MID sem presentation 2018 -2019.pptx

1. BITS Pilani
Hyderabad Campus
MidSemester Presentation
Semester I(2018-19)
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Candidate Name : G. Praveen Kumar
ID No. : 2016PHXF0420H
Supervisor Name : Dr. K. Suresh
DAC members:
Dr. Pavan Kumar .P
Dr. Nitin .K

2. BITS Pilani
Hyderabad Campus
Experimental investigations and mathematical
modeling of incremental forming processes

3. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Contents
 Objectives of the Proposed Research
 Work done
 Analysis of Results
 Publications
1

4. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Objectivesoftheproposedresearch
2
1. Analysis of surface roughness in parts formed by incremental forming.
2. Experimental and theoretical studies on formability in incremental
forming.
3. Analysis of form accuracy, spring back and forming forces in
incremental forming process.
4. Experimental investigation in incremental hole flanging process.
5. Finite element (FE) simulations of incremental forming.

5. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Workdone
S.No Tool dia Step depth Wall angle
1 5 0.25 30
2 5 0.75 30
3 5 1.25 30
4 5 0.25 50
5 5 0.75 50
6 5 1.25 50
7 5 0.25 70
8 5 0.75 70
9 5 1.25 70
10 10 0.25 30
11 10 0.75 30
12 10 1.25 30
13 10 0.25 50
14 10 0.75 50
15 10 1.25 50
16 10 0.25 70
17 10 0.75 70
18 10 1.25 70
19 15 0.25 30
20 15 0.75 30
21 15 1.25 30
22 15 0.25 50
23 15 0.75 50
24 15 1.25 50
25 15 0.25 70
26 15 0.75 70
27 15 1.25 70
Input parameters
3
R1 R2 R3 Avg
1.41 1.92 1.28 1.54
2.41 2.44 2.36 2.40
3.22 3.2 3.24 3.22
1.18 1.19 1.15 1.17
3.63 3.48 3.67 3.59
3.16 3.59 3.41 3.39
0.89 0.7 0.89 0.83
3.43 2.85 3.37 3.22
2.61 2.61 2.21 2.48
1.92 1.92 1.22 1.69
2.23 2.11 2.37 2.24
1.47 1.7 1.6 1.59
0.99 0.92 0.71 0.88
1.62 1.99 2.44 2.02
2.02 2.36 2.08 2.15
0.73 0.65 0.60 0.67
1.51 1.69 1.79 1.66
1.48 1.61 1.33 1.47
1.06 1.21 1.19 1.15
0.96 1.23 1.18 1.12
1.30 0.81 1.10 1.07
0.62 0.73 0.73 0.70
0.67 0.58 0.52 0.60
1.69 1.53 1.35 1.52
0.64 0.64 0.87 0.72
2.14 2.36 2.45 2.32
0.99 1.04 1.17 1.07
Roughness values

6. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
 Digital image processing is a tool of machine vision technique which is used extract useful
information from physical objects.
 A digital image is a representation of a two-dimensional image as a finite set of digital
values, called picture elements or pixels.
 Improvement of pictorial information for human interpretation.
 Processing of image data for storage transmission and representation for autonomous
machine perception.
 Only one dimensional trace can be available by contact type surface profiler whereas a more
detailed two dimensional quality check is possible via area scan camera.
 Machine vision systems are comparatively low cost systems.
 Three dimensional quality check of surface finish can also be possible, accurately, by using
scanning type non-contact 3D surface profiler
Digitalimageprocessing–Surfacerougnness

7. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
 Euclidean distance method
 Hamming distance method
 GLCM (Gray level co-occurrence matrix )method
 Wavelet analysis
4
Digitalimageprocessing–Surfacerougnness

8. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
 The Euclidean distance is the distance between two points in Euclidean space.
For an n- dimensional space the Euclidean distance ( DE ) is calculated using below equation.
𝐷𝐸 𝑝, 𝑞 = 𝑝1 − 𝑞1
2 + 𝑝2 − 𝑞2
2 + ⋯ + 𝑝𝑖 − 𝑞𝑖
2 + ⋯ + 𝑝𝑛 − 𝑞𝑛
2
𝐷𝐸 𝑝, 𝑞 = 𝑖=1
𝑁
𝑝𝑖 − 𝑞𝑖
2
Where N is the dimension of the feature vector;
pi is the ith component of the feature vector and qi is the ith component of the template vector
5
Euclidean distance
𝑥1 − 𝑥2
2 + 𝑦1 − 𝑦2
2
Euclidean distance method

9. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
 The Hamming distance represents the distance between two items by number of mismatches
among their pairs of variables.
For Hamming distance (𝐷𝐻) calculated from below equation.
𝐷𝐻 𝑝, 𝑞 =
1
𝑁 𝑖=1
𝑁
𝑝𝑖 𝑞𝑖
Where N is the dimension of the feature vector;
pi is the ith component of the feature vector and qi is the ith component of the template vector
1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1
6
1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
A
B
Hamming distance =3
Hamming distance method

10. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Specimen
Captured image
Fig. 1 Stereo microscope capture the specimen
5 1.25 30 10 0.75 50
10 0.25 30 15 0.75 70
Fig. 2 Surface textures of parts formed in incremental forming at 10× magnification

11. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
10 0.25 30 10 0.75 50 15 0.25 50
5 0.25 50 5 1.25 30 15 0.75 70
Fig. 1 Surface textures of parts formed in incremental forming at 10× magnification
7

12. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Part formed in ISF
Image acquisition
Using stereo microscope
Image resizing
Histogram equalization
Conversion to gray image
Euclidean distance b/w
Reference and Test image
Reference
images
data base
Display Ra value
Fig 1.Process steps in Euclidean distance method
Process steps in Euclidean distance method

13. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Reference Images
Image (1)
256 x 256
Image (2)
Image (27)
Ra Values
Image 1 ---- 1.54
Image 2 ---- 2.40
Image 27 ---- 2.40
Image (a)
256 x 256
Test image
 A min value of Euclidean distance means a test image
matches closely with the reference image.
Ed1
Ed2
Ed3
Ed27
8
Gray image
Test image
Reference image
Calculation of Euclidean distance

14. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
S.No Tool dia Step depth Wall angle
Stylus method
Ra Range
Avg ® T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6
Euclidean method
Ra Range
1 5 0.25 30 1.28 to 1.92 1.54 1.54 ® 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 to 1.54
2 5 0.75 30 2.36to 2.41 2.40 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.24 0.72 2.4® 0.72 to 2.40
3 5 1.25 30 3.2 to 3.24 3.22 2.15 2.15 3.22 ® 3.22 2.15 2.15 2.15 to 3.22
4 5 0.25 50 1.15 to 1.19 1.17 1.17 ® 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17
5 5 0.75 50 3.48 to 3.69 3.59 3.59 3.59 3.59 ® 3.22 3.59 3.22 3.22 to 3.59
6 5 1.25 50 3.16 to 3.59 3.39 2.15 2.15 2.15 3.39 ® 3.39 3.39 2.15 to3.39
7 5 0.25 70 0.7 to 0.895 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 ® 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
8 5 0.75 70 2.85 to 3.47 3.22 3.22 ® 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22
9 5 1.25 70 2.21 to 2.61 2.48 2.48 ® 2.15 2.15 2.48 2.15 2.15 2.15 to 2.48
10 10 0.25 30 1.22 to 1.92 1.69 1.69 ® 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 to 169
11 10 0.75 30 2.11 to 2.37 2.24 1.52 2.24® 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 to 2.24
12 10 1.25 30 1.47 to 1.6 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 1.59 ® 1.59 1.59 1.59
13 10 0.25 50 0.71 to0.99 0.88 0.88 ® 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 0.88 to 1.17
14 10 0.75 50 1.62 to 2.24 2.02 2.02® 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 to2.02
15 10 1.25 50 2.02 to 2.36 2.15 2.15® 2.15 2.15 2.15 2.15 3.22 2.15 to 3.22
16 10 0.25 70 0.605 to 0.735 0.67 0.67 0.67 ® 0.67 0.67 0.67 0.72 0.67 to 0.72
17 10 0.75 70 1.51 to 1.79 1.66 1.66 0.83 1.66 1.66® 1.66 1.66 1.66
18 10 1.25 70 1.33 to 1.61 1.17 1.17 1.47 ® 1.47 1.17 1.47 1.17 1.17 to 1.47
19 15 0.25 30 1.06 to 1.21 1.15 1.15 1.15® 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.15 to 1.17
20 15 0.75 30 0.961 to 1.23 1.12 1.12® 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.12 to 1.52
21 15 1.25 30 0.811 to 1.3 1.07 1.07® 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.07 to 1.17
22 15 0.25 50 0.621 to 0.736 0.70 0.7 ® 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.7 to 0.83
23 15 0.75 50 0.529 to 0.679 0.60 0.6® 0.6 0.6 1.17 0.6 1.17 0.6 to 1.17
24 15 1.25 50 1.35 to 1.69 1.52 1.52® 3.39 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52 1.52
25 15 0.25 70 0.649 to0.874 0.72 0.72® 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72
26 15 0.75 70 2.14 to 2.45 2.32 1.66 1.66 2.32® 2.32 1.66 2.32 1.66 to 2.32
27 15 1.25 70 0.99 to 1.17 1.07 1.07 ® 2.15 1.07 2.15 2.15 2..15 1.07 to2.15
Results
9
Euclidean distance method

15. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1 2
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
3
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54

16. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1 2
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
3
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
1.28
1.92
1.15
1.54
3

17. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Euclidean
distance
No of experiments
Euclidean distance
2319.694
Test image : 5 0.25 50 2

18. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Reference Images
Image (1)
256 x 256
Image (2)
Image (27) 256 x 256
Ra Values
Image 1 ---- 1.54
Image 2 ---- 2.40
Image 27 ---- 2.40
Image (a)
256 x 256
Test image
 A min value of Hamming distance means a test image
matches closely with the reference image.
HD1
HD2
HD3
HD27
10
Binary image
Test image
Reference image
Calculation of Hamming distance

19. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Hamming distance method
Results
S.No Tool dia
Step
depth
Wall
angle
Range Avg ® T1 T2 T3 T4 T5 T6 Range
1 5 0.25 30 1.28 to 1.92 1.54 1.47 1.54® 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 1.47 to 1.54
2 5 0.75 30 2.36to 2.41 2.40 2.4® 2.02 2.4 2.02 2.4 2.02 2.02 to 2.40
3 5 1.25 30 3.2 to 3.24 3.22 3.22 ® 3.22 2.02 2.02 3.22 3.22 2.02 to 3.22
4 5 0.25 50 1.15 to 1.19 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17
5 5 0.75 50 3.48 to 3.69 3.59 1.66 3.59® 3.59 3.59 3.59 1.66 1.66 to 3.59
6 5 1.25 50 3.16 to 3.59 3.39 1.52 1.52 3.39 1.52 3.39 ® 3.39 1.52 to 3.39
7 5 0.25 70 0.7 to 0.895 0.83 0.83 0.83® 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83 0.83
8 5 0.75 70 2.85 to 3.47 3.22 3.22 3.22 ® 0.83 3.22 3.22 3.22 3.22
9 5 1.25 70 2.21 to 2.61 2.48 2.48 ® 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 to 2.48
10 10 0.25 30 1.22 to 1.92 1.69 0.83 0.83 0.83 1.69 ® 0.83 0.83 0.83 to 1.69
11 10 0.75 30 2.11 to 2.37 2.24 1.66 2.24 1.66 ® 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 to2.24
12 10 1.25 30 1.47 to 1.6 1.59 1.59 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.59 ® 1.59 to1.66
13 10 0.25 50 0.714 to0.994 0.88 0.88 ® 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 to 0.88
14 10 0.75 50 1.62 to 2.24 2.02 2.02 ® 2.02 2.02 2.02 2.02 0.72 2.02
15 10 1.25 50 2.02 to 2.36 2.15 2.15 ® 2.15 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 to 2.15
16 10 0.25 70 0.605 to 0.735 0.67 0.67® 0.67 2.02 2.02 0.67 2.02 0.67 to 2.02
17 10 0.75 70 1.51 to 1.79 1.66 1.66 ® 1.66 1.66 1.66 0.6 1.66 1.66
18 10 1.25 70 1.33 to 1.61 1.47 1.47 1.17 1.17 1.47 1.17 1.47® 1.17 to 1.47
19 15 0.25 30 1.06 to 1.21 1.15 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.15® 1.17 1.15 1.15 to 1.17
20 15 0.75 30 0.961 to 1.23 1.12 1.12 ® 1.12 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.66 1.12 to 1.66
21 15 1.25 30 0.811 to 1.3 1.07 1.07® 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.17 1.07 to 1.17
22 15 0.25 50 0.621 to 0.736 0.70 0.60 0.7® 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 to 0.7
23 15 0.75 50 0.529 to 0.679 0.60 0.6® 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6
24 15 1.25 50 1.35 to 1.69 1.52 1.52 1.66 1.66 1.52 ® 1.66 1.66 1.52 to1.66
25 15 0.25 70 0.649 to0.874 0.72 0.72® 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72 0.72
26 15 0.75 70 2.14 to 2.45 2.32 1.66 2.32® 2.32 1.66 2.32 1.66 1.66 to 2.32
27 15 1.25 70 0.996 to 1.17 1.07 0.83 1.07 0.83 1.07 1.07 1.07 0.83 to 1.07

20. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
S.No Tool dia Step depth Wall angle
Stylus method
Ra value Range
Euclidean distance method
Ra value range
Hamming distance method
Ra value range
1 5 0.25 30 1.28 to 1.92 1.15 to 1.54 1.47 to 1.54
2 5 0.75 30 2.36to 2.41 0.72 to 2.40 2.02 to 2.40
3 5 1.25 30 3.2 to 3.24 2.15 to 3.22 2.02 to 3.22
4 5 0.25 50 1.15 to 1.19 1.17 1.17
5 5 0.75 50 3.48 to 3.69 3.22 to 3.59 1.66 to 3.59
6 5 1.25 50 3.16 to 3.59 2.15 to3.39 1.52 to 3.39
7 5 0.25 70 0.7 to 0.895 0.83 0.83
8 5 0.75 70 2.85 to 3.47 3.22 3.22
9 5 1.25 70 2.21 to 2.61 2.15 to 2.48 0.7 to 2.48
10 10 0.25 30 1.22 to 1.92 1.17 to 169 0.83 to 1.69
11 10 0.75 30 2.11 to 2.37 1.52 to 2.24 1.66 to2.24
12 10 1.25 30 1.47 to 1.6 1.59 1.59 to1.66
13 10 0.25 50 0.71 to0.99 0.88 to 1.17 0.6 to 0.88
14 10 0.75 50 1.62 to 2.24 1.17 to2.02 2.02
15 10 1.25 50 2.02 to 2.36 2.15 to 3.22 1.17 to 2.15
16 10 0.25 70 0.60 to 0.73 0.67 to 0.72 0.67 to 2.02
17 10 0.75 70 1.51 to 1.79 1.66 1.66
18 10 1.25 70 1.33 to 1.61 1.17 to 1.47 1.17 to 1.47
19 15 0.25 30 1.06 to 1.21 1.15 to 1.17 1.15 to 1.17
20 15 0.75 30 0.96 to 1.23 1.12 to 1.52 1.12 to 1.66
21 15 1.25 30 0.81 to 1.3 1.07 to 1.17 1.07 to 1.17
22 15 0.25 50 0.62 to 0.73 0.7 to 0.83 0.6 to 0.7
23 15 0.75 50 0.52 to 0.67 0.6 to 1.17 0.6
24 15 1.25 50 1.35 to 1.69 1.52 1.52 to1.66
25 15 0.25 70 0.64 to0.87 0.72 0.72
26 15 0.75 70 2.14 to 2.45 1.66 to 2.32 1.66 to 2.32
27 15 1.25 70 0.99 to 1.17 1.07 to2.15 0.83 to 1.07
Comparative Ra value range between Stylusmethod , Eucliden and Hamming distance method

21. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus

22. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
Summaryofwork
11

23. BITS Pilani, Hyderabad Campus
International Conference:
1. “Experimental studies on incremental hole flanging of steel sheets”, 20th Edition
of International Conference On Advances in materials and processing
technologies, 11 - 14 December 2017. VIT University – Chennai, India.
(Accepted)
2. “Analysis of formability in incremental forming processes”, 7th international
conference on materials processing and characterization 2017, GRIET, March
17-19 2017, Hyderabad, Telangana, India. (Published in Materials Today:
Proceedings,Elsevier)
Publications
12

24. BITS Pilani
Hyderabad Campus
THANKYOU