Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
AvailableScienceDirect
Availableonline
onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Procedia Manufacturing 29 (2019) 145–152
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
18th International Conference on Sheet Metal, SHEMET 2019
18th International Conference on Sheet Metal, SHEMET 2019
An investigation of mandrel-free spinning
An investigation of mandrel-free spinning
Manufacturing Engineering Society
Kishore International
Jawale * Conference
, Evripides 2017, MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
G. Loukaides
2017, Vigo * (Pontevedra), Spain
Kishore Jawale , Evripides G. Loukaides
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, United Kingdom
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bath, Claverton Down, Bath BA2 7AY, United Kingdom
Costing models for capacity optimization in Industry 4.0: Trade-off
Abstract
Abstract between used capacity and operational efficiency
Spinning is a sheet metal forming technique conventionally used to form axisymmetric shapes. Recently a flexible mandrel-free
Spinningprocess
is a sheet
wasmetal forming used
technique aconventionally
spinning
spinning process
A. Santana
successfully to form Afonsoused
, non-axisymmetric
P. a,* to
A.form axisymmetric
, geometries.
Zanin Inb,this shapes. Recently
R.mandrel-free
Wernke bspinning a flexible
process,mandrel-free
numerically
controlled rollers was successfully
are used instead of used to form allowing
a mandrel, non-axisymmetric
for savings geometries. In this mandrel-free
in the lead-time, spinningrequired
cost and the material process,fornumerically
mandrel.
controlled
The rollersbehavior
deformation are usedofinstead of a mandrel,
this process allowing
ahas not been for
previouslysavings in
analyzed the lead-time,
numerically,
University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal cost and
although the
it ismaterial
critical torequired
designingfor mandrel.
toolpaths
Theachieving
and deformation behaviorparts.
successful of this
Inprocess
this work,hasban
notFEAbeenmodel
Unochapecó, previously analyzed
is constructed
89809-000 Chapecó,numerically,
and used toalthough
isBrazil
SC, study theitstress
is critical to designing
distribution toolpaths
and the strain
and achieving
path. Validation successful parts. In this
of the numerical modelwork, an FEAout
is carried model is constructed
by comparing andwith
forces is used to study theexperimental
measureable stress distribution
results.and
Thethemodel
strain
path. Validation
shows of the
that the stress numerical while
distribution modelforming
is carried out by comparing
is different forces with
to that observed in themeasureable
conventionalexperimental
spinning while results.
the The model
wrinkling
shows that is
mechanism thesimilar
stress todistribution
that observed while forming is different
in conventional spinning. to that observed in the conventional spinning while the wrinkling
Abstract
mechanism is similar to that observed in conventional spinning.
© 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
© 2018
2019 the
Under The Authors.
concept Published
of "Industryby Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
©
This is anThe
openAuthors.
access Published
article underby the4.0", productionlicense
B.V.
CC BY-NC-ND processes will be pushed to be increasingly interconnected,
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
information
This is anand
Selection openbased
accesson
peer-review a real
article time
under
under basis
the and,
CC BY-NC-ND necessarily,
licensemuch
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committeeof
responsibility of the organizing more efficient. In2019.
this context, capacity optimization
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
committee ofSHEMET
SHEMET2019.
goes beyond
Selection the traditional
and peer-review aim
under of capacityofmaximization,
responsibility the organizing contributing also for organization’s
committee of SHEMET 2019. profitability and value.
Indeed, lean
Keywords: management
Spinning; and continuous
Flexible mandrel-free improvement
spinning; Simulation; approaches
Sheet metal; Forming. suggest capacity optimization instead of
Keywords: Spinning;
maximization. TheFlexible
studymandrel-free
of capacity spinning; Simulation;
optimization Sheet
and metal; Forming.
costing models is an important research topic that deserves
contributions from both the practical and theoretical perspectives. This paper presents and discusses a mathematical
1. Introduction
model for capacity management based on different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A generic model has been
1. Introduction
developed and it was used to analyze idle capacity and to design strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
In commercial
value. The trade-offsheet metal spinning
capacity a circular
maximization blank is rotated
vs operational at highis velocities
efficiency highlighted(1000
and -it2000 rpm) and
is shown thatiscapacity
formed
In commercial
against a mandrel sheet
[1]. metalresults
This spinning
in a circular
an axially blank is rotated
symmetric at high However,
component. velocities (1000 - 2000
recently a rpm) and
flexible is formed
mandrel-free
optimization might hide operational inefficiency.
against aprocess
spinning
© 2017 The
mandrelwas
Authors.
[1]. This results
developed.
Published
in prototype
This
by Elsevier
an axiallymachine
B.V.
symmetric component.
allows rollers toHowever, recentlyoraindependently
move in tandem flexible mandrel-free
to form
spinning
asymmetric process was
componentsdeveloped.
[2]. This
This prototype
setup (Fig. machine
1) has allows
eliminated rollers
the to move
need forin tandem or independently
component-specific mandrel
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference to form
and
asymmetricsupport
introduced
2017. components
rollers [2].
and aThis setuproller
blending (Fig.to1)support
has eliminated
the componentthe need
beingfor component-specific
formed, mandrel and
mimicking the conventional
introduced
mandrel in support rollers
spinning. It wasandfurther
a blending rollerthat
observed to support
the setup thecan
component
be used being
to formformed, mimicking
components withthe
theconventional
help of the
mandrel Cost
Keywords: in spinning. It was
Models; ABC; further
TDABC; observed
Capacity that the
Management; Idle setup can
Capacity; be usedEfficiency
Operational to form components with the help of the

1. Introduction
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1225 385366.
*
E-mail address:
Corresponding
The cost author. Tel.: +44is1225
k.j.jawale@bath.ac.uk
of idle capacity 385366.
a fundamental information for companies and their management of extreme importance
E-mail address: k.j.jawale@bath.ac.uk
in modern production systems. In general, it is defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
in several ways: tons of production, available hours of manufacturing, etc. The management of the idle capacity
2351-9789
This © 2018
is an open Thearticle
access Authors. Published
under by Elsevier B.V.
the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
* Paulo
This Afonso.
is anand
Selection open Tel.:article
access
peer-review+351 253 510
under
under the761;
CC fax:of+351
BY-NC-ND
responsibility 253license
604 741
the organizing (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
committee of SHEMET 2019.
E-mail address: psafonso@dps.uminho.pt
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of SHEMET 2019.

2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review
2351-9789 © under
2019responsibility
The Authors. of the scientificbycommittee
Published Elsevier of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the organizing committee of SHEMET 2019.
10.1016/j.promfg.2019.02.119
146 Kishore Jawale et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 29 (2019) 145–152
2 Kishore Jawale/ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

working roller and the blending roller, without the need of the support rollers [3]. This however will change the stress
distribution in the component and thus needs to be analyzed.

Support rollers
Clamping
Working roller

Blending roller
Sheet

(a) (b)

Fig. 1: (a) Experimental setup; (b) Schematic side view of the setup (adapted from [1]).

Numerical simulations can be used to study the stresses in the workpiece. Previously Rentsch and Hora [4] have
successfully modelled multi-pass sheet metal spinning. In this study the accuracy of numerical modelling techniques,
by a direct comparison with metal spinning experiments, was investigated. The authors compared results using shell
and solid elements and found that the shell elements are computationally more efficient and produce similar results
when compared with solid elements. Using strain distribution analysis, the authors could identify the bending under
tension (BUT) mechanism in spinning. In another study [5], a Finite Element (FE) simulation was used to study the
deformation mechanics of the conventional metal spinning. The numerical results suggested that among three tool
force components, the axial force is the highest while the tangential force is the lowest. The blank thickness decreases
after each forward pass and there are almost no thickness changes during the backward pass. In the area between the
roller contact point and the back-plate, bending effects have been observed at the beginning of the forward pass.
Compressive tangential stresses are observed at the flange area near the local forming zone however they will change
into tensile tangential stresses when the current contact zone of the work-piece rotates away from the roller.
In the present study, the objective is to study the deformation behaviour of the mandrel-free spun component, by
observing the stress distribution in the component while forming, using an FE simulation. The FE model is validated
by measuring and comparing the reaction forces generated at the working roller. In the subsequent section
experimental setup used for verification is introduced and then followed by a description of the FE model and a
comparison of the two. Additional results made available through the numerical model concludes with the discussion.

2. Experimental setup

A circular Aluminum 1050 sheet with 2 mm thickness and 385 mm diameter was spun on the flexible mandrel-free
machine setup (Fig. 1) without the use of support rollers. The sheet was formed to produce a conical component with
an inclined wall at a 30° angle from the initial plane of the blank. To reduce the undesirable effect of friction between
the rollers and the sheet, the rollers were kept free to rotate. Additionally, grease was applied between the rollers and
the sheet surface to further reduce the friction. The toolpath was generated using a custom algorithm for which the
details can be found in a study done by Russo and Loukaides [3]. The working roller toolpath consisted of three
forward linear passes and corresponding backward passes (see Fig. 2, Y-axis represents axial direction and X-axis
represents radial direction with respect to machine’s spindle). When the working roller retracted (between forward
passes) it had no contact with the workpiece, i.e. forming is performed only in forward passes. The blending roller,
 Kishore Jawale et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 29 (2019) 145–152 147
Kishore Jawale/ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 3

once moved to the initial position, is stationary and in contact with the component at its base for the entire duration of
the forming.
The spindle speed was 200 rpm and the feed-rate was 1 mm/sec. This is lower than typical spinning speeds due to
limitations on the prototype machine motors. The forces on the rollers while forming are recorded using load cells.
The nose radii of both the working and blending rollers are 15 mm.

Start point
End point

Fig. 2: Toolpath for working roller.

3. Numerical simulation

The metal spinning process can be considered a quasi-static problem which includes large membrane deformation
and complex contact conditions [5]. Some authors [6] have previously studied the difference in computational time
and accuracy of models solved using implicit and explicit methods. It was observed that while the implicit method
resulted in slightly better accuracy the computational time was very high. Thus to study the deformation in this paper
(with an acceptable computational time trade-off) the explicit method in the commercial package Abaqus was used.
The material plastic property was defined using the von Mises yield criterion and isotropic hardening. To simplify the
model, the rollers where modelled as analytical rigid bodies with inertia. The 4-node reduced integration shell elements
(S4R in Abaqus) with approximate global size of 5mm, which generated 6450 elements, were used to model the
workpiece as a deformable material. Unlike the reduced integration linear solid element, which only uses one
integration point along the thickness direction, multiple integration points are used through the thickness of a shell
element. Stresses and strains at each integration point of the shell element are calculated independently. 9 integration
points were assigned to the elements through the thickness. Displacement boundary conditions are used in order to
model the motion of the working roller. A built-in coupling condition was applied to the center of the workpiece, to
represent the clamp on the spindle. A rotation velocity of 200 rpm was defined for this center point. The rollers are
free to rotate about their axis.
The mass scaling technique, which artificially increases the density of the material, is commonly used to speed up
the analysis, but can result in unrepresentative inertial effects. A mass scaling factor of 25 was used, in accordance
with successful past models for conventional spinning [5]. It was observed that the kinetic energy was less than 1%
of the total internal energy, thus assuring that the mass scaling does not affect the simulation results. The coulomb’s
friction criterion with a coefficient of 0.2 was used to define the friction between the rollers and sheet. This is an
assumed value based on the known rollers and workpiece materials, as well as the presence of lubrication in the
physical trial. The rollers are allowed to rotate freely, both in the experimental setup and in the simulation, thus
reducing the influence of friction further.
The numerical experiment was constructed to match the geometry of the physical experiment described above. The
toolpaths were provided to Abaqus as a tabulated list of coordinates, taken from the same file provided as input to the
prototype machine.
148 Kishore Jawale et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 29 (2019) 145–152
4 Kishore Jawale/ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

4. Results and discussion

In this section the FE simulation is validated by comparing the experimental results with the results obtained from
the numerical simulation. Later the stress distribution in the formed component is compared with that observed in
conventional spinning as found in earlier literature. This gives further insight into the deformation mechanism
observed in flexible mandrel-free spinning.
In Fig. 3, the equivalent axial forces generated at the working roller from the experimental setup and the FE
simulation are compared. The forward passes are clearly separated by regions of diminishing reaction force during
backward travel of the working roller. This is trivially expected, as the roller is no longer in contact with the sheet.

3rd Pass
2nd Pass

1st Pass

Fig. 3: Reaction forces generated at the working roller.

The experimental values deviate from the FE simulation with an average relative error of 23.8%. This deviation
can be attributed to the following three reasons:
a. The von Mises yield criteria with isotropic hardening relies on data representing equivalent plastic strain versus
equivalent stress. The material data was acquired from a standard tensile test and it is only possible to measure
the stress-strain curve up to a certain strain level with the proposed methods. To predict higher values, the data
is simply extrapolated using mathematical models. Abaqus is capable of interpolating and extrapolating from
this data, and thus giving a reasonable fit to the provided material behavior. However, more sophisticated
material characterization is needed to capture behavior in the regions of higher strains.
b. The von Mises yield criterion with isotropic hardening is a simple elastoplastic material law, which does not
consider any changes in the yield locus. During the first tool pass the influence might be negligible, but after
multiple load reversals and at higher strain levels these effects could have more significance and lead to the
observed deviation. Applying more sophisticated material models, which consider the anisotropy of the
material and the Bauschinger Effect (BE), might lead to an improvement of the results.
c. The friction model could be more complicated than the one assumed in the FE simulation.
Further to these, the modelling strategy, viz. the use of explicit method, might also contribute to the discrepancy
between experiments and simulations, as stated in the beginning of the previous section. Admittedly, additional work
is required to produce a more accurate simulation. However, we note that the trend of the relative error in force
magnitude between FE and experiment is remarkably consistent. Hence, it is reasonable to assume that trends in other
metrics remain consistent, albeit with an amount of relative error. With that in mind, the stress distribution is examined
using the presented FE simulation.
The development of stresses, due to contact of working roller, in the sheet at the start of the first pass can be
observed in Fig. 4(a) and the same after working roller travels 5 mm can be observed in Fig. 4(b). A high stress zone
 KishoreJawale/
Kishore JawaleProcedia
et al. / Procedia Manufacturing
Manufacturing 29000–000
00 (2018) (2019) 145–152 1495

can be seen in the sheet region which is located under the roller contact points. The sheet region between the working
roller and the blending roller appears to be under low tensile stress, which is not observed in conventional spinning.
The stress distribution during the initial forward pass in the case of flexible mandrel-free spinning is slightly different
than the conventional spinning observed in [4, 5]. The difference is prominent at the edge of the sheet. The high tensile
stress extending from the working roller to the edge of the sheet is absent in the case of this process. No significant
higher tensile stresses are developed, and further they are unevenly distributed. This uneven stress distribution may
cause dynamic instability and makes this process more prone to wrinkling failure. Here, the support rollers’ contact
would help to minimize the effect of uneven stress distribution.
(a)

Low tension
zone

Roller
contact point

(b)

Fig. 4: Stress distribution (in MPa) at the first pass; (a) initial contact with sheet, (b) after working roller displacement of 5mm.

Fig. 5 gives a visual overview of residual stresses induced by this multi-pass spinning process. The von Mises stresses
are displayed on the deformed workpiece at the end of each roller pass. The stress pattern observed at the end of all
passes is similar to that observed in conventional spinning [4, 5], except for the high stresses induced in the sheet at
the contact point with the blending roller. This shows that the deformation state at the end of the pass is similar in both
processes. The high stress zone under the blending roller causes the required bending of the sheet at that point. Due
to the substantially different tool setup, it is reasonable to assume that there might also be a difference in the amount
of residual stresses induced in the component formed with different spinning processes. This needs to be investigated
further.
150 Kishore Jawale et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 29 (2019) 145–152
6 Kishore Jawale/ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

(a)

(b)

(c)

Fig. 5: Mises stress distribution (in MPa) at the end of, (a) 1st pass; (b) 2nd pass; c) 3rd pass.
 Kishore Jawale et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 29 (2019) 145–152 151
Kishore Jawale/ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 7

An additional forward pass was introduced to the model to understand the deformation mechanism of wrinkling in
flexible mandrel-free spinning. The wrinkling, as presented in Fig. 6, shows toothed stress pattern similar to that
observed in conventional sheet metal spinning [5]. Wrinkling in conventional spinning typically occurs in regions not

Fig. 6: Stress (in MPa) distribution in flexible mandrel free spinning at wrinkling.

in contact with the mandrel, hence that similarity is perhaps unsurprising.

Three elements from different positions were selected to investigate the plastic deformation at difference locations
on the workpiece. Both the position of elements and the respective in-plane principal strains are presented in Fig. 7.
Position A indicates an element under the blending roller, position B is in the middle of the cone and position C is at

B C

(a) (b)

Fig. 7: (a) Positions of selected elements; (b) Strain paths for corresponding position.

the edge of the formed cone. The black cross mark intersecting strain paths in Fig. 7a represents the end of pass 1,
green cross mark represent end of pass 2 and red cross mark represent end of pass 3.
The element under the blending roller follows a plane strain path, the element positioned at the middle of the cone
follows approximately uniaxial strain path and the element positioned at the edge of the formed cone follow shear
152 Kishore Jawale et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 29 (2019) 145–152
8 Kishore Jawale/ Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

strain path. Shear deformation is usually desired in this process to ensure thickness uniformity. However, due to the
complex mechanics of the process, a range of deformation from plane strain to shear is observed. In general, in
incremental forming, maximum fracture strain is achieved when the material follows a uniaxial strain path [7]. Thus,
this strain path is desirable to achieve higher deformation.

4. Conclusion

An FEA simulation was created for flexible mandrel-free spinning. The numerical simulation was validated using
the experimental axial forces generated at the working roller and the stress distribution was examined in the sheet at
different stages of forming. The stress distribution in the case of flexible mandrel-free spinning, at the end of the
passes, is similar to that observed in the conventional spinning. However, there is a difference in stress distribution
during forming. There is a development of low tensile stress zone in-between the blending and working rollers. The
stresses generated at the edge are also different than in conventional spinning. The uneven stresses generated at the
edge of the sheet can cause early wrinkling failure in flexible mandrel-free spinning without support rollers, compared
to conventional spinning. The wrinkling failure mechanism for this process is similar to that observed in the
conventional spinning. The strain path followed by the elements at different positions range from plane strain to shear.
This preliminary work demonstrates the possibility to use an FE model to further understand this process. In
particular, the absence of a mandrel introduces distinct deformation mechanics, which need to be understood better to
optimize both the hardware configuration and the toolpath design on the machine. Another avenue of study is for non-
axisymmetric workpieces, which have only been studied experimentally on this process. As shown here, the FE model
can reveal pertinent metrics and trends, not readily available in an experimental setting.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge funding for this study through an Innovate UK project (FELDSPAR) and
earlier funding from Nissan Motor Co., Ltd., UK. The authors also appreciate the contribution of Iacopo M. Russo
through data and discussions.

References

[1] O. Music, J. M. Allwood and K. Kawai, A review of the mechanics of metal spinning, Journal of Material Processing Tech., 210 (2010), 3-23.
[2] O. Music and J. M. Allwood, Flexible asymmetric spinning, CIRP Ann., 60 (2011), 319–322.
[3] I. M. Russo and E. G. Loukaides, Toolpath generation for asymmetric mandrel-free spinning, Procedia Eng., 207 (2017), 1707–1712.
[4] B. Rentsch, N. Manopulo, and P. Hora, Numerical modelling, validation and analysis of multi-pass sheet metal spinning processes, Int. J.
Material Forming., 10 (2017), 641–651.
[5] L. Wang and H. Long, Investigation of material deformation in multi-pass conventional metal spinning, Material Design, 32 (2011), 2891–
2899.
[6] M. E. Tamer, O. Music, I. Ozdemir, B. Baranoglu, A. Sakin, and I. Durgun, Simulation for Incremental Sheet Forming Process : a Comparison
of Implicit and Explicit Finite Element Analysis with Experimental Data, in 7th International Conference and Exhibition on Design and
Production of Machines and Dies/Molds, Antalya, Turkey, 2013.
[7] K. Jawale, J. F. Duarte, A. Reis, and M. B. Silva, Characterizing fracture forming limit and shear fracture forming limit for sheet metals,
Journal of Material Processing Technology, 255 (2018), 886–897.