International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ijhmt

A new approach for analyzing the temperature rise and heat partition at
the interface of coated tool tip-sheet incremental forming systems
Xin Zhang a, Tao He a, Hirotaka Miwa b, Toshikazu Nanbu b, Ryou Murakami b, Shuangbiao Liu c,
Jian Cao a, Q. Jane Wang a,⇑
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA
b
Advanced Materials Laboratory, Nissan Research Center, Japan
c
Caterpillar Inc, Peoria, IL 61630, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper reports a semi-analytical model for studying general and critical heat-transfer characteristics
Received 16 May 2018 at the interface between a coated sheet and a moving coated tool tip in incremental forming considering
Received in revised form 10 October 2018 heat partition. Both of the tool tip and the sheet can be treated as a coating-substrate material system.
Accepted 10 October 2018
The frequency response functions (FRFs) for temperature rise in each material system are analytically
Available online 18 October 2018
derived, in which the tool-tip velocity is incorporated by means of the Galilean transform. The FRFs
are then converted into influence coefficients (ICs) in the frequency domain for solution efficiency and
Keywords:
convenience. Fast numerical techniques are applied, such as the conjugate gradient method (CGM) for
Thermal analysis
Incremental forming
searching the distributed tool-tip/sheet heat partition and the fast Fourier transform (FFT) for obtaining
Coating temperature solutions. The proposed model is implemented to analyze the combined influences of Péclet
Heat partition number, coating thicknesses of the tool tip and the sheet, sheet thickness, and heat conductivity of each
Sensitivity analysis material on the temperature rise and the heat partition at the interface, and the sensitivity of the depen-
dence of the peak temperature on these system parameters.
Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction capable of thermal segregation and temperature mating in the tool

The tool tip-sheet interface in incremental forming involves
either a dry or lubricated contact, and rapid tool-tip motion, in
which the sheet is stretched, friction is produced, and heat is gen-
erated and dissipated. Although a large plastic deformation is
involved, friction is believed to be the major heat source in the tool
tip-sheet interaction that leads to high temperature arises at the
interface. Excessively high temperature rise affects the perfor-
mance and durability of the tool tip, as well as the quality of the
thin sheet thus formed [1–4]. A large amount of research has been
conducted to explore sheet formability and accuracy in the appear-
ance of frictional heat and to study the temperature effects on
incremental forming of polymers [5,6] or alloys [7–9]. Many mod-
eling and experimental works have been conducted to support the
designs of tool-tip path and motion [10–13], coatings of tool tips
and sheets [14,15], and tool-tip surface profiles [16,17], and to
study surface roughness [18] and lubrication [15] problems in
sheet-metal forming. It is believed that the tool-tip/sheet coatings
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: qwang@northwestern.edu (Q.J. Wang).
tip-sheet interaction are of a huge impact on mitigating
temperature-induced problems in sheet-metal forming.
Technical design and selection of tool-tip/sheet coatings for
high-quality incremental forming require deep understanding of
the heat-transfer performance of the working materials of the tool
tip and sheet in conjunction with their coatings. Recently, several
researches were conducted to understand the interfacial tempera-
ture in forming processes, among which are the theoretical model
by Giuseppina et al. [8] for predicting the temperature in uncoated
tool tip-sheet interaction, the heat-transfer model by Min et al. [19]
for calculating the temperature rise in the sheet in electricity-
assisted incremental forming, the analytical method concerning
regional Joule heating by Magnus [20,21] for calculating the tem-
perature rise in the forming zone. However, these works were pri-
marily focused on an uncoated tool tip-sheet system, and used
simplified treatments of the practically three-dimensional heat-
transfer problems. Considering the fact that the forming compo-
nents, which are the sheet and the tool tip, are usually coated, a
coated tool tip-sheet system should be a natural choice for a com-
prehensive temperature modeling of the forming components. In
order to understand the heat-transfer characteristics of the coated

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheatmasstransfer.2018.10.056
0017-9310/Ó 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183 1173

Nomenclature

acgm step length in CGM dimensionless heat flux towards the sheet, Q t ¼ Q t =q0
Q s , Q sheet
a0 characteristic contact radius, m dimensionless heat flux towards the tool tip, Q s ¼ Q s =q0
Q t , Q tool


Ai , A unknowns in potential functions t time, s
i
ci specific heat capacity in the coating and substrate, T ð1Þ temperature rise in the coating, K
J=ðkg  KÞ T ð2Þ temperature rise in the substrate, K
~
~ ðiÞ
C continuous Fourier transforms of influence coefficients T s0 ; T t0dimensionless surface temperatures of the sheet and
^
^ ðiÞ
C discrete Fourier transforms of influence coefficients tool tip, T t0 ¼ T t0 kt2 =ða0 q0 Þ, T s0 ¼ T s0 kt2 =ða0 q0 Þ
C s0 , C t0 ICs for the surface temperatures of the sheet and tool tip Ts; Tt dimensionless temperatures of the sheet and tool tip,
dcgm descent direction in CGM T t ¼ T t kt2 =ða0 q0 Þ, T s ¼ T s kt2 =ða0 q0 Þ
Fs shape function

T; dimensionless peak temperature
g temperature difference in CGM V velocity of the tool tip, m/s
~
~ ðiÞ
G frequency response functions V0 characteristic velocity, V 0 =1m/s
h1 thickness of the coating, m x; y; X; Y cartesian coordinates in the spatial domain
h2 thickness of the substrate, m zs1 , zs2 cartesian coordinates in the sheet’s coating and sheet
hs1 dimensionless thickness of the sheet’s coating, zt1 , zt2 cartesian coordinates in the tool-tip’s coating and tool

hs1 ¼ hs1 =a0 tip

hs2 dimensionless thickness of the sheet, hs2 ¼ hs2 =a0
ht1 dimensionless thickness of the tool-tip’s coating, Greek letters

ht1 ¼ ht1 =a0 a distance of a node, (m, n), to the origin of the frequency
Hp heat partition coefficient domain
k1 heat conductivity of the coating, W=mK bi thermal diffusivity of the coating and substrate,
k2 heat conductivity of the substrate, W=mK bi ¼ ki =ci qi , m2 =s
kt1 heat conductivity of the tool-tip’s coating, W=mK bt1 thermal diffusivity of the tool-tip’s coating, m2 =s
kt2 heat conductivity of the tool tip, W=mK bt2 thermal diffusivity of the tool tip, m2 =s
ks1 heat conductivity of the sheet’s coating, W=mK bs1 thermal diffusivity of the sheet’s coating, m2 =s
ks2 heat conductivity of the sheet, W=mK bs2 thermal diffusivity of the sheet, m2 =s pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
m, n Fourier-transformed variables with respect to x, y direc- xi variables in the frequency domain, xi ¼ a2  imV=bi
tions l friction coefficient
M, N mesh numbers along the X, Y directions qi mass density of the coating and substrate, kg=m3
Me, Ne refined mesh numbers C contact zone
p pressure distribution, Pa Dx, Dy grid size in the X and Y directions, m
p0 maximum contact pressure, Pa
Pe Péclet number, Pe ¼ Va0 =ðbt2 Þ
Special marks
q0 characteristic heat source, W=m2 AL level of the aliasing control
Q generalized surface flux, W=m2 IFFT inverse fast Fourier transform
Q total dimensionless heat generation due to the friction,  double continuous Fourier transform
Q total ¼ Q total =q0 ^^ double discrete Fourier transform

tool tip-sheet system, dependences of the temperature rise and
heat partition on various system parameters (e.g. coating thickness,
sheet thickness, thermal properties of the sheet and tool tip, as well
as their coatings, tool-tip motion, and tool-tip velocity), should be
deeply explored, and several important issues should be addressed:
such as (a) what are the general heat-transfer characteristics of a
coated tool tip-sheet system? (b) How does the tool-tip velocity
affect the temperature rise and heat partition? (c) What are the
general roles of coatings in thermal resistant or conduction? To this
end, a comprehensive heat-transfer model, accompanied by a set of
efficient solution methods, for coated tool-tip and sheet systems is
highly demanded.
A number of researches have devoted to the study of heat con-
duction in layered, or coated materials in general. Several exam-
ples are the analytical solutions by Dülk and Kovácsházy [22] for
the steady-state heat conduction in multilayered materials under
a stationary heat source, the semi-analytical solutions by Zhang
et al. [23] for three-dimensional temperature distributions in a
multilayered half-space in the presence of a moving heat source,
the numerical model by Haji-Sheikh and Beck [24] for the temper-
ature distributions in two layered bodies under a moving heat
source, analytical solutions by Ma and Chang [25] for heat conduc-
tion in multi-layered materials with a prescribed temperature on
the surfaces, the numerical model by Johansson and Lesnic [26]
for the transient heat conduction in a coated material system influ-
enced by a transient heat source, the surface analysis by Ling et al.
[27] for a layered half-plane subjected to a stationary heat source,
and the recursive image method by Dias [28,29] for transient heat
diffusion in a multilayered medium. However, little attention has
been paid to heat partition between two contact bodies, although
many investigations were conducted on the coated or uncoated
half-space [30–33]. Moreover, the coated sheet in incremental
forming were usually treated as a coated thin-layer system, in
which the heat-transfer analysis and heat partition are largely
missing due to the complexity in obtaining exact analytical
solutions.
In the past twenty years, various semi-analytical models [34–
39], built upon core fundamental solutions and supported by such
fast numerical techniques as the conjugate gradient method (CGM)
and the fast Fourier transform (FFT), have been successfully intro-
duced to the studies of three-dimensional contact problems
involving layered material [35,40,41]. This methodology can be
extended to analyze the heat transfer and temperature problems
at the tool tip-sheet interface of incremental forming. The core fun-
damental solutions to temperature rises in a coating-substrate sys-
tem should be firstly derived pertaining to a moving surface heat
source, with incorporation of the Galilean transform. Then the
method for heat partition by Chen and Wang [30] is employed.
1174 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183
The proposed model is verified by comparing the solutions to spe-
cial cases with those from a coated half-space model.
2. Formulation
2.1. Problem description
The interface of the tool tip and sheet is formed by two coated
media under the influences of friction and the motion of the tool
tip if the effect of plasticity on heat transfer is ignored. Fig. 1(a)
describes such a problem, where the tool tip is moving at a con-
stant velocity V along the x direction. The rigid sphere of radius
R represents any forming tool whose tip geometry can be modeled
by its local radius of curvature. Both the tool tip and sheet are
coated, where the coating of thickness hs1 is perfectly bonded to
the sheet of thickness hs2 , while the coating of thickness ht1 per-
fectly bonding to the tool-tip material is treated as a half space.
The origins of the zs1 , zs2 , zt1 , and zt2 axes in the coatings and sub-
strate are located at their top surfaces.
In the presence of friction, heat would be generated in the con-
tact interface between the tool tip and sheet surfaces, as shown in
Fig. 1(b). The heat generation would be distributed in the contact
P P P 2.2. Boundary conditions and basic equations
zone, C, which can be denoted by C Q total ¼ C Q t þ C Q s , where
Q t is for the heat flux towards the tool tip, and Q s for that towards
the sheet. Considering the nature of tool tip sliding on sheet, heat
input Q s can be described as a moving heat source, with velocity V,
acting on the sheet surface in contact zone C, while Q t should be
treated as a stationary heat source acting on the tool-tip surface
in region C. It is reasonable to focus on the steady-state behavior
of such a system, at which the heat conduction process in the
tool-tip and sheet system should reach a state of thermal equilib-
rium. Therefore, as shown in Fig. 1(b) and (c), the heat-transfer
states from the coordinate system ðx; y; zÞ to ðX; Y; ZÞ can be
Fig. 1. Heat transfer at the tool tip-sheet interface: (a) a tool tip moving on a thin sheet with constant velocity V along the x direction; (b) heat generated in the interface
between the tool tip and sheet surfaces and its partition, note that the sheet is subjected to a moving heat source; (c) problem generalized to a coating-substrate system under
a moving surface flux, Q .
connected by the Galilean transform, to be described later. Besides,
the surface heat fluxes, Q total , Q t and Q s , are considered to be inde-
pendent of time.
In the current problem, the contact bodies locally have shallow
curvatures, meaning that the size of contact zone C is much smal-
ler than the radius R of the tool tip. Therefore, the effect of the sur-
face heat flux on the temperature rise in the spherical body can be
approximately treated by that on a half space. Thus, the heat-
transfer problem becomes that shown in Fig. 1(c), the conduction
of heat in a coated medium subjected to a portion of the interfacial
frictional heating, and the material system is either that of the tool
tip with a half-space substrate, or that of the sheet with a finite-
depth substrate; and the formulation for the temperature issue
due to surface flux Q on this coating-substrate system should be
derived first, in which body 1 is for the coating of thickness h1
and body 2 for the substrate of thickness h2 . With labeling the vari-
ables for the coating and substrate by i ¼ 1; 2, respectively, the
derivation in the following section yields the analytical solutions
for the coated sheet if making Q ! Q s , h1 ! hs1 , and h2 ! hs2 . On
the other hand, letting Q ! Q t , h1 ! ht1 , h2 ! 1, and V ¼ 0 results
in the solutions to the temperature in the tool tip.
As shown in Fig. 1(c), the moving heat source is described by a
heat flux distribution, Q ðx; yÞ, on region C of the coating top surface
with uniform initial temperature. While out of region C, an adia-
batic boundary condition is applied for simplicity. Hence, the
boundary conditions at the upper surface of the coating can be
written as,

@T ð1Þ Q ðx; yÞ; ðx; yÞ 2 C;
k1 j ¼ ð1Þ
@z1 z1 ¼0 0; ðx; yÞ R C;
 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183 1175

where k1 is the heat conductivity of the coating; T ð1Þ denotes the Applying the Fourier transform to Eqs. (1)(4) and substituting
temperature rise in the coating surface. Likewise, the sheet bottom Eq. (11) into the results lead to the boundary conditions in the
surface is also treated as adiabatic, which is Fourier transform domain,
 ~~
@T ð2Þ 
1 ¼ Q
A1  A =x1 k1 : ð12Þ
k2  ¼ 0; ð2Þ
@z2 
z2 ¼h2

2 ex2 h2 ¼ 0;
A2 ex2 h2  A ð13Þ
where k2 is the heat conductivity of the substrate (the sheet or the
tool-tip material); T ð2Þ denotes the temperature rise in the
1 ex1 h1  A2  A
A1 ex1 h1 þ A
2 ¼ 0; ð14Þ
substrate.
Because the lower surface of the coating is perfectly bonded to x1 k1 A1 ex1 h1  x1 k1 A
1 ex1 h1  x2 k2 A2 þ x2 k2 A
2 ¼ 0; ð15Þ
the upper surface of the substrate, the temperature and heat flux at
their interface should be continuous, which results in the Solving the set of Eqs. (12)(15) results in the following,
following, ~~
  A1 ¼ r 2 Q =½x1 k1 ðr 1 þ r 2 Þ;
ð1Þ  ð2Þ 
1 ¼ r 1 A1 =r 2 ;
T  ¼T  ; ð3Þ A
z1 ¼h1 z2 ¼0

1 =ð2x2 k2 Þ;
A2 ¼ ½ðx1 k1 þ x2 k2 Þex1 h1 A1 þ ðx2 k2  x1 k1 Þex1 h1 A
 
ð1Þ  ð2Þ 
2 ¼ e 1 1 A1 þ e 1 1 A
 x x
1  A2 ;
@T  @T  A h h
k1  ¼ k2  : ð4Þ
@z1  @z2  ð16Þ
z1 ¼h1 z2 ¼0

For a temperature function, T ðiÞ , of coordinate variables ðx; y; zÞ where the constants are listed below,
and time variable t, the heat conduction equations can be written r 1 ¼ e2x1 h1 þ ðx1 k1 þ x2 k2 Þe2x1 h1 ðe2x2 h2 þ 1Þ=ð2x2 k2 Þ;
as follows, with i ¼ 1 for the coating and i ¼ 2 for the substrate, ð17Þ
! r 2 ¼ 1 þ ðx2 k2  x1 k1 Þðe2x2 h2 þ 1Þ=ð2x2 k2 Þ:
ðiÞ 2 ðiÞ 2 ðiÞ 2 ðiÞ
@T @ T @ T @ T
1 ; A

2 g back into
 bi þ þ ¼ 0; ði ¼ 1; 2Þ; ð5Þ Accordingly, substituting coefficients fA1 ; A2 ; A
@t @x2 @y2 @z2i
Eq. (11) establishes the Fourier transformed solutions for the cor-
responding temperature distributions in the coating and sheet.
where bi ¼ ki =ci qi is the thermal diffusivity with ci for specific heat
capacity, and qi for mass density.
The following Galilean transform is introduced to connect coor- 2.3. Frequency response functions and influence coefficients
dinated systems ðx; y; zi Þ and ðX; Y; Z i Þ [42],
The frequency response functions (FRFs) can be described as the
X ¼ x  V  t; Y ¼ y; Z i ¼ zi ; ð6Þ responses to unit point heat source. Thus the components of FRFs
~
~ ¼ 1 in Eq. (11), which is
with are analytically obtained by letting Q
~
~ ðiÞ with i ¼ 1 for the coating, i ¼ 2 for the substrate.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ denoted by G
¼ ; ¼ ; ¼ ; ¼ V ; ði ¼ 1; 2Þ: ð7Þ ~
~
@X @x @Y @y @Z i @zi @t @X ðiÞ
Once G is obtained, the continuous Fourier transforms of influ-
ence coefficients (ICs) can be solved by multiplying the FRFs and
Substituting Eq. (6), together with Eq. (7), into Eq. (5) leads to the
the Fourier transformed shape functions [35],
following,
~~ ðiÞ ~~ ðiÞ ~~
@ 2 T ðiÞ @ 2 T ðiÞ @ 2 T ðiÞ V @T ðiÞ C ¼ G  Fs; ð18Þ
þ þ ¼  ; ði ¼ 1; 2Þ ð8Þ
@X 2
@Y 2
@Z 2i bi @X where Fs is the shape function given as follows

As suggested in [37,43], it is convenient to approach the solu- 1; jXj 6 DX =2 and jYj 6 DY =2;
F s ðX; YÞ ¼
tions of heat conduction equation (8) for coated materials in the 0; others;
frequency domain. Hence, the following direct double Fourier
ð19Þ
~ 4 sinðmDX =2Þ sinðnDY =2Þ
transform and its inverse are introduced, F~s ðm; nÞ ¼ :
mn
Z 1 Z 1
~~ Then the discrete Fourier transforms of ICs in the frequency
f ðm; n; ZÞ ¼ f ðX; Y; ZÞeiðmXþnYÞ dXdY;
Z 1 Z 1
ð9Þ domain can be further calculated from the continuous ICs with
1 1
1 ~~ the following aliasing treatments [23,37],
f ðX; Y; ZÞ ¼ f ðm; n; ZÞeiðmXþnYÞ dmdn;
4p 1 1
2
 
1 X
r X ¼AL rX
~~ ðiÞ 2p 2p 2p 2p
Y ¼AL
^^ ðiÞ
where hat ‘‘” represents the double Fourier transform; m and n C ¼ C l rX ; j rY ;
DX DY r ¼ALr ¼AL M e DX DX Ne DY DY ð20Þ
denote the transform variables with respect to X and Y directions, X Y

but in the frequency domain. ðM e =2 < l 6 M e =2; Ne =2 < j 6 Ne =2Þ;
Applying Fourier transforms to Eq. (8) yields the following,
where DX and DY are the mesh sizes along the X and Y directions,
~  
@ 2 T~ ðiÞ V ~~ ðiÞ respectively; AL represents the level of the aliasing control, which
 a2  im T ¼ 0; ði ¼ 1; 2Þ; ð10Þ is 2 in the present work; Me ¼ 2c M and Ne ¼ 2c N denote the refine-
@Z 2i bi
^ ðiÞ
^
ment mesh numbers of the original mesh numbers M and N; C is
whose solutions can be expressed as, the ICs in the form of the discrete Fourier transform.
~
i exi Zi ; Furthermore, if a heat flux of Q is known, one can perform zero
T~ ðiÞ ¼ Ai exi Zi þ A ði ¼ 1; 2Þ; ð11Þ ^
padding and fast Fourier transform of it and obtain Q^ . Then, apply-
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
where a ¼ m2 þ n2 ; xi ¼ a2  imV=bi . Ai ðm; nÞ and A
i ðm; nÞ are ing the discrete convolution-fast Fourier transform (DC-FFT) algo-
four unknowns to be determined from boundary conditions (1)–(4). rithm, the temperature within region C can be obtained by
1176 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183

means of the corresponding components of ICs [35,44] with IFFT (1) Initial parameters are known inputs, including the mesh
being the inverse fast Fourier transform: size, geometric dimension, material properties, and total
heat flux distribution.
^^ ðiÞ ^^ (2) The ICs for temperatures of the coated tool tip, C t0 , and the
T ðiÞ ¼ IFFTðC  Q Þ: ð21Þ
coated sheet, C s0 , should be prepared in advance.
(3) The initial heat flux distribution towards the tool tip is set by
Q t ¼ 0:5Q total . Note that the heat fluxes Q t , Q s , and Q total are
2.4. Numerical modeling
matrixes, each element represents the amount of heat flux at
each grid point.
As mentioned before, the solutions for a coated sheet can be
^ ^
^ s0  Q
^ total Þ is calculated by
obtained by setting Q ! Q s , h1 ! hs1 , and h2 ! hs2 in the equations (4) Surface temperature T 1 ¼ IFFTðC
derived in the previous section, and those for a coated tool tip by applying the DC- FFT algorithm described in [35,44].
letting Q ! Q t , h1 ! ht1 , h2 ! 1, and V ¼ 0. The key issue is to (5) Then the CGM is employed to determine heat flux Q t , in
determine the exact amounts of heat fluxes to the sheet and tool which, (i) Q 0t is set to equal Q t ; (ii) the surface temperature
tip at each location. Following the idea proposed by Chen and ^
^ s0 þ C ^ ^
^ s0 Þ  Q
^ t  is calculated by applying the DC-
T 2 ¼ IFFT½ðC
Wang [30], a deterministic numerical process is introduced to FFT algorithm; (iii) the gap, known as the temperature dif-
determine the partition of heat source to the sheet and tool tip. ference, is calculated by g ¼ T 2  T 1 ; (iv) Heat flux Q t is
In view of Eq. (21), T s0 and T t0 , the surface temperatures within updated based on the descent direction, dcgm , and step length
region C of the sheet and tool tip, can be expressed as, acgm , by Q t ¼ Q 0t þ acgm  dcgm ; and (v) the iteration is tested in
steps i)-iv) until the required convergence condition
^^ ^^ P
T s0 ¼ IFFTðC s0  Q s Þ; 0 0 5
ð22Þ C ½ðQ t  Q t Þ=Q t  < 1  10 is satisfied.
^^ ^^ (6) Once heat flux Q t is determined, the heat partition coeffi-
T t0 ¼ IFFTðC t0  Q t Þ; P P
cient can be calculated by Hp ¼ C Q t = C Q s .
(7) By applying the DC-FFT algorithm, the surface temperature
where C s0 and C t0 represent the ICs for the surface temperatures of
distributions in the tool tip and sheet are obtained through
the sheet and tool tip. Based on the continuity postulation that
^
^ ^
^ ^
^ ^
^
T s0 ¼ T t0 at their contact interface, Eq. (22) can be rearranged as a T t0 ¼ IFFTðC t0  Q t Þ and T s0 ¼ IFFTðC s0  Q s Þ, where 0 means
set of linear equations with Q t being the unknown, z ¼ 0 on the surface. Furthermore, the sub-surface tempera-
tures of the tool tip and sheet can be calculated by
^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^
IFFTðC s0 þ C t0 Þ  Q t ¼ IFFTðC s0  Q total Þ; ð23Þ T t ¼ IFFTðC t  Q t Þ and T s ¼ IFFTðC s  Q s Þ. At this point, the cal-
culations for the temperature distributions and heat parti-
The heat flux distribution, Q t ðx; yÞ, in Eq. (23) can be solved by
tion are completed.
the conjugate gradient method (CGM). Then the temperature dis-
tributions in the sheet and tool tip can be evaluated based on the
heat flux distributions Q t ðx; yÞ and Q s ðx; yÞ ¼ Q total ðx; yÞ  Q t ðx; yÞ. 3. Results and discussion
P P
Hence, heat partition coefficient, defined as Hp ¼ C Q t = C Q s ,
can be readily obtained. Fig. 2 shows the numerical process for The heat partition and temperature distributions in the sheet
heat flux determination and temperature calculation, in which, and the moving tool tip, described in Fig. 1, with the tool tip mov-

Fig. 2. Flow diagram for calculating the temperature rise in and heat partition to the tool tip and the sheet.
 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183
ing at constant velocity V along the x direction, are solved based on
the efficient solution approach described in the previous section.
Dimensionless parameters are employed in the simulation with
a0 for the characteristic contact radius in the motion direction,
variables with ⁄ are for the dimensional parameters, in which:
  
(1) for thickness, hs1 ¼ hs1 =a0 , hs2 ¼ hs2 =a0 , and ht1 ¼ ht1 =a0 ; (2)
  
for heat flux, Q total ¼ Q total =q0 , Q t ¼ Q t =q0 , and Q s ¼ Q s =q0 with q0
for a characteristic heat source; (3) for temperature,
T t ¼ T t kt2 =ða0 q0 Þ, and T s ¼ T s kt2 =ða0 q0 Þ with kt2 for the heat con-
ductivity of the tool tip. The Péclet number, Pe ¼ Va0 =ðbt2 Þ, is intro-
duced to describe the velocity effects in the context of surface
interaction. A fixed computational domain of
6a0  6a0  ðhs1 þ hs2 Þa0 with 128  128  100 grids in the X, Y
and Z directions was used for the sheet, while that of
6a0  6a0  2ht1 a0 with same grids was employed for the tool tip.
The total heat flux distribution, Q total , is for the frictional heat
generated in the contact interface between the tool tip and sheet,
which satisfies Q total ¼ lp  V with l for friction coefficient, p for
pressure distribution, and V for velocity. For the purpose of general
understanding of heat partition and temperature rise, the follow-
ing numerical calculation will use a Hertzian pressure distribution,
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pðX; YÞ ¼ p0 1  ðX 2 þ Y 2 Þ=a20 with p0 for the maximum contact
pressure, on a circle region of a unity radius though for simplicity.
Therefore, total heat flux distribution can be expressed as
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Q total ¼ q0 V  1  ðX 2 þ Y 2 Þ=a20 =V 0 , where q0 ¼ lp0 V 0 with
V 0 ¼ 1m=s. Furthermore, the tool tip-sheet contact in incremental
forming may involve a longer contact area in a certain direction.
Although the circular-contact heat transfer cases can reasonably
well show the interfacial (surface) temperature characteristics
and the trend of temperature variations, an elliptical contact case
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
with pressure distribution pðX; YÞ ¼ p0 1  ð0:25X 2 þ 4Y 2 Þ=a20 ,
under which the contact domain is longer in the motion direction,
was also analyzed as a general case of such tool tip-sheet
interactions.
3.1. Model verification
The model presented in the previous section is verified through
the comparison of its solutions from the degenerated formulation
by letting h2 ! 1 in Fig. 1(c) with the corresponding results from
Zhang et al. [23], for the problem of a half-space with a single coat-
ing subjected to a unit heat flux on a circular region with a unit
radius. Four Péclet numbers, Pe ¼ 0; 0:5; 1:0; 1:5, and four coating
Fig. 3. Verification of the present method with the solutions by Zhang et al. [23], for the problem of a half-space with a single coating subjected to a unit heat flux on a circular
region of a unit radius: (a) for different Péclet numbers, Pe; (b) for different coating thicknesses, h1 .
1177
thicknesses, h1 ¼ 0:1; 0:5; 1:0; 5:0, are selected for the comparison.
Fig. 3 (a) shows the surface temperature distributions, T, with
respect to Pe, while (b) plots the surface temperature distributions
for different coating thickness h1 . Clearly, both surface temperature
distributions well agree with each other.
3.2. Effects of Péclet number on thermal characteristics
The work reported in this section solves the problems of a mov-
ing coated tool tip on a coated sheet subjected to different Péclet
numbers, Pe, along the x direction. The sheet thickness is
hs2 ¼ 1:0, and coatings on the sheet and the tool tip have the same
thickness, hs1 ¼ ht1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of the sheet is the
same as that of the tool-tip substrate material, ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and the
heat conductivities of their coatings are also the same, which are
10% of those of their substrates, ks1 ¼ kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 . Fig. 4 shows
the surface temperatures, T 0 , of the tool tip and sheet, which are
the same at their contact interface, while they have different values
outside the contact region. Considering the same temperature rises
of the sheet and tool tip in the contact region, only the surface tem-
peratures of the tool tip are plotted in the following sections.
Accordingly, the heat partition and surface temperature rise in
the tool tip are different for the material system with different
Péclet numbers ðPe ¼ 0:5; 1:5; 5:0; 8:0Þ, which are shown in Fig. 5.
In general, the maximum temperature value, T t0 , in the tool-tip
surface increases with increasing Péclet number Pe. On the other
hand, a larger Péclet number Pe leads to a smaller heat partition
coefficient, Hp . Usually, a stationary body should draw a small
amount of heat; however, the tool-tip material system in the pre-
sent coated tool tip-sheet system transfers more heat if Pe is small,
due to its large depth that allows more heat flow. Generally, the
temperature rises are subjected to the combined effects of coating
and sheet thicknesses, and their heat conductivities, which will be
discussed below.
3.3. Effects of tool-tip coating thickness on thermal characteristics
This section analyzes the temperature rise at the tool-tip sur-
face and heat partition for tool tips coated by a low-conductivity
layer with coating thickness ht1 ¼ 0:05; 0:08; 0:1; 0:15; and 0:2,
subjected to Péclet number Pe ¼ 1:5. The sheet thickness is
hs2 ¼ 1:0, with its coating thickness is hs1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conduc-
tivity of the sheet is the same as that of the tool-tip substrate mate-
rial, ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and the heat conductivities of their coating are
also the same, which are 10% of that of their substrates,
1178 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183
Fig. 4. Surface temperature rise T 0 of the tool tip and sheet subjected to Pe ¼ 0:5.
The sheet thickness is hs2 ¼ 1:0, and the sheet and tool tip have the same coating
thickness hs1 ¼ ht1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of the sheet is the same as that of
the tool-tip substrate material, ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and the heat conductivities of their
coatings are also the same, which are 10% of that of their substrates,
ks1 ¼ kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 .
ks1 ¼ kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 . Fig. 6shows the results for different tool-tip coat-
ing thickness ht1 , where (a) and (b) plot the temperature rise T t0 of
the tool-tip surface and the heat partition coefficient Hp , respec-
tively. Clearly, increasing tool-tip coating thickness ht1 results in
a higher temperature rise T t0 , but smaller heat partition coefficient,
because the thicker low-conductivity coatings demote heat pene-
tration and that on the tool-tip side weakens the sink effect of
the deep tool-tip substrate. Fig. 7 plots the numerical results for
kt1 =kt2 ¼ 10:0, while the other parameters are the same as those
shown in Fig. 6. As expected, increasing tool-tip coating thickness
ht1 leads to a lower surface temperature rise T t0 , but a larger heat
partition coefficient, which are opposite to the tendencies viewed
in Fig. 6, because the thicker high-conductivity coatings promote
heat penetration and the coating on the tool-tip side strengthen
the sink effect of the deep tool-tip substrate.
3.4. Effect of the thermal conductivity of tool-tip coating on
temperature distribution
In this group of studies, the sheet still has a low-conductivity
coating, while the conductivity of the tool-tip coating varies from
Fig. 5. Influence of Péclet number Pe for coatings of lower heat conductivities. (a) Tool-tip surface temperature rises; (b) heat partition coefficient. The sheet thickness is
hs2 ¼ 1:0, and the sheet and tool tip have the same coating thickness hs1 ¼ ht1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of the sheet is the same as that of the tool-tip substrate material,
ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and the heat conductivities of their coating are also the same, which are 10% of that of their substrates, ks1 ¼ kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 .
low to high, kt1 ¼ 0:05kt2 ; 0:1kt2 ; 1:0kt2 ; 5:0kt2 ; and 10:0kt2 , at the
Péclet number of Pe ¼ 1:5. The sheet thickness is hs2 ¼ 1:0 with
its coating thickness hs1 ¼ 0:1, while the thickness of the tool-tip
coating is also ht1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of the sheet is the
same as that of the tool-tip substrate, ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and that of its
coating is kept at ks1 ¼ 0:1ks2 . Fig. 8(a) and (b) shows the numerical
results for tool-tip surface temperature rises and the heat partition
coefficient, respectively. It is clear that a higher tool-tip coating
heat conductivity kt1 causes a smaller temperature rise T t0 but a
larger heat partition coefficient because more heat is drawn to
the tool-tip surface and quickly dissipated laterally. Fig. 9 plots
the contours of the temperature T t in the tool tip in the x-z section
for different kt1 , where the dashed line represents the interface
between the substrate and its coating. The maximum temperature
always appears at the surface. Generally, as kt1 increases, the max-
imum values of the tool-tip temperature T t become smaller, and
the temperature in the coating becomes more uniform.
3.5. Dependence of temperature rise on system parameters
In the above sections, numerical results have been pursued to
reveal the effects of Péclet number, tool-tip coating thickness and
heat conductivity on temperature rise. In fact, there are totally
eight independent system parameters that would influence the
temperature rise, including Péclet number Pe, thickness of the
sheet coating hs1 , thickness of the sheet hs2 , thickness of the tool-
tip coating ht1 , heat conductivity of the sheet coating ks1 , heat con-
ductivity of the sheet ks2 , heat conductivity of the tool-tip coating
kt1 , and heat conductivity of the tool-tip substrate kt2 . It is impor-
tant to evaluate the combined effects and dependence of tempera-
ture rise on those system parameters. The dimensionless
sensitivity, calculated with the step length of 0.01f0, Eq. (24), is
widely used in researches [39,41,45,46]; it is employed here to
study the dependence of the peak temperature rise on those sys-
tem parameters.
 
T
f ¼1:01f 0  T
f ¼0:99f 0
Sðf Þ ¼  ð24Þ
0:02T
 0 f ¼f
where f is one of the eight system parameters with f0 being its ref-
erence value; T
is the maximum temperature in the tool tip-sheet
contact interface, which should appear at the surfaces of the sheet
and tool tip at the same location.
Sensitivity studies were conducted for tool tips with lower and
higher conductivity coatings working on a sheet with a lower-
 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183 1179

Fig. 6. Influence of tool-tip coating thickness ht1 under the Péclet number Pe ¼ 1:5 for coatings of lower conductivities. (a) Tool-tip surface temperature rises; (b) Heat
partition coefficient. The sheet thickness is hs2 ¼ 1:0 with its coating thickness hs1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of the sheet is the same as that of the tool-tip substrate
material, ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and the heat conductivities of their coating are also the same, which are 10% of that of their substrates, ks1 ¼ kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 .

Fig. 7. Influence of tool-tip coating thickness ht1 under the Péclet number Pe ¼ 1:5 for coating of higher conductivities. (a) Tool-tip surface temperature rises; (b) Heat
partition coefficient. The sheet thickness is hs2 ¼ 1:0 with its coating thickness hs1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of the sheet is the same as that of the tool-tip substrate
material, ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and that of its coating is ks1 ¼ 0:1ks2 , while the heat conductivity of the tool-tip coating is kt1 ¼ 10:0kt2 .

Fig. 8. Influence of heat conductivity of the tool-tip coating kt1 under the Péclet number Pe ¼ 1:5: (a) Tool-tip surface temperature rises; (b) Heat partition coefficient. The
sheet thickness is hs2 ¼ 1:0, and the sheet and tool tip have the same coating thickness hs1 ¼ ht1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of the sheet is the same as that of the tool-tip
substrate, ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and that of its coating is ks1 ¼ 0:1ks2 .
1180 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183

Fig. 9. Contours of temperature T t in the tool tip in the x-z section under the influence of different kt1 : (a) kt1 ¼ 0:05kt2 ; (b) kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 ; (c) kt1 ¼ 0:5kt2 ; (d) kt1 ¼ 1:0kt2 ; (e)
kt1 ¼ 5:0kt2 ; (f) kt1 ¼ 10:0kt2 . The dashed lines represent the interfaces between the substrate and the coating.

conductivity coating. Fig. 10(a) plots the sensitivity of peak tem-
perature T
to the eight independent parameters for the tool tip
with a lower conductivity coating, kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 , while Fig. 10(b)
shows for the tool tip with a higher conductivity coating,
kt1 ¼ 10:0kt2 . The other reference values f0 are set to Pe ¼ 1:5,
hs1 ¼ 0:1, hs2 ¼ 1:0, ht1 ¼ 0:1, ks1 ¼ 0:1kt2 , ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 . The peak
temperature T
shows obvious dependences on those eight param-
eters. For both of the two tool-tip conductivity cases, Péclet num-
ber Pe, and thickness of the low-conductivity sheet coating hs1
promote the increase in T,
while the thickness of the sheet hs2 ,
the sheet coating heat conductivity ks1 , the sheet substrate heat
conductivity ks2 , the tool-tip coating heat conductivity kt1 , and
the tool-tip substrate heat conductivity kt2 tend to confine the peak

The thickness of the tool-tip coating ht1 promotes
temperature T.
the increase in T
for the case of lower conductivity coating
kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 , while it tends to reduce T
for the case of higher con-
ductivity coating kt1 ¼ 10:0kt2 . The above observations are summa-
rized below, which are in accordance with the presented results
given in Sections 3.2–3.4 and the physical nature of the problem
shown in Fig. 1.
(a) For a larger Péclet number Pe, the peak temperature rise
becomes higher. Naturally, for a moving body (i.e. the sheet),
there are three competing contributions from Péclet number
Pe toward T:
(i) the amount of heat generated in the contact
interface, which is promoted by increasing Pe, as shown in
the previous equation, Q total ¼ lp  V; (ii) the heat transmit-
ted to the sheet, which is enhanced by increasing Pe, as
reported in Fig. 5(b); and, (iii) the amount of heat penetrated
into the tool tip, which is reduced by increasing Pe, as stated
in Fig. 3(a). The combined effects of those three factors result
in a positive contribution to T.
Namely, (i) and (ii) offer pos-
itive influences but (iii) has a negative effect. For a stationary
heat source (i.e. the tool tip), only (i) promotes the increase


in T.
(b) Coating thicknesses hs1 and ht1 cause the increase in peak
temperature T
if the heat conductivity of the tool-tip coating
is lower than that of the built material of the tool tip because
it retards heat penetration. The opposite is true if the heat
conductivity of the tool-tip coating is higher than that of
the substrate.
 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183
Fig. 10. Sensitivity of peak temperature T
to the eight independent parameters for the tool tips with (a) a lower conductivity coating kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 ; (b) a higher conductivity
coating kt1 ¼ 10:0kt2 . The other reference values are Pe ¼ 1:5, hs1 ¼ 0:1, hs2 ¼ 1:0, ht1 ¼ 0:1, ks1 ¼ 0:1kt2 , ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 .
(c) All the heat conductivities of ks1 , ks2 , kt1 and kt2 cause T
to
reduce, which are in accordance with the physical nature
of heat conduction [23].
3.6. Effects of pressure distributions
Considering the nature of the elliptical contact domain in a
forming process, a selected elliptical pressure distribution,
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
pðX; YÞ ¼ p0 1  ð0:25X 2 þ 4Y 2 Þ=a20 is also employed to explicitly
reveal the effects of pressure distributions on the contact interfa-
cial heat transfer. Fig. 11 plots the surface temperature rise of
the tool tip for the circular and elliptical pressure distributions
for the problem of Péclet number Pe ¼ 1:5. The insets display the
contours of the surface-plane temperature distributions. The sheet
thickness is hs2 ¼ 1:0, and the coatings of the sheet and the tool tip
have the same thickness hs1 ¼ ht1 ¼ 0:1. The heat conductivity of
Fig. 11. Temperature rise at the tool-tip surface due to circular and elliptical
pressure distributions. The insets display the contours of the surface-plane
temperature distributions. Péclet number Pe ¼ 1:5, sheet thickness hs2 ¼ 1:0. The
sheet and tool tip have the same coating thickness hs1 ¼ ht1 ¼ 0:1. The heat
conductivity of the sheet is the same as that of the tool-tip substrate material,
ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and the heat conductivities of their coating are also the same, which are
10% of that of their substrates, ks1 ¼ kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 .
1181
the sheet is the same as that of the tool-tip substrate material,
ks2 ¼ 1:0kt2 , and the heat conductivities of their coating are also
the same, which are 10% of that of their substrates,
ks1 ¼ kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 . In general, the maximum temperature T t0 due
to the circular pressure distribution is higher than that due to
the elliptical pressure distribution, although both cases involve
the same heat input. For the case of the elliptical pressure distribu-
tion, the temperature distribution along the X direction (the
motion direction, the major radius direction) spreads more widely
than that along the Y direction (the miner radius direction). The
other behaviors are similar to those observed from the cases due
to the circular pressure distributions.
4. Conclusions
A semi-analytical model for studying the general interfacial
thermal characteristics of a coated tool tip-sheet system has been
developed based on (1) a set of new analytical frequency response
functions (FRFs) and their conversion into frequency-domain influ-
ence coefficients (ICs) for a coating-substrate system subjected to a
moving surface heat source, together with the incorporation of the
motion velocity by the Galilean transform, and (2) fast numerical
techniques, such as the conjugate gradient method (CGM) for cal-
culating the heat partition, and the fast Fourier transform (FFT) for
efficient numerical solutions to the surface and subsurface temper-
ature distributions. The combined influences of Péclet number,
sheet thickness, coating thicknesses of the tool tip and the sheet,
conductivities of the coating and the substrate materials on the
temperature rise and heat partition coefficient have been studied,
and the numerical results lead to the following.
(1) The maximum temperature rise always appear in the sur-
faces, or at the interface of the tool tip and the sheet; it
increases with increasing Péclet number. On the other hand,
a larger Péclet number leads to a smaller heat partition coef-
P P
ficient ( Q tool = Q sheet ).
(2) For kt1 =kt2 < 1, increasing tool-tip coating thickness results
in a higher surface temperature rise, but smaller the heat
partition coefficient. The opposites are true for the cases
with kt1 =kt2 > 1.
(3) Increasing tool-tip coating heat conductivity kt1 is an effec-
tive means to control the interfacial temperature rise.
1182 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183
(4) The sensitivity analyses of influences of the eight system
parameters on the peak temperature for the cases of the
sheets with a lower thermal conductivity coating show that
the Péclet number and the thickness of the sheet coating pro-
mote the increase in peak temperature T,
while the thickness
of the sheet, the sheet coating heat conductivity, the sheet
substrate conductivity, the tool-tip coating heat conductiv-
ity, and the tool-tip substrate heat conductivity tend to con-
fine the peak temperature T.
The thickness of the tool-tip
coating promotes the increase in T
for the case of lower con-
ductivity coating kt1 ¼ 0:1kt2 , while it tends to reduce T
for
case of higher conductivity coating kt1 ¼ 10:0kt2 .
(5) The surface peak temperature T
due to a circular pressure
distribution is higher than that due to an elliptical pressure
distribution if the total heats are the same. For the case of
the elliptical pressure distribution, the temperature distribu-
tion along the X direction, if it is the motion direction and
the major radius direction, spreads more widely when com-
pared with that along the Y direction (the miner radius
direction).
Above all, the numerical results in this paper have addressed
the key issues mentioned in the introduction, which are (a) the
general thermal characteristics of coated tool tip-sheet system in
terms of temperature rise and heat partition are all much depen-
dent on the system parameters such as the Péclet number, the
thicknesses and conductivities of the coatings of the sheet and tool
tip, as stated in conclusion (4); (b) Increasing velocity (due to
Pe ¼ Vl0 =ðb0 Þ) promotes a higher temperature rise, but a smaller
P P
heat partition to the tool tip ( Q tool = Q sheet ), as stated in conclu-
sion (1); (c) The temperature rise and heat partition coefficient are
much dependent on the coating thickness and its conductivity, as
stated in conclusions (2) and (3).
Conflict of interest
The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest to
this work. We declare that we do not have any commercial or asso-
ciative interest that represents a conflict of interest in connection
with the work submitted.
Acknowledgment
The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to Nis-
san Motors, Japan, for research support.
References
[1] L. Wang, M. Strangwood, D. Balint, J. Lin, T. Dean, Formability and failure
mechanisms of AA2024 under hot forming conditions, Mater. Sci. Eng., A 528
(2011) 2648–2656.
[2] M. Albakri, F. Abu-Farha, M. Khraisheh, A new combined experimental–
numerical approach to evaluate formability of rate dependent materials, Int. J.
Mech. Sci. 66 (2013) 55–66.
[3] R. Hmida, S. Thibaud, A. Gilbin, F. Richard, Influence of the initial grain size in
single point incremental forming process for thin sheets metal and microparts:
experimental investigations, Mater. Des. 45 (2013) 155–165.
[4] T. Kim, D. Yang, Improvement of formability for the incremental sheet metal
forming process, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 42 (2000) 1271–1286.
[5] I. Bagudanch, M. Garcia-Romeu, G. Centeno, A. Elías-Zúñiga, J. Ciurana,
Forming force and temperature effects on single point incremental forming
of polyvinylchloride, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 219 (2015) 221–229.
[6] I. Bagudanch, M. Vives-Mestres, M. Sabater, M. Garcia-Romeu, Polymer
incremental sheet forming process: temperature analysis using response
surface methodology, Mater. Manuf. Processes 32 (2017) 44–53.
[7] M. Durante, A. Formisano, A. Langella, F. Minutolo, The influence of tool
rotation on an incremental forming process, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 209
(2009) 4621–4626.
[8] A. Giuseppina, C. Claudio, F. Luigino, G. Francesco, Theoretical model for
temperature prediction in Incremental Sheet Forming-Experimental
validation, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 108 (2016) 39–48.
[9] A. Bhattacharya, K. Maneesh, N. Reddy, J. Cao, Formability and surface finish
studies in single point incremental forming, J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 133 (2011)
061020.
[10] J. Jeswiet, F. Micari, G. Hirt, A. Bramley, J. Duflou, J. Allwood, Asymmetric single
point incremental forming of sheet metal, CIRP Ann.-Manuf. Technol. 54
(2005) 88–114.
[11] M. Rauch, J. Hascoet, J. Hamann, Y. Plenel, Tool path programming
optimization for incremental sheet forming applications, Comput. Aid. Des.
41 (2009) 877–885.
[12] B. Lu, Y. Fang, D. Xu, J. Chen, H. Ou, N. Moser, J. Cao, Mechanism investigation
of friction-related effects in single point incremental forming using a
developed oblique roller-ball tool, Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf 85 (2014) 14–29.
[13] R. Malhotra, A. Bhattacharya, A. Kumar, N. Reddy, J. Cao, A new methodology
for multi-pass single point incremental forming with mixed toolpaths, CIRP
Ann.-Manuf. Technol. 60 (2011) 323–326.
[14] J. Duflou, B. Callebaut, J. Verbert, H. De Baerdemaeker, Laser assisted
incremental forming: formability and accuracy improvement, CIRP Ann.-
Manuf. Technol. 56 (2007) 273–276.
[15] G. Hussain, L. Gao, N. Hayat, Z. Cui, Y. Pang, N. Dar, Tool and lubrication for
negative incremental forming of a commercially pure titanium sheet, J. Mater.
Process. Technol. 203 (2008) 193–201.
[16] M. Shim, J. Park, The formability of aluminum sheet in incremental forming, J.
Mater. Process. Technol. 113 (2001) 654–658.
[17] Y. Kim, J. Park, Effect of process parameters on formability in incremental
forming of sheet metal, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 130 (2002) 42–46.
[18] S. Kurra, N. Rahman, S. Regalla, A. Gupta, Modeling and optimization of surface
roughness in single point incremental forming process, J. Mater. Res. Technol.
4 (2015) 304–313.
[19] J. Min, P. Seim, D. Störkle, L. Thyssen, B. Kuhlenkötter, Thermal modeling in
electricity assisted incremental sheet forming, Int. J. Mater. Form. 10 (2017)
729–739.
[20] C. Magnus, Joule heating of the forming zone in incremental sheet metal
forming: Part 2, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 89 (2017) 295–309.
[21] C. Magnus, Joule heating of the forming zone in incremental sheet metal
forming: Part 1, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 91 (2017) 1309–1319.
[22] I. Dülk, T. Kovácsházy, Steady-state heat conduction in multilayer bodies: an
analytical solution and simplification of the eigenvalue problem, Int. J. Heat
Mass Transf. 67 (2013) 784–797.
[23] H. Zhang, W. Wang, S. Zhang, Z. Zhao, Semi-analytic solution of three-
dimensional temperature distribution in multilayered materials based on
explicit frequency response functions, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 118 (2018)
208–222.
[24] A. Haji-Sheikh, J. Beck, Temperature solution in multi-dimensional multi-layer
bodies, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 45 (2002) 1865–1877.
[25] C. Ma, S. Chang, Analytical exact solutions of heat conduction problems for
anisotropic multi-layered media, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 47 (2004) 1643–
1655.
[26] B. Johansson, D. Lesnic, A method of fundamental solutions for transient heat
conduction in layered materials, Eng. Anal. Boundary Elem. 33 (2009) 1362–
1367.
[27] F. Ling, W. Lai, D. Lucca, Fundamentals of Surface Mechanics: with
Applications, Springer Science & Business Media, 2012.
[28] C. Dias, A method of recursive images extended to solve diffusion in multilayer
materials under convective boundary conditions, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 85
(2015) 1069–1074.
[29] C. Dias, Transient heat diffusion in multilayered materials with thermal
contact resistance, Int. J. Heat Mass Transf. 97 (2016) 1001–1009.
[30] W. Chen, Q. Wang, Thermomechanical analysis of elastoplastic bodies in a
sliding spherical contact and the effects of sliding speed, heat partition, and
thermal softening, J. Tribol. 130 (2008) 041402.
[31] A. Clarke, K. Sharif, H. Evans, R. Snidle, Heat partition in rolling/sliding
elastohydrodynamic contacts, J. Tribol. 128 (2006) 67–78.
[32] M. Rashid, A. Seireg, Heat partition and transient temperature distribution in
layered concentrated contacts. Part I—Theoretical model, J. Tribol. 109 (1987)
487–495.
[33] W. Chen, Q. Wang, W. Kim, Transient thermomechanical analysis of sliding
electrical contacts of elastoplastic bodies, thermal softening, and melting
inception, J. Tribol. 131 (2009) 021406.
[34] S. Liu, Q. Wang, G. Liu, A versatile method of discrete convolution and FFT (DC-
FFT) for contact analyses, Wear 243 (2000) 101–111.
[35] S. Liu, Q. Wang, Studying contact stress fields caused by surface tractions with
a discrete convolution and fast Fourier transform algorithm, J. Tribol. 124
(2002) 36–45.
[36] I. Polonsky, L. Keer, A numerical method for solving rough contact problems
based on the multi-level multi-summation and conjugate gradient techniques,
Wear 231 (1999) 206–219.
[37] Z. Wang, C. Yu, Q. Wang, An efficient method for solving three-dimensional
fretting contact problems involving multilayered or functionally graded
materials, Int. J. Solids Struct. 66 (2015) 46–61.
[38] X. Zhang, H. Shen, J. Liu, S. Deng, X. Li, Z. Cai, M. Zhu, An efficient numerical
model for predicting the torsional fretting wear considering real rough surface,
Wear 344 (2015) 32–45.
 X. Zhang et al. / International Journal of Heat and Mass Transfer 129 (2019) 1172–1183
[39] X. Zhang, Z. Wang, H. Shen, Q. Wang, An efficient model for the frictional
contact between two multiferroic bodies, Int. J. Solids Struct. 130 (2018) 133–
152.
[40] Z. Wang, W. Wang, H. Wang, D. Zhu, Y. Hu, Partial slip contact analysis on
three-dimensional elastic layered half space, J. Tribol. 132 (2010) 021403.
[41] X. Zhang, Z. Wang, H. Shen, Q. Wang, Frictional contact involving a multiferroic
thin film subjected to surface magnetoelectroelastic effects, Int. J. Mech. Sci.
131 (2017) 633–648.
[42] Y. Zhou, K. Lee, Contact problem for magneto-electro-elastic half-plane
materials indented by a moving punch Part I: Closed-form solutions, Int. J.
Solids Struct. 49 (2012) 3853–3865.
1183
[43] C. Yu, Z. Wang, Q. Wang, Analytical frequency response functions for contact of
multilayered materials, Mech. Mater. 76 (2014) 102–120.
[44] S. Liu, D. Hua, W. Chen, Q. Wang, Tribological modeling: application of fast
Fourier transform, Tribol. Int. 40 (2007) 1284–1293.
[45] A. Makagon, M. Kachanov, S. Kalinin, E. Karapetian, Indentation of spherical
and conical punches into piezoelectric half-space with frictional sliding:
applications to scanning probe microscopy, Phys. Rev. B 76 (2007) 064115.
[46] A. Makagon, M. Kachanov, E. Karapetian, S. Kalinin, Piezoelectric indentation of
a flat circular punch accompanied by frictional sliding and applications to
scanning probe microscopy, Int. J. Eng. Sci. 47 (2009) 221–239.