Analysis into Differences between the Buckling in Single-Point and Two-Point Incremental Sheet Forming of Components for Self-Supporting Sheet Metal Structures

Abstract

In the architecture and construction sector the trend for individualization is often expressed in complex-shaped freeform buildings. Due to missing universal and mature construction methods for freeform buildings, they are usually realized with customized solutions that often include massive, material-consuming substructures, while the visible skin has neither structural nor functional properties. In this context a new concept for self-supporting lightweight structures for the realization of free-form surfaces and the production of the corresponding components has recently been proposed. Taking into account the large part dimensions and the varying part geometries in this application a flexible production chain based on incremental sheet forming has been developed and optimized. It has been validated by producing six-sided large-scale pyramids in 140 similar variants which were assembled to a self-supporting free-form demonstrator. Two-point incremental sheet forming (TPIF) was used with a universal partial supporting tool with the goal to produce all variants without dedicated tooling. Although the majority of pyramids was produced successfully with the applied TPIF strategy, there was a small number of parts with a very asymmetric shape that showed severe buckling in the side walls. For a detailed analysis of this observation the asymmetry was quantified using a wall angle ratio. Subsequently, a single-point incremental sheet forming (SPIF) strategy was successfully applied as an approach to avoid buckling. The results confirm the assumption that the circumferential expansion in SPIF suppresses buckling due to tensile stresses in the side walls, whereas the circumferential compression in TPIF triggers buckling due to the compressive stresses in the side walls.