methodology, major and
75 reciprocal effects of parameters on response function
can be easily assessed. The consequential factors in the
regression model can be appraised by performing
ANOVA.19 It is inevitable to have an explanation
about different statistical practical terms in this study.
The definition for each term is shown in the Appendix.
ANOVA and developed mathematical model
The ANOVA was applied to investigate the influences
of the input factors on the DG. The model summary
statistics of different sources are given in Table 7.
Model summary statistics composed of the R-squared,

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
6 Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 0(0)

Table 7. Model succinct statistics.

Model Standard deviation R2 Adjusted R2 Predicted R2 PRESS

Linear 26.28 0.7065 0.6388 0.5082 15052.05

2FI 28.50 0.7347 0.5755 0.1460 26135.83
Quadratic 2.5 0.9986 0.9967 0.9771 700.00 Suggested

PRESS: predicted residual error sum of squares; 2FI: model consisting of first order term and interaction term of parameters.

Table 8. ANOVA for response surface quadratic model (response: DG).

Source Sum of squares DF Mean square F-value P-value (probability . F)

Model 30562.01 9 3395.78 543.32 \ 0.0001

A – thickness reduction (%) 18432.00 1 18432.00 2949.12 \ 0.0001
B – feed rate 1176.13 1 1176.13 188.18 \ 0.0001
C – roller nose radius 2016.13 1 2016.13 322.58 \ 0.0001
AB 90.25 1 90.25 14.44 0.0067
AC 42.25 1 42.25 6.76 0.0354
BC 729.00 1 729.00 116.64 \ 0.0001
A2 6486.58 1 6486.58 1037.85 \ 0.0001
B2 67.37 1 67.37 10.78 0.0134
C2 1077.89 1 1077.89 172.46 \ 0.0001
Residual 43.75 7 6.25
Core. total 30605.76 16

DF: degrees of freedom; Core. total: total sum of squares corrected for the mean. It is the sum of squared differences between the individual
observations and the overall average.

Table 9. Terms estimation of DG mathematical model.

Term Estimate Model

Intercept 2257.55806 First order (linear)

Thickness reduction 19.85725
Feed rate 20.12115
Roller nose radius 16.81250
Thickness reduction 3 feed rate 20.024359 Interaction
Thickness reduction 3 roller nose radius 0.12500
Feed rate 3roller nose radius 0.45000
Thickness reduction2 20.23225 Second order (quadratic)
Feed rate2 20.017778
Roller nose radius2 24.00000

the adjusted R-squared, the predicted R-squared and
the predicted residual error sum of squares (PRESS).
Where R2 is a gage of the amount of deviation around
the mean explained by the model and adjusted R2 is
the R-squared adjusted for the number of terms in the
model proportionate to the number of points in the
design matrix. Predicted R2 is a gage of the amount of
degree of diversity in new data explained by the model.
It displays that the quadratic model with maximum
adjusted R2 and predicted R2 values and minimum
PRESS value is the best model recommend as asuitable
case. Thus, for advance analysis, this model was
suggested.8
Table 7 gives the ANOVA of the reaction surface
model for the DG. ANOVA is used to determine the
importance of the effects of the model terms of the
response. If the value of ‘‘Prob . F’’ for the model is
less than 0.05, the ANOVA proves the adequate
accuracy of quadratic model.20 In this case the model is
worthwhile because it signifies that the terms in the
model have an important effect on the response. The
significance of each coefficient can be obtained by the
‘‘P-value’’, which is listed in Table 8. In this case A, B,
C, AB, AC, BC, A2, B2 and C2 are significant model
terms.
The ‘‘Model F-value’’ of 543.32 shows the signifi-
cance of the model, because the ‘‘P-value’’ of 0.0001
implies that there is a possibility of 0.01% that a
‘‘model F-value’’ could transpire owing to noise.21
The comparison of the ‘‘F-value’’ of the parametric
sources indicates that the thickness reduction is the
most significant parameter influencing the DG. After
the thickness reduction, the roller nose radius and the
feed rate have more influence on DG, respectively. The
estimated terms as coefficients of the DG mathematical
model are given in Table 9.

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
Jalali Aghchai et al. 7

Table 10. Calculated value of regression and accuracy of the coefficient of regression value (Adj. R2 = 0.9967) illus-
model. trates the competency of the model.
Adequate precision represents the competency of
Standard deviation 2.50
the model. When it is over 4, indicates the model sig-
Mean 137.12
Coefficient of variation % 1.82 nificance level. From Table 10 it is clear that the ade-
PRESS 700.00 quate precision value of 71.711 is considerable. The
R-squared 0.9986 predicted R2 value of 0.9771 implies that the model
Adj-squared 0.9967 could explain 97% of the variability in predicting new
Pred R-squared 0.9771
Adequate precision 71.711 Desire . 4
observations.
The residuals, which are the differences between the
PRESS: predicted residual error sum of squares. corresponding actual responses and the predicted
responses, are reviewed using the plot of the residual
errors and internally studentized residuals plot in con-
trast to predicted response. The competency plots of
the model are shown in Figure 6.
The points on the predicted versus actual response
plot (Figure 6(a)) lie on a straight line, so the model is
qualified. Also in the qualified model, the plot of the
residuals versus the predicted responses (Figure 6(b))
should contain no obvious pattern.22 Hence, it is clear
that the model is qualified.

Figure 6. Diagnostic contour plots: (a) the predicted versus
actual responses of DG; (b) the residuals versus predicted
responses of DG.
Confirmation of analysis
The computed values of regression are given in Table
10. High resulted coefficient of regression value
(R2 = 0.9986) demonstrated the competency of the rep-
resented model. The R2 value varies between 0 and 1. It
leads to an increase with decline in the residual errors.
To signify the competency of analysis, adjusted coeffi-
cient of regression (Adj. R2) is utilized when the num-
ber of variables increases. In this model, a high-resulted
DG and 3D graphs
Imperfections and related failures that occurred on
flow-forming tubes can be classified as micro cracks,
DG, ovality, fish scaling and fracture bursting.23 In
fact, the material in front of the roller has a tendency to
accumulate and form a heap on the surface. The tan-
gential tensile strain that causes DG during the forming
process is the major parameter in influencing the spinn-
ability.24 DG, as a dimentional imperfection, was found
on flow-formed AISI 321 stainless steel tubes in this
experimental study. Predicted wall thickness is not as
much as the real amount of it. It is owing to the hap-
pened spring-back on the deformation zone. A large
amount of depth of cut merged with low feed rates
makes a large amount of DG. The DG is another way
of adjusting material flow by the materials outside the
deformation area. It should be noticed that materials at
the end of the tube have a DG instead of pile-up.13 It
was found that the DG rises by decreasing the feed rate
and increasing the depth of cut. Figure 7 reveals that
the pile-up on the flow-formed tube becomes greater by
raising the thickness reduction.
Material flow can be appraised using the contact
ratio (S/L), in which L is the longitudinal direction and
S is the circumferential direction of the contact area
between the roller and the tube. The values of L and S
can be computed using geometrical calculations as
follows.25
S = Rr b ð1Þ
where b is expressed by
a 2 + c 2  b2
b = cos1 ( ) ð2Þ
2ac
where a, b and c are defined as

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
8 Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 0(0)
Figure 7. Section views of the FE model: (a) before, (b) after flow forming, and a flow-formed tube in thickness reduction of (c)
20%, (d) 33% and (e) 46%.
Figure 8. Contact area between tube and roller of FE model.
a = Rr + Tfi + Rm ð3Þ
c = Rr ð4Þ
b = Rm + Tfi + Ftana ð5Þ
Tin + Tfi + 2
Lffi( ) ð6Þ
tana + F
where a is the attack angle, Rr is the roller radius, Rm is
the mandrel radius, Tin is the final thickness, Tfi the final
thickness, F the feed rate, and T the thickness difference.
The instability and related imperfections founded in
flow forming are foreseeable by using the S/L ratio
(Figure 8). DG is a function of the ratio of the circumfer-
ential contact length S to the longitudinal contact length
L. DG is low in the high value of the S/L ratio and the
smaller S/L ratio leads to form considerable DG.
Figures 9, 10 and 11 give the 3D surface graphs for
the predicted DG results. From Figure 9 it is clear that
DG rises with an increase in thickness reduction and
also rises with the combination of high value depth of
cut with low feed rates owing to the reduction of S/L
ratio. In addition, the feed rate of the roller has no con-
siderable influence on DG in lower thickness reduction
levels. However, in higher levels of thickness reduction
Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
the DG increases with a reduction in the feed rate.
Consequently, interaction effects of thickness reduction
and feed rate on flow-formed tubes are considerable.
The interaction effects of the roller nose radius and
thickness reduction on the DG are presented in Figure
10. According to equations (1)–(6), the combination of
higher levels of roller nose radius and thickness reduc-
tion, causes the lower S/L ratio. It is obvious that the
reduction of the S/L ratio results in maximum DG.
Consequently, in lower levels of roller nose radius and
thickness reduction the DG has the minimum value.
There is a substantial occurrence in interaction
effects of the roller nose radius and feed rate (Figure
11). At higher levels of roller nose radius, the effect of
feed rate is not considerable. The contact area between
the rollers and pre-form is expanded by increasing the
value of the roller nose radius. Afterwards, the plastic
deformation process is influenced. The high level of the
roller nose radius compensates the effects of feed rate
when the mandrel rotational speed is constant.
Verification experiment
The RSM model predicted the minimum value of DG
(Table 11). In order to approve the exactness of the
Jalali Aghchai et al. 9

Figure 9. The effects of feed rate and thickness reduction on the DG on the constant roller nose radius (5 mm).

Figure 10. The effects of the roller nose radius and thickness reduction on the DG in the constant feed rate (60 mm/min).

Figure 11. The effects of roller nose radius and feed rate on the DG in the constant thickness reduction (33%).

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
10
Table 11. Optimum set.
Thickness reduction (%)
Feed rate (mm/min)
Roller nose radius (mm)
DG (m m)
RSM predict
Experimental result
Error (%)
RSM: response surface methodology.
advanced model, a confirmation test was carried out.
The computed error has an authorized value. So, the
developed mathematical model of the DG has the com-
petency to predict the DG values for any layout of
experiments consisting of the thickness reduction, the
feed rate and the roller nose radius.
Conclusion
A coupled set of experiments and FE simulations were
conducted to predict the DG in a three-roller flow-
forming process. The effects of the process parameters
on dimensional quality of the flow-formed AISI 321
tube were quantified by applying RSMs Box-Bankhen
design. The following conclusions may be drawn by
outcomes.
1. Using a FEM and DOE coupled set is very useful
to cost saving in experiments and reducing the
computational time consuming FE analyses.
2. The ANOVA estimations revealed that the thick-
ness reduction was the most significant parameter
influencing the DG. After the thickness reduction,
the roller nose radius and the feed rate have more
influences on DG, respectively.
3. It revealed that the minimum value of DG occurs
in the thickness reduction = 20%, feed rate =
60 mm/min and at the minimum value of the roller
nose radius.
4. The maximum value of DG was attained in high
levels of thickness reduction and roller nose radius.
5. In lower thickness reduction levels and higher
roller nose radius, the feed rate of the roller has an
insensible effect on DG.
6. The contact interface area in the deformation zone
and S/L ratio can perform a criterion for predict-
ing the quality of dimensional defect in the flow-
forming process.
7. The confirmability between RSM prediction and
experimental results verified the adequate precision
of the FEM model.
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any fund-
ing agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit
sectors.
Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012
Proc IMechE Part B: J Engineering Manufacture 0(0)
References
1. Hayama M and Kudo H. Analysis of diametral growth
20
65 and working forces in tube spinning. Bull JSME 1979;
3 22: 776–784.
2. Kemin X, Zhen W, Yan L, et al. Elasto-plastic FEM
49 analysis and experimental study of diametral growth in
47 tube spinning. J Mater Process Technol 1997; 69: 172–
4.1 175.
3. Xu Y, Zhang SH, Li P, et al. 3D rigid plastic FEM
numerical simulation of tube spinning. J Mater Process
Technol 2001; 113: 710–713.
4. Hua FA, Yang YS and Zhang YN. Three-dimensional
finite element analysis of tube spinning. J Mater Process
Technol 2005; 168: 68–74.
5. Groche P and Fritsche D. Application and modelling of
flow forming manufacturing processes for internally
geared wheels. J Mater Process Technol 2006; 46: 1261–
1265.
6. Davidson MJ, Balasubramanian K and Tagore GRN.
An experimental study on the quality of flow-formed
AA6061 tubes. J Mater Process Technol 2008; 203:
321–325.
7. Davidson MJ, Balasubramanian K and Tagore GRN.
Experimental investigation on flow-forming of AA6061
alloy-A Taguchi approach. J Mater Process Technol
2008; 200: 283–287.
8. Davidson MJ, Balasubramanian K and Tagore GRN.
Surface roughness prediction of flow-formed AA6061
alloy by design of experiments. J Mater Process Technol
2008; 202: 41–46.
9. Parsa MH, Pazooki AMA and Nili Ahmadabadi M.
Flow-forming and flow formability simulation. Int J Adv
Manuf Technol 2009; 43: 463–473.
10. Debin S, Guoping Y and Wenchen X. Deformation his-
tory and the resultant microstructure and texture in back-
ward tube spinning of Ti–6Al–2Zr–1Mo–1V. J Mater
Process Technol 2009; 209: 5713–5719.
11. Roy MJ, Klassen RJ and Wood JT. Evolution of plastic
strain during a flow forming process. J Mater Process
Technol 2009; 209: 1018–1025.
12. Roy MJ, Maijer DM, Klassen RJ, et al. Analytical solu-
tion of the tooling/workpiece contact interface shape dur-
ing a flow forming operation. J Mater Process Technol
2010; 210: 1976–1985.
13. Mohebbi MS and Akbarzadeh A. Experimental study
and FEM analysis of redundant strains in flow forming
of tubes. J Mater Process Technol 2010; 210: 389–395.
14. Sun JS, Lee KH and Lee HP. Comparison of implicit and
explicit finite element methods for dynamic problems.
J Mater Process Technol 2000; 105: 110–118.
15. Hill R. The mathematical theory of plasticity. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1950.
16. Holloman JH. Tensile deformation. Transition of the
American Institute Mining. Metall Petroleum Engng
1949; 16: 268–290.
17. Montgomery DC. Design and analysis of experiments. 4th
ed. New York: John Wiley, 1997.
18. Box GEP and Wilson KB. On the experimental attain-
ment of optimum condition. J Royal Statistical 1951; 13:
1–45.
19. Box GEP, Hunter WG and Hunter JS. Statistics for
experiments – An introduction to design, data analysis and
modeling. New York: Wiley, 1978.
 Jalali Aghchai et al. 11

20. Cansee S, Uriyapongson J, Watyotha C, et al. Ampho- E Young’s modulus

teric starch in simultaneous process preparation with F feed rate
Box-Behnken design for optimal conditions. Am J Fr feed rate
Applied Sci 2008; 52(11): 1535–1542. L contact length in the longitudinal
21. Edrissi M and Razzaghiasl N. Complexation of iron with direction
piroxicam – evaluation via response surface methodology. n strain hardening exponent
Acta Chim Slov 2007; 54: 825–833. Rm mandrel radius
22. Noordin MY, Venkatesh VC, Sharif S, et al. Application
Rnr roller nose radius
of response surface methodology in describing the perfor-
mance of coated carbide tools when turning AISI 1045
Rr roller radius
steel. J Mater Process Technol 2004; 145: 46–58. R0 Lankford coefficient (0° of rolling
23. Rajan KM and Narsimhan K. An investigation of the direction)
development of defects during flow forming of high R45 Lankford coefficient (45° of rolling
strength thin wall steel tubes. ASM J Pract Failure Anal direction)
2001; 5: 69–76. R90 Lankford coefficient (90° of rolling
24. Xu D. Thickness reduction spinning of the thin-walled direction)
cylinder with inner stiffness. In: Proceedings of the 4th S contact length in the circumferential
international conference of rotary forming, International direction
Academic Publishers, Beijing, China, October 17–21,
T thickness difference
1989; 97–102.
25. Jahazi M and Ebrahimi G. The influence of flow-forming Tin initial thickness
parameters and microstructure on the quality of a D6ac Tfi final thickness
steel. J Mater Process Technol 2000; 103: 362–366. a roller attack angle
n Possion’s Ratio
r density
Appendix su ultimate tensile stress
Notation sy yield stress
D mandrel diameter
Dc thickness reduction

Downloaded from pib.sagepub.com at Ebsco Electronic Journals Service (EJS) on December 14, 2012

View publication stats