Comparing Different Sheet Metal Forming Processes for Reshaping Purposes

Abstract:

The reshaping approach is widely considered a virtuous strategy in line with the pillars of the Circular Economy. According to this approach, End-of-Life (EoL) components are subjected to a second forming process to achieve a new functional geometry. However, EoL parts often exhibit a non-uniform thickness distribution and work-hardened zones resulting from the primary manufacturing step, which makes the design of the reshaping step not trivial. Beyond the standard objectives like avoiding fracture and minimizing springback during the reshaping operations, one of the most concerning aspects is the complete removal of the geometrical features coming from the initial forming process. Flexibility and versatility of the forming process are unavoidable requirements to make the reshaping successful. Therefore, three different reshaping routes are numerically investigated in the present work: (i) reshaping by hydroforming (RH) at room temperature; (ii) reshaping by gas forming (RGF) at hot temperature; (iii) a hybrid approach, based on the combination of an intermediate deformation step via Single Point Incremental Forming followed by sheet hydroforming (RHA). The three routes share the same EoL, characterized by the presence of a deep-drawn square feature. Comparing the three routes, in terms of final shape and thinning distribution, with a reference case study (represented by the sole hydroforming process carried out on an undeformed flat blank) allowed to conclude that the feature removal and a non-severe thinning could not be achieved simultaneously: in fact, while RGF and RHA ensure a more evident suppression of the pre-existing feature, they simultaneously induce a more pronounced and localized thinning compared to the RH route.

• Periodical: Key Engineering Materials (Volume 1051)
• Pages: 135-146
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/p-4eKwco
• Online since: April 2026
• Authors: Antonio Piccininni*, Giuseppe Ingarao, Letizia Barcellona, Riccardo Puleo, Angela Cusanno, Fabrizio Micari, Gianfranco Palumbo
• Keywords: End Of Life (EoL) Vehicles, Gas Forming, Hydroforming, Reshaping, SPIF, Sustainability

References

[1] Cusano G. Best Available Techniques ( BAT ) Reference Document for Waste Incineration. 2019.

[2] Raabe D, Ponge D, Uggowitzer PJ, Roscher M, Paolantonio M, Liu C, et al. Making sustainable aluminum by recycling scrap: The science of "dirty" alloys. Prog Mater Sci 2022;128.

DOI: 10.1016/j.pmatsci.2022.100947

[3] Wan B, Chen W, Lu T, Liu F, Jiang Z, Mao M. Review of solid state recycling of aluminum chips. Resour Conserv Recycl 2017;125:37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec. 2017.06.004.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.06.004

[4] Duflou JR, Tekkaya AE, Haase M, Welo T, Vanmeensel K, Kellens K, et al. Environmental assessment of solid state recycling routes for aluminium alloys: Can solid state processes significantly reduce the environmental impact of aluminium recycling? CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 2015;64:37–40.

DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2015.04.051

[5] Takano H, Kitazawa K, Goto T. Incremental forming of nonuniform sheet metal: Possibility of cold recycling process of sheet metal waste. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 2008;48:477–82.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2007.10.009

[6] Sato H, Manabe K, Ito K, Wei D, Jiang Z. Development of servo-type micro-hydromechanical deep-drawing apparatus and micro deep-drawing experiments of circular cups. J Mater Process Technol 2015;224:233–9.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2015.05.014

[7] Bell C, Corney J, Zuelli N, Savings D. A state of the art review of hydroforming technology: Its applications, research areas, history, and future in manufacturing. International Journal of Material Forming 2020;13:789–828.

DOI: 10.1007/s12289-019-01507-1

[8] Lang LH, Wang ZR, Kang DC, Yuan SJ, Zhang SH, Danckert J, et al. Hydroforming highlights: sheet hydroforming and tube hydroforming. J Mater Process Technol 2004;151:165–77.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.04.032

[9] Parsa MH, Darbandi P. Experimental and numerical analyses of sheet hydroforming process for production of an automobile body part. J Mater Process Technol 2008;198:381–90. https://doi.org/.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.07.023

[10] Brosius A, Hermes M, Khalifa N Ben, Trompeter M, Tekkaya AE. Innovation by forming technology: motivation for research. International Journal of Material Forming 2009;2:29–38.

DOI: 10.1007/s12289-009-0656-9

[11] Duflou JR, Tekkaya AE, Haase M, Welo T, Vanmeensel K, Kellens K, et al. Environmental assessment of solid state recycling routes for aluminium alloys: Can solid state processes significantly reduce the environmental impact of aluminium recycling? CIRP Annals 2015;64:37–40. https://doi.org/.

DOI: 10.1016/j.cirp.2015.04.051

[12] Piccininni A, Cusanno A, Palumbo G, Zaheer O, Ingarao G, Fratini L. Reshaping End-of-Life components by sheet hydroforming: An experimental and numerical analysis. J Mater Process Technol 2022;306:117650.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2022.117650

[13] Ingarao G, Zaheer O, Campanella D, Fratini L. Re-forming end-of-life components through single point incremental forming. Manuf Lett 2020;24:132–5. https://doi.org/.

DOI: 10.1016/j.mfglet.2020.05.001

[14] Piccininni A, Fulco E, Cusanno A, Guglielmi P, Sorgente D, Palumbo G. Gas forming of a deep drawn component for reshaping purposes. Materials Research Proceedings 2025;54:2485–93.

DOI: 10.21741/9781644903599-268

[15] Domitner J, Silvayeh Z, Shafiee Sabet A, Öksüz KI, Pelcastre L, Hardell J. Characterization of wear and friction between tool steel and aluminum alloys in sheet forming at room temperature. J Manuf Process 2021;64:774–84.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.02.007

[16] Buffa G, Gucciardi M, Fratini L, Micari F. Multi-directional vs. mono-directional multi-step strategies for single point incremental forming of non-axisymmetric components. J Manuf Process 2020;55:22–30.

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmapro.2020.03.055