468623

Deep Drawing of Round Cups Using
Variable Blank Holder Pressure

By: Arjan L. P. Coremans, Visiting Student
Eindhoven University of Technology,
The Netherlands
Rep. nr. WPA 1369
DEEP DRAWING OF ROUND CUPS
USING VARIABLE BLANK HOLDER PRESSURE
A Thesis
by
Arjan L. P. Coremans, Visiting Student
NSF Engineering Research Center for
Net Shape Manufacturing
The Ohio State University
1971 Neil Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43210
June 1992
Acknowledgments
Looking back, at the end of my stay at the ERC/NSM, I can truly say that it has
been a very exiting, as well as, a very instructive period in my engineering
education. I should like to thank everybody I have been cooperating with especially
Dr. Taylan Altan, and Mustafa Ahmetoglu M.S for their support and worthwhile
advises throughout this project.
I also wish to express my thanks to Prof. Ir. J.A.G. Kals, who gave me the freedom
to pun,ue an engineering education in which I could also learn about different
cultures. Furthermore I like to thank him for the support the gave me in all my
endeavors and the time he took to share with me his own experiences and opinions.
Lastly I like to thank my family for the love and support they gave me.
-ii-
FOREWORD
This document has been prepared for the Engineering Research Center for Net
Shape Manufacturing (ERC/NSM). This Center was established on May I, 1986 and
is funded by the National Science Foundation and the member companies. The focus
of the Center is net shape manufacturing with emphasis on cost-effective
manufacturing of discrete parts. The research concentrates on manufacturing from
engineering materials to finish or near-finish dimensions via processes that use dies
and molds. In addition to conducting industrially relevant engineering research, the
Center has the objective to a) establish close cooperation between industry and the
university, b) train students, and c) transfer the research results to interested
companies
This report "Deep Drawing of Round Cups Using Variable Blank Holder Pressure"
was prepared by Arjan Coremans from Eindhoven University of Technology and
Mustafa Ahmetoglu from the ISE department at The Ohio State University. The
!.eport is part of Arian Coremans' graduation the!is at his home university and it will /
also be a part of Mustafa Ahmetoglu's Ph.D. thesis.
Information about the ERC for Net Shape Manufacturing can be obtained from the
office of the Director, Taylan Altan, located at the Baker Systems Engineering
Building, 1971 Neil Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 43210-1271, Phone 614/292-9267
-111-
Executive summary
The objective of this study was the investigation of the effect of variable blank holder
pressure on deep drawing of round cups. This promising method of improving cup
characteristics has recently been subject to intensified investigation at many research
institutes all over the world. At the ERC for Net Shape Manufacturing also a project
was set up to investigate the possibilities of this method, starting with the
installation of the 160 Tons Minster Hydraulic press in early 1991 capable of varying
the blank holding force with the stroke. This press was partially donated by the
Minster machine company, Minster, Ohio. For this press a die set was designed by
the ERe. This die set was manufactured by Superior Tool and Die, Co, Columbus
Ohio, and partially donated to the ERC/NSM. The tooling was equipped with 4
loadcells capable of monitoring the punch load as well as the blank holder force and
blank holder force distribution. These loadcells and additional signal processing
system was donated by Helm Instruments, Toledo, Ohio.
At the ERC a partly in-house developed FDM program was available capable of
simulating the axisymmetric forming processes with variable blank holding forces.
Test series using five different materials have been carried out. Firstly the test
results were used to verify the FDM program. Both strain and load predictions were
verified as well as failure criteria. After this the FDM program was modified so that
it was capable of predicting blank holding force variations based on several criteria.
Tests were carried out to verify these predictions and some promising advantages of
varying the blank holding force during the stamping operation could be
experimentally determined.
-iv-
Table of Contents
Title i
Acknowledgments ii
FOREWORD iii
Executive summary iv
Table of Contents v
List of Figures viii
List of Tables xx
Conversion Factors xxiii
I Introduction 1
II Technology of deep drawing processes 6
2.1 Introduction to deep drawing 6
2.2 Material properties and their influence on formability 9
2.2.1 The influence of the n value on the drawability 9
2.2.2 The influence of the Kvalue on the deep drawability 10
2.2.3 The influence of the r value on the deep drawability 11
2.3 Fracture in a deep drawing operation 17
2.4 The formation of wrinkles 19
2.5 The limiting drawing ratio, (LDR) 22
2.6 Restraining forces to increase LDR and failure limit 25
III Deep Drawing Equipment: Press Specifications, Die Design, and
Instrumentation 31
3.1 The Minster press specifications 31
3.2 Die Design 34
3.2.1 Selection of Design Parameters 35
3.2.2 Tool Design 38
3.2.3 Operation Sequence 47
3.3 Instrumentation 51
3.3.1 Load and stroke measurements 51
-v-
3.3.1.1 Hydraulic Pressure Transducers 51
3.3.1.2 Measurement of the Slide Position 51
3.3.1.3 Loadcells 53
3.3.2 Data acquisition 58
3.3.2.1 Helm Trend LoadGard System 58
3.3.2.2 Data Acquisition System 58
IV Accuracy of the Machine and Tooling Setup 63
4.1 Blank Holder Force Measurements 63
4.1.1 Data processing accuracy 65
4.1.2 Dimensional irregularities 66
4.1.3 Determination of the most accurate loadcell and tooling
configuration 74
4.1.3.1 Orientation of Upper and Lower Cushion Rings
with Respect to Each Other 77
4.1.3.2 Orientation of The Cushion Rings with Respect to
The Press Frame 79
4.2 Hydraulic Press Control System Accuracy 89
4.2.1 Die cushion force input and output values 89
4.2.2 Velocity profiles 96
V Material Properties and Process Parameters 113
5.1 Materials 113
5.2 Strain Measurements 114
5.3 Lubrication 115
VI Analysis of the Deep Drawing Process 117
6.1 Description of the analysis program, SHEET_FORM 117
6.2 Prediction of stresses, strains, and punch force 118
6.3 Failure evaluation 120
6.4 Optimization of the Blank Holder Force (BHF) 121
6.4.1 Punch Force Control Method 121
6.4.2 Radial Stress Control Method 124
6.4.3 Thickness Strain Control Method 130
-Vl-
VII Results of Experiments and Computer Simulations 141
7.1 Deep Drawing Experiments and Comparison with Simulation
Results 141
7.2 Fracture predictions, using constant BHF 186
7.3 Wrinkling 203
7.4 Increasing the limiting Drawing Ratio Using Variable BHF 212
VIII Conclusions and Future Work 224
8.1 Conciusions 224
8.2 Future Work 225
References 227
-vii-
List of Figures
Figure-l.l
Deep drawing operation, (Eary, 1974).2
Figure-l.2
Schematic illustration of the effect of blankholder force (BHF) upon achievable
part depth, (Duncan, 1986).2
Figure-l.3
Drawing a cylinder cup using blankholder, (Ahmetoglu, 1990).4
Figure-l.4
Drawing a hemisphere with drawbead, (ASM, 1988).4
Figure-2.1
Schematic views of some axisymmetric deep drawing processes, (Ramaekers,
1988).7
Figure-2.2
Examples of deep drawn products, (SMG, 1990). 8
Figure-2.3 .
The influence of different r values in a tensile test. The thick lines indicate the
original shape of the specimen, the dashed lines indicate the intermediate shape
of the specimen. 12
Figure-2.4
Schematic diagram of the state of stress during deep drawing. Thin lines indicate
elements before deformation, thick lines indicate element after deformation,
(Lange, 1985). 14
Figure-2.5
The yield surfaces for plane stress (sz =0), for 4 different anisotropy values,
(Lange, 1985). 14
Figure-2.6
Variation of strain ratio, r, with direction in low-carbon steel, and the effect of
average strain ratio, rm, on drawability of cylindrical cups. Each cup
represents the maximum height that can be drawn from a material with the
indicated r
m
value, (ASM, 1985) 16
Figure-2.7
Sequential flow of metal shows the progressive stages of cupping, (TMEH,1984).
18
Figure-2.8
-viii-
Typical grid pattern(a) undeformed and (b) deformed, and elongation equation,
(TMEH, 1984).20
Figure-2.9
Forming limit diagram for aluminum-killed steel. Critical strain band separates
failure from non failure conditions, (ASM 1988). 21
Figure-2.10
A schematic view of the deep drawing process with a blankholder, (Siegert,
1991).23
Figure-2.11
Principle of counter pressure deep drawing method assisted by radial fluid
pressure, (Nakamura, 1987).26
Figure-2.12
Punch force and blank holding forces (measured at three different loadcells)
measured in deep drawing a high strength hot dipped galvanized steel from
304.8 mminitial blank diameter to 152.4 mm diameter cup without using
lubricant. 27
Figure-2.13
Drawing of a large shape with curved sides using draw beads, (Siegert, 1991).
29
Figure-2.14
Application of draw beads
(a) Possible orientation in test die set, (b) Drawing load and restraining force as a
function of draw bead size and orientation, (Lange, 1985).30
Figure-3.1
The 1-DPA-160-10 MINSTER/Tranemo hydraulic press, and overall dimensions
(L=110.2 inches, M=102.4 inches, N=153.5 inches) 33
Figure-3.2
Axisymmetric cup geometry. 36
Figure-3.3
Tool arrangement for deep drawing, (Lange, 1985).39
Figure-3.4
Assembly drawing of the die set for deep drawing of a round cup. 43
Figure-3.5
Orientation of the supporting cushion pins. 46
Figure-3.6
Open position of the tooling. 48
-ix-
Figure-3.7
Clamp position of tooling. 49
Figure-3.8
Formed position of tooling. 50
Figure-3.9
Dimensional drawing of string potentiometer used on Minster press slide,
(Celesco Transducer Products, Inc.). 55
Figure-3.10
200-Ton loadcell for measuring punch loads in deep drawing tooling on Minster
press, (Helm Instrument Co., Inc.) 56
Figure-3.11
40-Ton loadcell for measuring blankholder forces on deep drawing tooling on
Minster press, (Helm Instrument Co., Inc.) 57
Figure-3.12
Front panel of Helm Trend LoadGard system with numbered channels, (Helm
Instrument Co., Inc.) 59
Figure-3.13
Example data collection screen from Workbench data acquisition software,
(Strawberry Tree, Inc.) 62
Figure-4.1
Locations of blank holder loadcells. 64
Figure-4.2
Schematic drawing of the tooling of the Minster press for drawing axisymmeric
cups. The numbers indicate the position of errors. 67
Figure-4.3
Support of the die cushion by pins in an unloaded situation. 69
Figure-4.4
Improper loadcell positioning. 69
Figure-4.5
The geometrical errors in two groups. 71
Figure-4.6
Three configurations used to measure the die cushion force with corresponding
load maximum and minimum. 72
Figure-4.7
Loadcell position offset. 76
Figure-4.8
-x-
Loadcell offset distance with corresponding force distribution for a total die
cushion force of 60 Tons. 78
Figure-4.9
Basic configurations of upper and lower cushion rings. 80
Figure-4.10
The maximum differences among the loads measured in three blankholder
loadcells at different configurations. 82
Figure-4.11
Configuration of the cushion rings attached together 83
Figure-4.12
Loads measured in three blankholder loadcells at four different die cushion load
settings. 84
Figure-4.13
Composition of the loads given in Figure 4.12 at four different die cushion force
settings. 85
Figure-4.14
Maximum differences in the blankholder load measurements among three
loadcells at four different die cushion load settings plotted against the die
cushion configurations. 86
Figure-4.15
The maximum differences in the loadcell readings versus the configuration at
four different die cushion loads 87
Figure-4.16
The maximum differences in the loadcell readings as a percentage of the total
load versus the configuration at four different die cushion force settings. 90
Figure-4.17
Comparison of pre-set die cushion force (Fc) with the cushion force measured
during the experiments. 93
Figure-4.18
Constant die cushion force input and output values for a normal speed setting,
65 mmls, for two different maximum slide force settings. 94
Figure-4.19
Layout of the die cushion cylinder. 95
Figure-4.20
Die cushion force (Fc) input and output values for different maximum slide
forces for a normal speed setting, 65 mm/ s. 97
-xi-
Figure-4.21
Constant die cushion force input and output values for a slow speed. setting, 12
mm/s, for two different maximum slide forces. 98
Figure-4.22
Constant die cushion force input and output values for normal and slow speed
setting, 65 and 12 mm/s respectively, both for two different maximum slide
forces. 100
Figure-4.23
Velocity versus stroke profile for fast approach with a normal speed setting, 65
mm/s. Fast approach is switched off at 100 mm before the die touches the
blankholder. The same test repeated three times. 102
Figure-4.24
Velocity profile for fast approach with a slow speed setting, 12 mm/s. Fast
approach is switched of 10 mm before the slide touches the die. Two different
velocity profiles for different values of maximum slide force and die cushion
force 103
Figure-4.25
Comparison of 2 velocity profiles for a fast approach (450 mm/s) with a normal
speed setting, 65 mm/s. 104
Figure-4.26
Comparison of 3 velocity profiles for a fast approach (80 mm/s) with a slow
speed setting, 12 mm/s. 105
Figure-4.27
Velocity versus stroke profile for the second draw speed set to 1 with a normal
speed setting, 65 mm/s. The same test is repeated twice. 108
Figure-4.28
Comparison of 2 velocity profiles for the second draw speed set to 1 ( 22 rnm/ s)
with a normal speed setting, 65 mm/s. Results are plotted for two different
values of maximum slide force and die cushion force (Fe). 109
Figure-4.29
Comparison of 2 velocity profiles for the second draw speed set to 5 ( 14 rom/ s)
with a normal speed setting, 65 mm/s. Results are plotted for two different
Figure-4.30
-xii-
Comparison of 2 velocity profiles for the second draw speed set to 9 ( 5 rom/ s)
with a normal speed setting, 65 rom/so Results are plotted for two different
Figure-4.31
The velocity measurements at different second draw speed settings. 112
Figure 6.1
General geometry and different zones in a deep drawing operation 119
Figure 6.2
Forces acting on the sheet metal during the deep drawing operation. 122
Figure 6.3
BHF variation predictions based on Punch Force Control method. 125
Figure 6.4
Punch force distributions using constant 200 kN, and variable BHF based on Punch
Force Control Method together with the optimumpunch force distribution calculated
from Equation 6.3. 126
Figure 6.5
Punch force distributions using constant 400 kN, and variable BHF based on Punch
Force Control Method together with the optimum punch force distribution
calculated from Equation 6.3. 127
Figure 6.6
Punch force distributions using the BHF variations given in Figure 6.3 together
with the optimum punch force distribution calculated from Equation 6.3. 128
Figure 6.7
BHF variation predictions based on Radial Stress Control method. 131
Figure 6.8
Maximum Radial Stress versus punch travel using constant 200 kN, and variable
BHF based on Radial Stress Control Method together with the critical radial stress
Figure 6.9
Maximum Radial Stress versus punch travel using constant 400 kN, and variable
BHF based on Radial Stress Control Method together with the critical radial stress
Figure 6.10
Maximum Radial Stress distributions using the BHF variations given in Figure 6.7
together with the critical radial stress calculated from Equation 6.4. 134
Figure 6.11
-xiii-
BHF variation predictions based on Maximum Thickness Strain Control method.
135
Figure 6.12
Maximum Thickness Strain versus punch travel using constant 200 kN, and
variable BHF based on Radial Stress Control Method together with the maximum
desirable thickness strain. 136
Figure 6.13
Maximum Thickness Strain versus punch travel using constant 400 kN, and
variable BHF based on Radial Stress Control Method together with the maximum
desirable thickness strain. 137
Figure 6.14
BHF variation predictions based on Punch Force, Maximum Radial Stress, and
Maximum Thickness Strain Control Methods with an initial BHF of 200 kN. 139
Figure 6.15
BHF variation predictions based on Punch Force, MaximumRadial Stress, and
Maximum Thickness Strain Control Methods with an initial BHF of 400 kN. 140
Figure 7.1
Tool geometry for axisymmetric deep drawing experiments. 142
Figure-7.2.a
Punch force versus stroke diagram measured during the deep drawing of AA
1100-0.145
Figure-7.2.b
Comparison of predicted radial strain with the experimentally measured ones in
deep drawing of AA 1100-0. 145
Figure-7.3.a
1100-0.146
Figure-7.3.b
Figure-7.4.a
1100-0.148
Figure-7.4.b
-xiv-
Figure-7.5.a
1100-0. 149
Figure-7.5.b
Figure-7.6.a
2024-0.152
Figure-7.6.b
Figure-7.7.a
2024-0.153
Figure-7.7.b
Figure-7.8
Comparison of measured punch force distributions for different thicknesses used
in the experiments with AA 2024-0. 154
Figure-7.9
Comparison of radial strain distributions for different thicknesses used in the
experiments with AA 2024-0. 154
Figure-7.10.a
Punch force versus stroke diagram in deep drawing of HSG steel. 157
Figure-7.10.b
Radial strain distributions in deep drawing of HSG steel. 157
Figure-7.11
Figure-7.12.a
Figure-7.12.b
Radial strain distribution in deep drawing of HSG steel. 160
Figure-7.13
-xv-
Comparison of radial strain distributions obtained using different initial blank
diameters in deep drawing of HSG steel. 161
Figure-7.14.a
Figure-7.14.b
Radial strain distributions in deep drawing of HSG steel. 162
Figure-7.15
Comparison of punch force versus stroke diagrams for different initial blank
Figure-7.16.a
Figure-7.16.b
Figure-7.17.a
Figure-7.17.b
Figure-7.18
Comparison of punch force versus stroke diagrams for different initial blank
Figure-7.19
Comparison of radial strain distributions for different initial blank diameters in
deep drawing of HSG steel. 168
Figure-7.20.a
Measured and approximated BHF profiles according to Variation-I. 169
Figure-7.20.b
Measured and approximated BHF profiles according to Variation-II. 169
Figure-7.21.a
Figure-7.21.b
Figure-7.22.a
Figure-7.22.b
Figure-7.23.a
-xvi-
Figure-7.23.b
Figure-7.24.a
Figure-7.24.b
Figure-7.25
Comparison of punch force versus stroke diagram for different BHF variations in
deep drawing of HSG steel. 175
Figure-7.26.a
Punch force versus stroke diagram in deep drawing of UV steel. 178
Figure-7.26.b
Radial strain distribution in deep drawing of UV steel. 178
Figure-7.27
The effect of different drawratios on the punch force versus stroke profile in
deep drawing of UV steel. (Punch travel is 55 mm.) 179
Figure-7.28.a
Punch force versus stroke diagram in deep drawing of IF steel. 182
Figure-7.28.b
Radial strain distribution in deep drawing of IF steel. 182
Figure-7.29
The effect of different draw ratios on the punch force versus stroke profile in
deep drawing of IF steel. (Punch travel is 55 mm.) 183
Figure-7.30
The effect of material parameters on the punch force versus stroke profile.
(Punch travel is 55 mm.) 185
Figure-7.31
The effect of material parameters on the radial strain distribution. 185
Figure-7.32
Fracture in high strength galvanized steel cups. 190
Figure-7.33.a
FLD for deep drawing of 254.0 mm diameter HSG Steel blank. 192
Figure-7.33.b
FLD for deep drawing 304.8 mm diameter HSG Steel blank. 192
Figure-7.33.c
-xvii-
Energy, Work 1 ft-lbf = 1.356 J IJ
= 0.738 ftlbf
Power 1 ftlbf/s = 1.356 W lW = 0.738 ftlbf Is
Temperature
Interval lOP
=9/5
o
C 1C =5/9
o
F
Temperature
of
= 32 + (9/5)Temp (OC)
Temperature C =(5/9)Temp (OF) - 32
-xxiv-
CHAPTERI
INTRODUCTION
In a deep drawing operation, a flat sheet metal is placed between a die cavity and
a movable punch, Figure 1.1. As the punch moves into the die cavity, the metal
blank is formed into the desired shape. The result of the deformation, i.e.
forming of a defect free part, depends on process parameters such itS blank-
holder pressure, lubrication, ratio of the punch diameter to the blank diameter,
and blank material, etc.
During deep drawing of axisymmetric parts, the sheet metal blank is gradually
changed from a planar form to a deep drawn shell. Therefore the sheet metal in
the flange area may wrinkle as a result of compressive stresses in circumferential-
direction. To prevent wrinkling during the process, a blankholder force (BHF) is
applied to the sheet metal on the flange area:
Figure 1.2 illustrates the effect of BHF on the failure of the sheet metal in deep
drawing operation. The horizontal axis indicates the BHF and the vertical axis
indicates the cup height at failure. If the BHF is very high so that drawing-in is
prevented, the side-wall can only be stretched a small amount before it fractures;
this is indicated as the tearing limit.
On the other hand, as the BHF is reduced, insufficient pressure may exist to
prevent wrinkling in the flange region. Thus, there is a wrinkling limit. The
objective in a particular deep drawing operation is to achieve conditions such
that for the desired part depth, h, there is still a reasonable range of useful BHF,
~ . The theory as well as experimental evidence indicate that it is possible to vary
the BHF during deep drawing in order to increase the limiting drawing ratio, i.e.
the ratio of initial blank diameter to cup diameter.
Some restraining is introduced to the metal flow by the die corner radius. But
this force is not enough to control the metal flow. Extra restraining force can be
obtained by means of frictional forces alone or/and by creating geometric
- 1 -
Movement of
blank edge
at beginning
of drawing
I
l
\
, ,-,"
v'
Cup after
partial drawing
Original edge
of blank
Die
Figure-I.1: Deep drawing operation, (Eary/ 1974).
Wrinkling
limit
Tearing
limit
PART DEPTH
BlANKHOLDER FORCE
Figure-I.2: Schematic illustration of the effect of blankholder force (BHF)
upon achievable part depth, (Duncan, 1986).
-2-
restrictions. Frictional forces are obtained by pressing the blankholder against the
die cushion, Figure 1.3-. In this case, the restraining force is a function of
lubrication and clamping pressure. Geometric restrictions can be introduced into
the flow of metal by means of draw beads, Figure 1.4. In the latter case, the main
factors that determine the restraining force are the depth, geometry, and
location of the drawbead.
The main objective of this research is to investigate the effects of BHF on the
quality of deep drawn cups. The effect of BHF variation on failure limits and the
limiting drawing ratio in axiSYmmetric deep drawmg operations are studied. A
tooling was designed and built to deep draw axisymmetric cups. This tooling
also is equipped with instrumentation to measure and record the punch and
blank holder forces during the punch stroke. After the tooling and
instrumentation were assembled on the hydraulic press used for experiments
(Minster-Tranemo 160-10) an evaluation of the hardware capability and accuracy
was made. Axisymmetric deep drawing operation is simulated using a Finite.
Difference Method (FDM) based computer program called SHEETFORM. Results
of the computer simulations are verified by performing the actual experiments
and comparing the results with strain and force measurements. The strains are
measured based on circle grid analysis. Failure predictions are made using the
failure evaluation module in SHEETFORM and compared with the actual failure
observations in the experiments. Initial guess BHF variations are determined
using SHEETFORM and later improved during experiments. A theoretical and
experimental evaluation of the effect of BHF variation on Limiting Drawing
Ratio was carried out. The main focus was on the establishment of the optimum
BHF for different process parameters. Thus the study covered:
Investigation of the effects of sheet thickness, friction, and other
process and material parameters on optimum BHF variation as a
function of punch stroke.
Investigation of the effects of the constant and variable BHF on the
limiting drawing ratio during the forming process.
-3-
Blank Holder
Force
A-B: Radial dIawill( of lhe flange betweendie and die bIaaJdlolderwilh CricdoD
n:sisraDce ~ It lhe intmfacc.
B-e: Radial dIawing ofsheet not in contact with die blankholdcr.
C-D: Radia1 dIawing and bending over the die c:omer radius.
DoS: Unbending and straightening to form lhe WIll of the cup.
B-F : BeDdiJlg, sliding, and stretchingover the punch profile.
F-G: Bi-uialllCDSile strelCbiDg of sbeet over the boaomsurface of diepaDCh.
Figure-l.3: Drawing a cylinder cup using blankholder, (Ahmetoglu, 1990).
Figure-1.4: Drawing a hemisphere with drawbead, (ASM, 1988).
-4-
In this study, the following hardware & software are used to achieve the stated
objectives:
160 ton Minster press, (installed in the laboratory of the Engineering
Research Center for Net Shape Manufacturing ).
Analysis program SHEET_FORM, (developed at OSU under a separate
project).
Die set for conducting deep drawing experiments.
Sensors to measure forces, and determine wrinkling and fracture.
Data acquisition system.
Chapter I of this report summaries the objectives and the various tasks of this
study. Chapter II deals with the technological background on deep drawing. All
parameters of interest for the final analysis are discussed in this chapter. Chapter
III describes the hydraulic Minster press, instrumentation and die design used in
this study. Chapter IV deals with the accuracy of the machine control and
tooling. It describes the improvements which could be made as well as the limits .
of the overall setup. Chapter V describes the preparation of the specimens. It
also describes the procedures followed to determine the material properties and
the friction coefficient. In Chapter VI, the analysis of the deep drawing process,
and in Chapter VII, a comparison between experimental results and computer
simulations are presented. Chapter VIII summarises the concluding remarks
and gives recommendations for future work.
-5-
CHAPTERII
TECHNOLOGY OF DEEP DRAWING PROCESSES
2.1 Introduction to deep drawing
In deep drawing, a flat blank is formed into its final shape by drawing it into a
die opening. This final shape can be any geometry varying from a simple
axisymmetric cup to a very complex auto body panel. Schematic figures
illustrating basic deep drawing process, and some examples of deep drawn
products are shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2 respectively.
As the name deep drawing implies, this process is capable of drawing deeper
cups than possible with normal stretching operations. Usually some stretching is .
involved, ironing on the contrary is avoided by choosing the clearance between
die and punch larger then the thickness of 'the cup wall. Both parts with and
without flange are commonly processed. Especially in automotive industry a
flange can be of use for spot welding.
In most industrial manufacturing systems, stamping of a certain product
requires a number of drawing operations. Usually the first step is to draw the
material in an axisymmetric shape or a square box with rounded corners. Then,
the part is further processed to add additional geometric shapes. Typically the
whole process takes place without loss of material. Also, the thickness of the
work piece is not desired to undergo a considerable change during the forming
operation.
The force necessary for a deep drawing process is applied to the cup bottom by
means of a punch. The force is then distributed as a stress in the sheet material
formed over the punch radius. This causes high tensile stresses in the cup walls.
Usually the bottom comer of the cup is the most critical area where fracture may
occur.
-6-
a
c
b
d
Figure-2.1: Schematic views of some axisymmetric deep drawing processes,
(Ramaekers, 1988).
a) Deep drawing with a blankholder
b) Deep drawing without a blankholder
c) Direct redrawing
d) Reverse redrawing
-7 -
Figure-2.2: Examples of deep drawn products, (SMG, 1990).
-8-
2.2 Material properties and their influence on formability.
The behavior of materials under plastic flow conditions is usually described by a
flow curve. The most commonly used relation is the simple power law
hardening relation expressed as Cf = K(e+Eo r.
where a = true stress
K = strength coefficient
e = true strain
n = strain hardening coefficient
Eo = initial strain
This law has been proposed by Swift but also the names of Ludwik, Nadai and l
others have been involved in developing the theory behind it. This law is
simple yet descriptive enough to be used to analyze the plastic behavior of most
materials. Hence, the parameters K and n are seen as material properties.
Another parameter often used when deep drawing is analyzed is the r value.
This value is an indication for the anisotropy of a material. The anisotropy of a
material is a measure for the most preferred strain direction of a material.
2.2.1 The influence of the n value on the drawability
The n value is determined by the dependence of the flow (yield) stress on the
level of strain. In materials with a high n value, the flow stress increases rapidly
with strain. This tends to further distribute strain to regions of lower strain and
flow stress. This becomes particularly important in the post uniform elongation
region, where necking and strain concentrations occur. Hence high n values
lead to good formability in stretching operations, but have little effect on
drawability. In a drawing operation, the metal in the flange must be drawn
without causing fracture in the wall. Therefore, a high n value strengthens the
wall, which is beneficial, but also strengthens the flange and make it harder to
draw in, which is detrimental. In the beginning, however, the process is not
exclusively deep drawing but a combination of drawing and stretching. As
- 9 -
mentioned before, a high n value improves the formability in operations which
involve stretching.
Ziinkler has performed an analytical and experimental study on the influence of
the n value on the deep drawability, (Ziinkler, 1973). He has found the
following relationship;
Ln( do J= ("def ) ( n ~ l ) (n + 1)
d
p
1.1
(2.1)
dO
d
p
lldef
Wid
Wtot
where
" _ Wid
'Idef -
W
tOl
= initial blank diameter
= punch diameter
= deformation efficiency
= ideal deformation work
= actual needed deformation work
This equation clearly shows an influence of the strain hardening exponent on
the limiting draw ratio. This result has been verified by about 400 experiments,
(Ziinkler, 1973).
2.2.2 The influence of the K value on the deep drawability.
The K value does not have much of an influence on the formability. During a
drawing operation, the metal in the flange must be drawn in easily without
causing fracture in the wall. A high K value means a strong wall, which is
beneficial, but also a strong flange which makes it harder to draw in. Therefore,
to perform a successful drawing operation the K value should not be too small,
to assure a reasonable strength of the product. On the other hand, it should not
be too high to cause excessive punch force necessary to complete the draw.
- 10 -
2.2.3 The influence of the r value on the deep drawability.
The r value or anisotropy factor is defined as the ratio of the true thickness strain
to the true width strain in a tensile test. Generally, its value depends on the
elongation at which it is measured. Most commonly the r value is determined at
10, 15, or 20% elongation.
An example of how the r value influences the width and thickness strain in a
tensile test can be seen in Figure 2.3
The r value is calculated from the measured width and length as;
w m(:,J
= - = - ~ ~
, In(t:J
where
(2.2)
Ew = true width strain
t = true thickness strain
Wo =initial width of the tensile specimen
w =intermediate width of the tensile specimen
to = initial thickness of the tensile specimen
t =intermediate thickness of the tensile specimen
The r value, however, is not constant in all directions of the sheet. During the
manufacturing process (casting and rolling), every material has become more or
less anisotropic. The micro structure of the sheet metal shows preferred
directions. This results in the r value which differs in different directions on the
sheet. The maxima are equally spaced with respect to the rolling direction.
Starting with the first maximum in the 0
0
(rolling direction), the subsequent
- 11 -
Cross section A-A
High r value
Low r value
g
----'
, I
'"" - -I
elongation
Figure-2.3: The influence of different r values in a tensile test. The thick
lines indicate the original shape of the specimen, the dashed
lines indicate the intermediate shape of the specimen.
- 12 -
maxima occur at 900, 1800, 2700. The minima occur in the middle of the
maxima, Le. at 450, 1350, 2250, and 3150. In most cases, the magnitudes of the
minima are the same. The magnitude of the maxima differs a little more. So it
is common to determine the r value in three directions namely: 0
0
,45
0
, and 90
0
.
From these values, two different parameters are calculated. These are;
a) the average r value, or average normal
b) the planar anisotropy;
As can be seen from Equation (2.2), the r value is a measure of the ability of a
material to resist thinning. The use of sheet metal with a large r-value not only'
produces less wall thinning but also reduces the drawing load. For a clear
understanding of the influence of the r value, a short theoretical explanation
will be given first. During a drawing operation, material in the flange is
stretched fn one direction (radially), and compressed in the perpendicular
direction (circumferentially), if the blank holding pressure is neglected. The
resulting stress state can be seen in Figure 2.4. With the simplified assumption
of isotropic material (r=l) and an homogeneous stress state, this results in the
following Von Mises yield criterion;
(2.3)
where = stresses in a cylindrical coordinate system
= yield stress
Hill has modified the Von Mises yield criterion for anisotropic materials, (Hill,
1950). This criterion is later simplified by Hosford et al. resulting in the
following yield criterion, (Hosford et al., 1962):
0'=
- 13 -
(2.4)
z
Flange
Figure-2.4: Schematic diagram of the state of stress during deep drawing.
Thin lines indicate elements before deformation, thick lines
indicate element after deformation, (Lange, 1985).
-2.a -1.5
Figure-2.5: The yield surfaces for plane stress (oz = 0), for 4 different
anisotropy values, (Lange, 1985).
- 14-
This results in the flow surface plotted in a ar, ae coordinate system as shown in
Figure 2.5. The loci ind"icate the border between the plastic and elastic stress-
strain state. As mentioned before, ar > 0 and ae < 0 in the flange of a cup. This
means that the stress state lies in the second quadrant. As can be seen from
Figure 2.5, the higher the anisotropy is the lower the stresses need to be to reach
the yielding point. Hence an increased anisotropy value will decrease the force
necessary to pull in the flange.
The stress state in the cup wall is ar > 0 and ae > 0, as shown in Figure 2.4. It has
to be noted that ar is substantially higher than ae. This means that the stresses
are situated in the first quadrant. When yielding starts, the main deformation
will be stretching of the cup wall. This will result in a thickness decrease. The
higher the r value, the higher the stresses necessary to start yielding. So a high r
value will decrease the sensitivity for wall thinning. Since thinning will soon
result in fracture this is one of the main criteria determining the limiting
drawing ratio (LOR). The maximum draw ratio or LOR is the ratio between the.
initial diameter of the blank and the final diameter of the cup which can be
formed without fracture. For cylindrical cups, the LOR is used as an important
measure for the severity of the drawing operation.
The rm value affects the average depth, or wall height, of the deepest draw
possible, as shown in Figure 2.6. Lange has proposed to use the rmin value, Le.
the lowest r value of a material, rather than rm to predict the drawing behavior
because of the fact that failure always occurs if rmin falls below a lower limit,
(Lange, 1985). If a non cylindrical cup is drawn it is advisable to position the
sheet so that the directions with the largest strains coincide with the directions of
the largest r values.
Earing is related to planar anisotropy. In the directions where the r value is
highest, resistance against thickness changes is also highest. As the draw
proceeds, material originally positioned at the outer circumference of the blank,
approaches to the die radius. Since the length in circumferential direction
decreases considerably, material has to compensate for this decrease to satisfy the
volume constancy. The higher the r value the more the material resists to
compensate this circumferential reduction by means of thickness increase
- 15 -
90 45
r",= 1.0
o OL...- ........... ""'----_----J
o 45 90 0
Angle between test direction and rolling direction. degrees
90 45
~ = 1.4
o'--- ....L- "--_.....J
o
Rolling
direction
Rolling
direction Rolling
direction
Good drawability Fair drawability Poor drawability
Figure-2.6: Variation of strain ratio, r, with direction in low-carbon steel,
and the effect of average strain ratio, r
m
, on drawability of
cylindrical cups. Each cup represents the maximum height that
can be drawn from a material with the indicated r
m
value,
(ASM, 1985).
- 16 -
as shown in Figure 2.3. Therefore, the only possible increase the material can
compensate for is in radial direction, as shown in Figure 2.6. This observation is
less in directions with lower r values, there the material will thicken more.
This means that the valleys are in the directions with low r values and the tops,
usually called ears, are in the directions with the high r values. Since ears
usually have to be removed after the forming operation, earing is a highly
undesired phenomena in deep drawing.
The previous explanation:: lead the conclusion that a material with a good
formability has a high rm value combined with a low ar value.
2.3 Fracture in a deep drawing operation
The force necessary to form a cup is applied to the blank by means of the punch.
This force is distributed in the blank as stress causing plastic flow of the material.
The sequences of the deep drawing process are schematically shown in Figure 2.7.
After a small stroke of the punch, indi<;ated as stage A, material in region 2 is
bent and wrapped around the punch nose. As the punch progresses, indicated as
stage B, the material on the border between regions 2 and 3 is straightened. This
is commonly referred to as unbending. The strains resulting from this operation
strengthen the material since it strain hardens. Simultaneously, material in
regions 4 and 5 is pulled towards the die radius, and is being circumferentially
compressed. This results in large negative hoop strains. Once the metal flows
over the die radius no further flow in circumferential or radial direction takes
place. However, there is stretching and there may be additional circumferential
strain based on the clearance between punch and die in the unsupported region.
To visualize the strains resulting from the draw, a circular grid is usually etched
onto the surface of the blank. After the deformation is completed, circles are
deformed into ellipses, or in special situations into circles with a smaller or
greater diameter, as shown in Figure 2.8. From these ellipses, the resulting
strain can be calculated. These strains will then be compared to a forming limit
- 17 -
c
Figure-2.7: Sequential flow of metal shows the progressive stages of
cupping, (TMEH, 1984).
- 18 -
diagram (FLD). FLD's which are exclusively derived for each material and
thickness predict the maximum possible strain combinations the material allows
without fracturing or necking. An example of a typical FLD for aluminum-killed
steel is given in Figure 2.9.
As can be seen from Figure 2.9, the left part describes a compression-tension
strain state, the right part describes a tension-tension strain state. The most
unprofitable position, Le. the position where failure occurs for the lowest
absolute strains, is at the axis indicating a minor strain of zero. This strain state
is referred to as plane strain. As explained in the previous part, the
material in the cup wall possesses a strain distribution of increasing large
negative hoop strain with increasing height of the formed cup and fairly large
tensile strains positioning this section in the left half of the FLD, a fairly safe
region. The material just above the punch nose, however, has only been bent
during the onset of the process, no compression took place in circumferential
direction as explained before. This results mainly in a positive major strain. If
the stresses during deformation increase, the material will start to yield at the
weakest point. This will be the latter region which has only been bent and hence
not much strain hardened. As the force increases and the material continues to
yield, this will increase the positive major strain. As mentioned before, the
weakest region in the FLD is at the axis which describes exactly the strain
distribution developing in the above described region. Hence the material will
soon reach the safety limit and will start fracturing. This is why fracturing in
axiSYmmetric deep drawing usually starts at the punch nose.
2.4 The formation of wrinkles
As the punch moves into the die cavity, the material in the flange moves
towards the die profile. This causes the material to shrink in circumferential
direction. The easiest way, Le. involving the lowest amount of energy for the
needed deformation, is wrinkling of the sheet in the flange. The formation of
wrinkles is highly unwanted since it disturbs the surface regularity and
additionally restrains the material in flowing into the die cavity. The most
common method to prevent the material from wrinkling is applying a
blankholder force to the material in the flange.
- 19-
(a)
II - lj
Engineering strain, % =-li (100)
Maximum strain
directian
Major axis
Minor axis
II (Major axis)
(b)
Figure-2.8: Typical grid pattern: (a) undeformed and (b) deformed; and
elongation equation, (TMEH, 1984).
- 20-
o
Major engineering strain, (e,l. %
30
20
10
-40 -30 -20 -10 o 10 20 30 40 50 60
Minor engineering strain, (e2), %
Figure-2.9: Forming limit diagram for aluminum-killed steel. Critical strain
band separates failure from non failure conditions, (ASM 1988).
- 21 -
Such a blankholder is usually a rigid ring with an inner diameter slightly larger
than the punch diameter and slightly smaller than the die opening diameter as
shown in Figure 2.10. Since the blankholder is rigid the force is not equally
distributed over the flange area but mainly applied at places where the material
is thickest. Due to larger compressive stresses in the circumferential direction,
sheet metal will thicken most at the outer rim of the flange. This leaves the
material closer to the die profile with some clearance to initiate wrinkling. Since
squeezing out Wrinkles requires an extremely high pressure wrinkles should be
prevented from initiating.
The sheet thickness is known to have an important influence in wrinkling. [/
Thick sheet can often be drawn without BHF at all. The thinner the sheet the
easier wrinkling starts due to the lower moment of inertia of thin sheet.
.
Therefore, it is generally recommended that a blankholder should be used in
drawing thin sheet.
Another parameter influencing wrinkling is the r value. A high ar value I
requires a high blank holding force whereas a high rm value allows a lower
blank holding force.
The tool geometry also has an influence. in wrinkling. If the clearance between
punch and die is large, wrinkles may occur on the cup wall rather than on the
flange area. This phenomena is sometimes called puckering. In the case of a
dome shaped punch or drawing of conical shapes, it is very difficult to prevent
puckering, and extra restraining force is required.
2.4 The limiting drawing ratio, (LDR)
The limiting drawing ratio (LDR) is defined as the maximum value of the ratio
do , where do is the blank diameter and d
p
is the punch diameter, for which a
d
p
complete cup without cracks or wrinkles can be drawn. A specific LDR has to be
determined for each material. The following parameters influence the value of
the LDR;
- 22-
Figure-2.10: A schematic view of the deep drawing process with a
blankholder, (Siegert, 1991).
- 23 -
- material properties,
- sheet thickness,
- punch and die geometry,
- lubrication.
The influence of material properties has been discussed in previous sections.
When the material is isotropic the LOR is mainly a function of friction. The
LDR tends to increase with increasing friction over the punch. From the
previous explanation about fracture initiation, it can be seen that it is
detrimental if material from underneath the punch bottom flows ovel the
punch nose. A high friction coefficient will prevent the flow of material over
the punch nose, which will prevent the sheet metal from excessive stretching at
the bottom of the punch and increase the LOR. A high friction coefficient
between die and sheet, however, will decrease the LOR. Since a high friction
over the die corner radius and in the flange will make it difficult for sheet metal
to draw in, it will increase the required punch force. This situation will cause
excessive stretching and. fracture in the unsupported region.
An increase in ...!2... (sheet thickness/blank diameter) ratio improves LOR.
do
Previously, it was also mentioned that the thinner the material the harder it is
to perform a successful drawing operation. From a geometrical point of view, it
d
is generally accepted that a decreasing ----f. (punch diameter/sheet thickness)
to
value increases the LOR
Oehler has empirically derived a formula to estimate the LOR for a particular
deep drawing operation with known parameters according to, (Oehler, 1966);
LORmax =(LORmax,lOO + f)- 1 ~ ;
o
- 24-
(2.5)
where f = (0.05 + 0.15) a correction factor depending on the ductility
of the material, the surface roughness, and the lubrication
conditions.
In general, improvements can be obtained by;
- strengthening the wall,
- softening the flange.
Several methods have been developed which adopt one or two of the above
mentioned techniques. For example, experiments have been ci''.rried out with
local heating of the flange. In general, material is easier to deform with
increasing temperature. Also, experiments have been carried out with stressing
the blank from underneath the punch bottom as shown in Figure 2.11. Firstly,
this increases friction between cup and punch at the corner which is beneficial as
mentioned before. Secondly, a larger hydrostatic stress distribution can be
obtained which highly increases drawability.
Despite the fact that some of the new developed methods have a potential to
considerably increase the LDR, industrial applications of these methods have
not been implemented widely so far. This is mainly because of the fact that these
methods are too time consuming and require elaborate tooling. Therefore, these
methods are too expensive when compared to more conventional methods.
2.5 Restraining forces to increase LOR and failure limit.
When drawing axisymmetric cups, the punch load reaches a maximum at about
one third or in the middle of the stroke as shown in Figure 2.12. For a common
drawing operation, this force maximum is close to the maximum force the
material can withstand. Control of BHF is therefore most critical in this area. In
other areas, the difference between the punch load and the maximum force the
material can withstand is larger. Hence one has some freedom in BHF control.
Two example BHF variations are described below;
- 25 -
Bypass
p
Punch

pressure
chamber
Figure-2.11: Principle of counter pressure deep drawing method assisted by
radial fluid pressure, (Nakamura, 1987).
- 26-
...... ..
,r !
: " :.: Punch - :,1 , " :
: I.
" ! Blank l
i'
--- r--:,:,/--r---r-------I---r-----r---
4
o
20
16
II)
c:
12
(,)
.;::
12
a;
E
.5
0
U-
8
200 220 240 260 280 300
Slide Displacement in mm
320 340
Figure-2.12: Punch force and blank holding forces (measured at three different
loadcells) measured in deep drawing a high strength hot dipped
galvanized steel from 304.8 mm initial blank diameter to 152.4 mm
diameter cup without using lubricant. (Speed 12 mm/s, BHF 20
metric tons (constant.
- 27-
a) if the objective is to increase the LDR as large as possible then the BHF
should be increased as 'high as possible in the less critical areas where the
possibility of fracture is not expected to be severe.
b) if stretching of the material needs to be avoided as much as possible
then the BHF should be lowered in the beginning and towards the end of the
process.
The above mentioned variations require an extra degree of freedom in the press
control system, a feature which is not yet commonly available at presses used in
industrial applications.
Because of differences in stress distribution between cylindrical and non-
cylindrical drawing operations it is not possible to readily transfer these ideas
between those geometries. Cylindrical geometries thicken most at the outer rim
of the blank whereas rectangular parts thicken most at the inner side of the
flange at the corners and at the outer edges of the straight portions. This leads to .
the concept of a flexible blankholder, which is capable of a more equally
distributed pressure allover the flange and is said to be capable of increasing the
maximum drawing depth, (Doege and Sommer, 1987).
A more commonly used concept is the use of draw beads to direct the material
flow and in tum the stress distribution in a deep drawing operation. Along
extended little curved edges there is virtually no tangential compressive stresses.
At the corners, however large tangential compressive stresses appear. These can
easily result in wrinkles which in turn will result in fractures. To overcome this
problem, drawbeads can be inserted alongside t h ~ s t ~ a i g h t edges as shown in
Figure 2.13. The goal is to achieve a more even material flow without wrinkles.
A properly designed draw bead results in sufficient restraining force in
combination with a slight increase in punch load. The effectiveness of the
drawbeads depends on:
- the size; width, height, and angle of the ramps,
- the position with respect to the die edge
Figure 2.14 illustrates an investigation of draw bead geometry's and resulting
forces.
- 28 -
c::: ::>
Figure-2.13: Drawing of a large shape with curved sides using draw beads,
(Siegert, 1991).
- 29-
[=1
ro
=

[4

8-

0\01

"2 n
CD
(==1

1'9.\
C]
iEj1
m

(Fii'J
0 b c d e
Draw-bead positions
(01
6000
3000
-:2
tf5000
i
.s::. 4000
2500
;
i 2000
j 1500
0'
1000
500
......
r-""''- ........
..........
1'- ...............
1-_
-
---:-.
1-- __
::=-
-----
-
Draw-bead position
rij--2-
f.;'.] _b__

--
Draw- bead height;
-.
h. =4mmlO.16inl
--
1-_-
..........
...
1'- ...
""""""'ii::.'
....
--

0.32 0.4 0.48 0.56 0.64.

Draw-bead width bb' in
(b)
Figure-2.14: Application of draw beads: (a) Possible orientation in test die set,
(b) Drawing load and restraining force as a function of draw bead
size and orientation, (Lange, 1985).
- 30-
CHAPTERIII
DEEP DRAWING EQUIPMENT:
PRESS SPECIFICATIONS, DIE DESIGN, AND
INSTRUMENTATION
3.1 The Minster press specifications
The MINSTER press was partially donated to ERC/NSM by Minster Machine Co.
of Minster, Ohio, and was installed at the ERC in early 1991. It belongs to the
MINSTER/Tranemo DPA series which are designed for all types of metal-
forming, from automated systems to manual operations. Its main dimensions
and specifications are given in Table 3.1, and Figure 3.1.
Technical description
The frame of the press is of quality welded steel one-piece construction. The
frame bed has extra heavy bolster support plates. The frame is designed for
automatic feeding systems and has large upright openings for easy access. This
rigid frame allows only minimum deflection which, in turn, gives longer die
life.
The slide is of welded steel and guided by eight adjustable' (extra-long span), self-
lubricating bronze gibs. The rigid slide is designed to accept the loading inherent
in progressive tools and also when using several tools in one setup. The slide is
furnished with 25.4 mm (1") T slots for die mounting.
The hydraulic system is mounted at the top of the press frame so as not to
interfere with the working area of the press.
The slide has a built-in hydraulic ejector or knockout, which can also be used as
an upper die cushion cylinder or as a cylinder for controlling special tooling.
- 31-
Table 3.1: Specifications of the 1-DPA-160-10 MINSTERffranemo
Hydraulic Press.
Force
Nominal pressing force 160
[toni]
Die cushion force 100 [toni]
Ejector force 15 [toni]
Stroke length
Slide stroke (A)* 500
[rom], 09.7")
Die cushion stroke (B) 190 [rom], (7.5")
Ejector stroke (C) 249 [rom], (9.8")
Pimensions
Press bolster right - left (D) 1000 [mm[, (39.4")
Press bolster front - back (E) 1000
[mm[, (39.4")
Press slide right - left (D) 1000 [mm[, (39.4")
Press slide front - back (F) 1000 [mm[, (39.4")
Cushion top plate right - left (G) 800 [rom], (31.5")
Cushion top plate front - back (H) 800 [rom], (31.5")
Maximum daylight (J) 800
[rom], (31.5")
Minimum daylight (K) 292.1 [rom], (11.5")
Width of opening in frame sides (Q) 749 [rom], (29.5")
Height of opening (R) 800 [rom],
(31.5") .
Overall Dimensions
Total width left - right (L) 2800 [rom], (110.2")
Total depth front - back (M) 2600 [rom], 002.4")
Total height (N) 3900 [rom], 053.5")
Height floor to top of bolster (P) 995 [rom], (39.2")
Weight
Total weight (approx.) 13,000 [Kg], (28,700 [lb.])
Speeds
Closing speed 365
[roms-I] (860"[min-
1
])
Max. pressing speed at 98 tons 40
[roms-I] (100"[min-
1
])
Max. pressing speed at full tonnage 30
[roms-I] (75"[min-1])
Max. return speed 390
[roms-I] (920"[min-
1
])
Max. return speed with engaged cushion 130
[roms-I] (310"[min-
1
])
fmm:
Motor power 30 [kW] (40 [HP])
*Capital letters between parentheses are used to illustrate the corresponding dimension in Figure
3.1.
- 32-
t
AA
b.
N
f.-
lIT
1
iU
A
,.c::J
0
D
Jl
0
0
0
~
'iEJ
l.
f
B
I
G
'1
p
I
L
D
~ ~
____LtJ__
~ - - E - - - - + ~
H---H----t-l
f-------M------i
00
Figure-3.1: The I-DPA-160-10 MINSTER/Tranemo hydraulic press, and
overall dimensions (L=110.2 inches, M=102.4 inches, N=153.5
inches)
- 33-
The die cushion is mounted within the press bed. Pressure and stroke length are
adjustable within the stroke range by setting from control panel. The pressure
from the cushion is transferred to the die by means of die cushion pins. The
cushion top plate is mounted directly to the cylinder piston rod and guided by
the steel pins. The cushion can also be operated separately without operating the
main slide.
The press is equipped with an Allan Bradley PLC 5/15 Programmable Controller.
The setup control units, along with "Manual", "Single-stroke", and "Continuos"
operation controls are located in a swing-arm console (R.H. front) clear,
easy-to-read visual displays of stroke lengths and pressures. The control system
also includes a photo-electronic light curtain across the front of press for safety as
well as ease of access to die area. The press control panel is mounted to the R.H.
side of he press frame above the swing-arm console.
The press is equipped with the following features.
Complete hydraulic and electrical equipment with controls on movable
console.
Hydraulic die cushion, complete hardened cushion pins.
Built-in machine lightning in bot,h sides of
Automatic oil cooling (by water) system.
Stroke counter and hour meter.
Photo electric light curtain across the front of the press.
Barrier guards on back and sides of press and access covers on die cushion,
top plate (front and back), electrically interlocked.
3.2 Die Design
A die set is designed and built with assistance from Superior Tool and Die Co. of
Columbus, Ohio, a member company of ERC/NSM. This die set is used to
conduct axisymmetric deep drawing experiments in 160 Ton Minster press
located in ERC/NSM laboratories. Wide variety of materials, e.g. aluminum,
low carbon steel, stainless steel, etc., having thicknesses varying from 0.81 mm
(0.032") to 1.63 mm (0.064"), are intended to be used in the experiments.
- 34-
Therefore, during die design, design parameters are selected for the most critical
material assuming the remaining materials will be formed without any difficulty
using the same tooling. In the following section, die design is explained step by
step using the parameters shown in Figure 3.2. The procedure outlined in this
section can be used as a general guideline to design dies for axisymmetric
forming operations.
3.2.1 Selection of Design Parameters
Select the diameter, d, for round cup:
Because of the limitations due to die cushion pin positions and force
requirements for different materials the largest diameter of a cup that can be
formed in this press is found to be 152.4 mm (6"). Therefore, the diameter of the
cup, d, is selected to be 152.4 mm (6").
Select the profile radius of the punch, rp' and die, rd:
For stainless steel, die profile radius, r
p
' is critical, and for aluminum, punch
corner radius, rd' is more critical. Therefore, punch and die profile radii should
be selected accordingly.
Recommended values for punch and die profile radii which are obtained from
literature are given in Table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Recommendations for punch and die profile radii
Material Reference
Die, rd Punch, r
p
Aluminum (ASTE, 1955) (4 + 6) t (4 + 10) t
Aluminum (LanKe, 1985) (5 + 10) t (8 + 10) t
Stainless steel (ASM, 1988) lOt 5t
Aluminum (ASM, 1988) (4 + 8) t
We have selected the punch profile radius as r
p
=20.1 mm (0.79"), and the die
corner radius as rd=16.0 mm (0.63"). For the thickest material which might be
used in our experiments, t=2.54 mm (0.1"), we obtained the following ratios;
- 35-
d
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
t I
I
I
I
I
I
..c
I
I
I
I
I
I
\..
i
I
r
p
!
I
Figure-3.2: Axisymmetric cup geometry.
- 36-
rd = 0.63 = 6.3
t .1
r
p
= 0.79 = 7.9
t .1
For thinner materials, these ratios will increase and the deformation will be
easier. On the other hand, if the thickness is reduced too much puckering may
occur over the die corner radius.
Clearance, c, between punch and die:
It is recommended that the clearance should be c=t+0.l0t per side for aluminum,
and c=t+0.35t per side for stainless steel, (ASM, 1988). We have selected 2.92
mm (0.115) clearance per side. This clearance corresponds to
t+0.15t for t=2.54 mm (0.100")
t+2.83t for t=0.76 mm (0.030")
Draw ratio, DR:
Draw ratio in a deep drawing operation is defined as the ratio of initial blank
diameter to the final cup diameter. Since we have selected the final cup
diameter as d=152.4 mm (6"), the initial blank diameter should be calculated
based on recommended reductions in the blank diameter. It is recommended
that maximum reduction that can be obtained in a deep drawing operation is
40% for aluminum, and 40-60% for stainless steel, (ASM, 1988). Based on these
recommendations we have selected 50% reduction in the blank diameter. This
reduction corresponds to the initial blank diameter of D=304.8 mm (12"), and the
draw ratio of DR=D/ d=2.
This ratio is bigger than the recommended value for aluminum. For thick sheet
metal, it is possible to complete the draw operation successfully, but for thin
metal wrinkling and/or fracture will occur. For thin materials, it would be
possible to complete the draw operation by using variable blankholding force.
It is possible to increase the draw ratio within suggested limits for steel. Using
the current tools, it is possible to increase the blank diameter up to 355.6 mm
(14") which will increase the draw ratio to DR=2.33. Punch travel will not be a
- 37-
limiting factor to increase the draw ratio and, thus, the required stroke of the
punch.
Calculation of the cup height, H:
Since the initial blank diameter, final cup diameter, and punch profile radius
are known, the final height of the cup can be calculated, using the symbols
shown in Figure 3.2, based on Equation 3.1, .(Lange, 1985).
D = ~ d 2 +4d(h +D.5?r
p
) - D.56r:
From this equation, the final cup height is calculated as;
H=120.27 mm (4.735") for DR=2
H=174.50 mm (6.87") for DR=2.33
(3.1)
Design parameters which are used in the die design, as shown in Figure 3.2, are
summarized in Table 3.3 together with suggested values taken from literature.
3.2.2 Tool Design
Based on the design parameters selected above, a set of tooling is designed and
manufactured'" to perform desired operations. Principles and design
specifications are explained below.
Principles
. .
Deep drawing operation using a blankholder can be performed in a single action
press with die cushion or a double action press having a separate slide for a
blankholder. A single action hydraulic press with die cushion, Le. 160 ton
Minster press whose specifications are given in section 3.1, is used in the
experiments. Principles of cup forming operation in a single action press are
shown in Figure 3.3. In this tool arrangement, punch is stationary and placed on
the lower plate, blankholding ring is placed on the cushion pins, and die is
* Tooling is manufactured by Superior Tool and Die, Co., Columbus, Ohio, an Affiliate Member of
ERC/NSM..
- 38-
"'" "
" " " ' j " " " ' ~ " " ' " I
" "" ""'1~ , . , :...-'.:...-.J
I
Die
Blankholder
Punch
: .... " _ ~ : ' : I , .': ~
. . '.
..... " .'
, "
Pressurized, '.': ':: " ,t-,---'-------
-+-. '., . , . j . , - - - . . . , . . . . , . . . . . , ~
fluid or air
Die cushion
(pressure adjustable
or constant)
-
Figure-3.3: Tool arrangement for deep drawing, (Lange, 1985).
-39 -
Table 3.3: Design Parameters Used in The Deep Drawing Tool Design
Suggestion Reference Selection
Punch profile radius, r
p
Aluminum (4 + 8)t (ASM, 1988) 20.07 mm
Steel 5t
(0.79")
Die corner radius,
rd
Aluminum (5 + 10) t (Lange, 1985) 16.00 mm
Steel lOt (ASM, 1988) (0.63")
Clearance between punch and
die, c
Aluminum 1.10t (ASM, 1988) 2.92 mm
Steel 1.35t (0.115")
Reduction in diameter
Aluminum 40% (ASM, 1988) 50-57%
Steel 40-60%
attached to the ram. During the deformation, slide moves down and forms the
sheet metal around the stationary punch. The blankholder is indirectly driven
by the ram of the press, and blankholding pressure is produced by hydraulic or
pneumatic cushion cylinders and can be controlled during the deformation by
controlling the cushion pressure. Since the slide constantly pushes against the
blankholder, this increases the load on the ram. The maximum load available
on the ram should be more than the total of blankholding load and the drawing
load.
Load Requirements
Maximum punch and blankholding forces required to form the cup shown in
Figure 3.2 whose specifications are given in Table 3.3 are calculated based on
stainless steel.
-40 -
(3.2)
Punch force required in the first draw operation can be calculated from the
following equation, (Lange, 1985);
F. = 1tdm{l.1;' (In ~ b -0.25)]
where
l1F
Fd : maximum draw force
d
m
: mean cup wall diameter
t : initial sheet thickness
0' : flow stress, 0'<=1.30'u where O'u is the tensile strength
efficiency of the operation, (0.5 + 0.7)
Dt, : initial blank diameter
d : punch diameter
Blankholder pressure which is required in the first draw operation can be
estimated based on the following equation, (Sommer, 1986);
where
PNA =kmO'tm
PNA : blank holder pressure at start
(3.3)
k
l+{rxnax -r
min
) 3
= 0.49 x 10- , material factor
rmn
m
r
max
: maximum r-value in blank plane
rmin: minimum r-value in blank plane
rm : average perpendicular anisotropy, r
m
= (r
o
+ 2r
45
+ r
90
) / 4
n
rn
: average strain hardening exponent, n ~ = (no + 2n
45
+n
90
) / 4
m=1+(d_
17S
)O.17 , shapefactor
t 100
d : punch diameter
t : original sheet thickness
O'tm : average tangential compressive stress in the flange
Experimental studies also show that the BHF increases with increasing tensile
strength, O'u, as well as with increasing relative part size, Le., d/t, (Sommer,
1986).
- 41-
Then, the blankholder force, F
b
, can be calculated from;
1r (2 2)
F
b
=PNA.- D -d
4
(3.4)
where D : blank diameter
d : punch diameter
Maximum punch force required to form 304.8 mm (12.0") diameter and 2.54 mm
(0.100") thick stainless steel blank is estimated, based on Equation 3.2, as
Fd=95.35 tons, and required blankholding force is estimated, based on Equation
3.4, as F
b
=12.52 tons. In total, maximum slide force required to form this cup is
107.87 tons which is available in Minster press.
If the draw ratio is increased to 2.3 which corresponds to 355.6 mm (14.0") blank
diameter, then for 2.54 mm (0.100") thick blank the required max. punch force is .
calculated to be Fd=79.0 tons, and required blankholding force- is estimated,
based on Equation 3.4, as F
b
=57.0 tons. In total, 136.0 tons of slide force is
required to form this cup, which is possible to obtain in Minster press.
Final Design
A set of tooling is designed and manufactured to form the cup shown in Figure
3.2 in 160 Tons single action hydraulic Minster press. A sketch of the press is
shown in Figure 3.1. Also, specifications of the press are given in Table 3.1.
Based on these overall dimensions and the desired cup geometry, the necessary
tooling is designed and built to carry out single stroke draw operation. Assembly
drawing of these tools are shown in Figure 3.4.
In Figure 3.4, working space of the press frame between ram, (II), and bolster,
(7), is shown together with the tooling in their assembled position. Upper die
assembly is attached to the upper die shoe, (I), which is attached to the ram,
01}, and lower die assembly is attached to the lower die shoe, (18), which is
attached to the bolster, (7). Guide pins, (13), and bushings, (6), which are
-42-
.......-........
:: j i:'
-../
.... '-..
! ; ",
~
.... . ,-'"
'"',
I <',
\'.
..--../
( i ~
\.J
...--..-
I -:- \
, ~ /
.----.
' . ~ )
---- ;-----'-----
\
;---.-.
! i oj
\:..7
' ~ " ''';-'.,' ',>., 9
I
, / /;
....-...,
! 8 \
~ /
/
I
~ '''''.''' .\,,,-.:9
~ ' . ' 'i./",.' .,/ /" I'
i ~
\."::"'/'
Figure-3.4:
Assembly drawing of the die set for deep drawing of a round cup.
-43 -
attached to the upper and lower die shoes, (1) and (18) respectively, are used for
locating purposes during the assembly process, but because of the length and low
stiffness of the guide pins, (13), they can not be used for locating purposes
during the forming process. Several holes are opened in the lower die shoe,
(18), to allow the penetration of the cushion pins, (16), to support the loadcell
container ring, (15).
Axisymmetric punch, (4), is located on top of an inline loadcell, (5), which is
attached to the lower die shoe, (18). This loadcell is used to measure the punch
load during the deformation. A round spacer, (17), with a slot machined on it,
is placed around the lower part of load cell to prevent an accidental damage of
the loadcell wire. A hole is drilled in the center of the punch, (4), to let the air
go inside to prevent vacuum when the formed part is removed from the punch.
The blankholder assembly including load cell container ring, (15), blankholder
container ring, (14), blankholder, (8), and three button loadcells, (3), is placed.
on top of twelve cushion pins, (16). Usually one ring is enough to contain the
blankholder by selecting the thickness of the ring according to the maximum
blankholding load. However, in the current design, we have two rings. The
second ring under the blankholder container ring, (l4), is called loadcell
container ring, (15). Three equally.spaced button l.oadcells, (3), which are used
to measure the blankholder load during the forming process, are placed inside
the pockets machined in this ring, (15). The blankholder container ring, (14),
sits on the three loadcells, (3), and it does not touch the loadcell container ring,
(15), to obtain accurate force measurements during the forming process.. For
maintenance purposes and to eliminate separation between container rings,
four strips are used to bolt them together. The length of the strips and the
distance between elliptical holes are arranged so that no preload is applied to the
loadcells.
A bushing is press fitted to the inside diameter of the blankholder container ring,
(14). This bushing should have been made from bronze or cast iron but, in the
current design, because of availability, it is made from soft steel. Container
rings, (14) and (15), are guided using the interface between bushing and the
punch, (4). Inside diameter of the blankholder is made 0.254 mm (0.010") bigger
-44-
than the inside diameter of the bushing, and it is used to strip the formed part
out from the punch.
Sheet metal blank, (9), is located on top of the blankholder, (8), before the
deformation starts. A step is machined on the blankholder, (8), to locate the
blank, (9). The height of this step should be lower than the minimum thickness
of the sheet metal blanks which will be used in the experiments.
Looking at the position of the cushion pins, (16), twelve of them are selected to
support the blankholder assembly. The orientation of these supporting cushion
pins are shown in Figure 3.5. Remaining pins are removed from the press.
Maximum stroke of the cushion pins is limited to 190.5 mm (7.5"). Due to the
thickness of the lower die shoe, (18), which is 50.8 mm (2"), the available stroke
of the cushion pins is reduced by 50.8 mm (2"). This is why the original pins are
replaced with 50.8 mm (2") longer ones. Length of the punch, (4), is also
adjusted to allow the maximum travel of the cushion pins, (l6).
Upper die assembly contains die, (0), die holder, (2), and spacer, (12), and it is
attached to the upper die shoe, (11). Die, (10), is inserted into the die holder,
(2), which is separated from the upper die shoe, (1), by welded spacer, (12), to
create enough distance for punch penetration. Another consideration in
designing the die assembly is that, in the upper most position of the ram, (II), it
should be possible to take the part out of the die after the forming process is
completed.
Die, (10), and blankholder, (8), which are in contact with the sheet metal
during the forming operation should be made from harder material. In this
design, these parts are made such that it is possible to change or modify them for
different material or geometry.
Since there is no means of centering die, (10), and the punch, (4),
automatically, before starting the forming experiments, die, (10), and the
punch, (4), should be centered manually. Punch, (4), and die, (10), are
centered in two steps. First, upper die assembly, including parts (2), (10), and
(12), is attached and fixed to the upper die shoe, (1). Secondly, punch assembly,
-45 -
I
I
T
I
I
"- v
,
I
I
,
Figure-3.5: Orientation of the supporting cushion pins.
- 46-
including parts (4) and (5), is centered with die, (10), and then fixed to the lower
die shoe, (18).
3.2.3 Operation Sequence
In this section, the operation sequence to carry out the deep drawing operation is
explained. All the part numbers referred to in this section are shown in Figure
3.4.
Upper and lower halves of the die set is shown at their open position in Figure
3.6. At this position, ram, (11), is at its upper most position, and flat sheet
metal blank, (9), is placed over the die, (8). Cushion pins, (16), are also
extended out. At this position, setup of the press should be completed, Le.
cushion and slide pressures, and the lower limit of the slide position should be
set at their desired values.
Upper die assembly driven by ram, (11), moves down, sheet metal, (9), is
clamped between die, (10), and the blankholder, (8), Figure 3.7. At this
position, the load measured in three button loadcells, (3), should show the
blankholding force with some discrepancy from the desired value due to reasons
explained in Chapter IV.
Ram, (11), moves further down and forms the sheet metal around the
stationary punch, (4), Figure 3.8. During this forming stage, punch load is
measured by means of inline loadcell, (5). Until the sheet metal leaves the
blankholder contact area, it is clamped between the die, (10), and the
blankholder, (8), and metal flow can be controlled by the application of
blankholding force. Blankholding load is obtained by means of cushion
pressure. Cushion pressure can be varied as a function of ram or die cushion
position resulting- in a variable blankholding force throughout the forming
stroke.
-47 -
Figure-3.8: Formed position of tooling.
- 50-
3.3 Instrumentation.
3.3.1 Load and stroke measurements
The Minster press is equipped with various transducers that measure position,
pressure and force. These include three blankholder loadcells, punch loadcell,
three hydraulic pressure transducers on the slide, die cushion and ejector
hydraulic lines, and the string potentiometer attached to the slide. The signals
of these devices must be read and interpreted. The following section will discuss
the set up to do this.
3.3.1.1 Hydraulic Pressure Transducers
The Minster Press was instrumented with hydraulic pressure transducers on the
slide, die cushion, and ejector pressure lines. These give the user of the press
some idea about the forces in the tooling without having in-tool
instrumentation. The pressure transducers were mounted off of "T" pipe fittings
at the dial gages on the front of the press. These fittings were installed by the
press manufacturer for their pressure transducers, which they used in the
calibration of the press. The pressure transducers mounted on the press were
purchased from Sensotec, Inc. They are the bonded foil strain gage type (model
LM). They have a full scale capacity of 34.5 MPa (5000 psi) with an output of 2
mv/v and an accuracy of +/- 0.5 %. The pressure transducer's specifications can
be seen in Table 3.4.
3.3.1.2 Measurement of the Slide Position
It is desirable to know the slide position while the load readings are being taken
during the deep drawing operation. A number of possible methods were
considered, including directly instrumenting the tooling, taking the position
readings of the press's encoders (used by the press controller for positioning) or
using some device to measure the position of the die cushion directly. It was
decided that the best solution for this project would be to attach a string
potentiometer to the slide. A string potentiometer was installed on the press
- 51 -
Table 3.4: Specifications of LM Pressure Transducer (Sensotec, Inc.)
PERFORMANCE
Pressure Range .
Accuracy (min) .
Output ..
Resolution .
ENVIRONMENTAL
Temperature, Operating ..
Temperature, Compensated .
Temperature Effect
- Zero (max) .
- Span (max) ..
ELECTRICAL
Strain Gage Type ..
Supply .
Bridge Resistance .
Wiring Code (std) .
Electrical Termination (std) .
MECHANICAL
Media .
Overload-Safe .
Pressure Port .
Wetted Parts Material .
Type <Gage, Abs) ..
Case Material ..
- 52-
0-34.5 MPa
(0 - 5000 psi)
+/- .5% P.5.
2.0 mv/v
Infinite
_54 C -121 C
(-650 F - 250 F)
-16C _71 C
(60 P - 160 F)
.018 % F.S.;o C
(,01 % P.S.;o F)
.036 % Rdg.;o C
(.02 % Rdg.;o F)
Bonded Foil
10VDC
350 ohms
#1
Cable914 mm
(3 ft).
Gas, Liquid
50% > capacity
1/4-18NPT F.
17-4 PH Stainless
Gage
Stainless Steel
slide. In our application, since the slide and die cushion move together, we
could use the slide position to determine the die cushion. position. The
potentiometer is mounted adjacent to the press bed and the end of the
string/wire is attached to the slide. The full length of the wire is 762 mm (30.0").
The total travel of the slide is just over 508 mm (20.0"). The specifications of the
potentiometer can be seen in Table 3.5 (Celesco Transducer Products, Inc.). A
dimensioned drawing of the potentiometer can be seen in Figure 3.9 (Celesco
Transducer Products, Inc.).
3.3.1.3 Loadcells.
Punch and blank holder loadcells are shown in the assembly drawing in Figure
3.4. These loadcells, and LoadGard system were custom designed,
manufactured, and donated to ERC/NSM by Helm Instrument, Co., Maumee,
Ohio.
200 Ton Punch Loadcell, (5)*
The punch loadcell is 152.4 mm (6.00") in diameter and 95.25 mm (3.75") tall.
With a capacity of 200 tons and an overload rating of 244 tons, this loadcell can be
used for the full capacity of the slide. A drawing of the loadcell can be seen in
Figure 3.10, (Helm Instrument Co., Inc.).
40 Ton EHF Loadcells, (3)
Three loadcells are used to measure the blank holding forces during the deep
drawing operation. Each loadcell has a 40.0 ton capacity, with an overload rating
of 48.8 tons. They are 50.55 mm (1.99") in diameter, and 25.4 mm (l.00") tall. The
loadcells (3) sit evenly spaced below the blank holder ring as seen in Figure 3.4.
A drawing of the loadcell can be seen in Figure 3.11, (Helm Instrument Co., Inc.).
* Part numbers are shown in Figure 3.4.
-53-
Table 3.5: Specifications of string potentiometer used for slide position
measurements on Minster press (Celesco Transducer Products, Inc.).
GENERAL
Range 762 mm (30 ")
Weight 567 gr (20 oz)
Case Material Aluminum
Sensing System Precision Potentiometer
Electrical Connector MS3102E-14S-6P
ELECTRIC
Input Resistance 500 ohms Standard
Output Resistance 138 ohms maximum Standard
Excitation Voltage 25 volts maxmimum, AC or DC
Insulation Resistance 100 meg ohms minimum at 100 VDC
PERFORMANCE
Accuracy +1- .10 % F.S. typical
Resolution .008% F.S. maximum
Thermal Coefficient 48.9 P.P.M./degreeC (88 P.P.M.I F)
of Sensing Element
Sensitivity 1.23 mVIVImm (31.26 mVIVlIN)
ENVINONMENTAL
Temperature Range -18 to +93 degrees C (0 to +200 F)
Humidity up to 90 %RH
Vibration up to 10 G's to 2000 Hz
-54 -
"A" DIM RANGE
.66 2" 10" 20"
(16.76)
.44 15" 30"
(11.18)
.17 5" 25" 40" SO"
(4.32)
20 DIA. TYp.
(5.08)
r
2.25 APPROX.
(57.15)
__--L-L--.-l
---C19
MS 3102E 1 S 6 (4.83)
-$--+-..l...4-.......
I
:<1
2.
8 "IJ
(5
\
I
--"
L
4 - P
Figure-3.9: Dimensional drawing of string potentiometer used on Minster
press slide, (Celesco Transducer Products, Inc.).
- 55-
1/8 DIA. THRU
}----.3.750---I
~ ~ ; ~ ~ i # 5 ~ 3.48 DIA 6.00 D!A.
L 1/4 R. (TYP.)
.06 x 45' CHAMFER,
2 PLACES
1.00
-A-
Cl .0005
Figure-3.10: 200-Ton loadcell for measuring punch loads in deep drawing
tooling on Minster press, (Helm Instrument Co., Inc.)
- 56-
.t!QIES;
I.) NORMAl.. CAPACITY RANGE IS fROM 4 0 T
)
(0 148p) TO 40.0 T. (0 14751'':).
2. OVERLOAD RATING IS 48.8 T.
(0 1800p).
WIRES LEADING TO
MONITORING OEVICE
TRANSDUCER BODY MACHINED FROM
'7-4PH STAINLESS STEEL
.125 DIA.
ANTI-ROTATION PIN
.03 45' CHAMFER,
80TH ENDS
Figure-3.n: 40-Ton loadcell for measuring blankholder forces on deep
drawing tooling on Minster press, (Helm Instrument Co., Inc.)
- 57-
When selecting the type of the loadcell for measuring the blank holding forces, a
loadcell "ring" was considered. This ring would be in the same location as the
current loadcells, and would measure the forces around the entire blank holder
ring. This was not done for two reasons. The first is that it would be difficult to
use the ring loadcell in future applications, unless it was another deep draw
process of similar dimensions. The second is that the ring loadcell would not
give us any indication of uneven loading around the blank holder ring.
3.3.2 Data acquisition.
3.3.2.1 Helm Trend LoadGard System
Installed on the side of the press is the Trend LoadGard System from Helm
Instruments. Front panel of the LoadGard system is shown in Figure 3.12. It is a
press load monitoring device used to protect the tooling and the machine from .
damage due to overloading. The deep drawing tooling has three 40 ton loadcells
for the die cushion, and one 200 ton loadcell for the punch.
Often, these types of systems are used with machine mounted strain gage
transducers to measure press deflec,tion during the,forming of parts. In our case,
the instrumentation is located in the tooling and not on the press. The
instrument is used to perform signal conditioning from our loadcells. This
includes signal filtering and amplification.
3.3.2.2 Data Acquisition System
The ERC/NSM has a data acquisition system to be used on various research
projects. The whole system is easily transportable and can be hooked up to
various pieces of equipment which need data acquisition. In our case, the
system will be used for the sheet metal experiments on the 160 Ton Minster
Hydraulic press. The data acquisition system will be used to collect signals of
punch and blankholding forces, and slide displacements. The heart of the
acquisition system is an Apple Macintosh IIfx computer with 4 megabyte of
internal memory and a 160 megabyte hard drive. This is where the system,
manufactured by Strawberry Tree Inc., runs on. The system is made up of a data
- 58-
/--------151/2"-------1'1
1--------- 14.75"--------
---r
." LOADGARD
-.ll.IM!lIII
TREND SERIES 4
10.0"
12 1/4"
@ @ @
@= @) '=@) ':::' 1 1 m - ~
-- ..........
..... I'D'" WI
.31 DIA
Figure-3.12: Front panel of Helm Trend LoadGard system with numbered
channels, (Helm Instrument Co., Inc.)
- 59-
acquisition card and a software package. The card (ACM2-12-16) has 16 analog
input channels, 16 digital I/O channels, and a counter/timer. It is through this
card in which signals are amplified and fed through an A/D converter. The
current ACM2 card samples at a maximum frequency of 2564 hertz (l2-bit), but
sampling rates as high as 5618 Hz can be obtained if resolution is sacrificed. The
other specifications of this board can be seen in Table 3.6.
The software (Workbench) is an icon based or object oriented programming
package for data acquisition, control, and data display. It can collect data, display
it on the screen in a graph form in real time and write it to the disk. It can also
perform numerical calculations on the data as it collects it. The collected log files
are compatible both with word processing and spreadsheet programs, making it
easier to utilize and analyze data. An example of a Workbench data collection
screen can be seen in Figure 3.13.
- 60-
Table 3.6: Specifications of data acquisition system (ACM2-12-16) for deep
drawing experiments (Strawberry Tree, Inc.)
ANALOG INPUT
Number of Channels
Resolution
Ranges
Maximum Sampling Rate
Accuracy
Range
-5 to +50mV
-25to+25mV
-50 to +500 mV
-250 to +250 mV
-1 to+ 10V
-5to5 V
Input Overload Protection
Input Impedence
Noise Rejection
50mV
+/-25mV
SOOmV
+/-250mV
lOmV
+/-5V
Resolution and Scan Time
low noise mode (.024%)
12 bits (.024%)
11 bits (.05%)
10 bits (.10%)
9bits (,20%)
DIGITAL I/O
Number of Bits
Low Level
Hi2:h Level
COUNTER/TIMER
Number
Operating Modes
Resolution
Frequency Range
16 Differential
12 - bit (1 part in 4096)
+/- 25mV, 5OmV, +/- 250 mY, 500mV, +/- 5V, +/-10 V
or autorange (Software selected.)
10,000 Hz (one channel)
The larger of:
+/-% of range +/-% of reading
.ffi% -
.16% -
.05% 2%
.05% .2%
.05% 2%
.05% .3%
50 V continuous, 150V for 1 sec
50 mV and +/- 25 mV ranges: >1000 Megohms, 200K
Ohms when not selected.
CMRR NMRR
>110 dB >30 dB
>100 dB >30 dB
> 85dB >30 dB
> 75dB >30 dB
> 60dB >30 dB
> SOdB >30 dB
One Chan' Mult Chan <1# of chans)
60 Hz 60 Hz
3200 Hz 3200 Hz
5000 Hz SOOO Hz
6000 Hz 6000 Hz
10.nmHz 34m Hz
16 Input or Output (1TL compatible)
50 rnA max. <.7 Vat 40 rnA (sink)
30 V max <250 microamps
1
pulse counting, timing, frequency output
16-bit
0-3 MHz
- 61 -
.. File [Iii..
Figure-3.13: Example data collection screen from Workbench data acquisition
software, (Strawberry Tree, 'Inc.)
- 62-
CHAPTERIV
ACCURACY OF THE MACHINE AND TOOLING SETUP
During the preliminary experiments, two types of inaccuracies have been
encountered in the force measurements. These are;
1) the differences among the loads measured in three equally spaced
loadcells located under the blank holder ring.
2) the difference between input and output die cushion forces in the
hydraulic press.
Before experiments were carried out in full extent, several experiments have
been conducted to further evaluate, and find possible causes of these two types of .
inaccuracies, and several methods have been suggested to overcome them.
4.1 Blank Holder Force Measurements.
Three button loadcells are used to measure the blank holder force dUring the
... ..
deep drawing process. These loadcells are located equally spaced under the die,
as shown in Figure-4.l. Each loadcell is expected to carry the 1/3 of the total
blankholder force. However, there are slight differences in the loads m e a ~ u r e d
in each loadcell. These differences may be due to;
1) errors introduced by inaccuracies in the data processing system,
2) errors introduced by (a) the elastic deflection of the press and tooling,
and (b) the inaccuracies in machining the tool set components.
Several experiments were conducted to evaluate the contribution of these two
error types in the overall accuracy. The results of these experiments will be
discussed in the following section.
- 63 -
VIEW A-A
Figure-4.1 Locations of blank holder loadcells.
- 64 -
4.1.1 Data processing accuracy.
Parameters of the data processing system which may possibly introduce
measurement errors are;
1) Amplification factors for different input channels.
The first test carried out was switching the load cells to different input channels
to see if a difference could be caused by the amplifier. The results which are not
printed in this report showed clearly that the amplifier has an equal
amplification on each channel.
2) Differences in load cell sensitivities.
Each loadcell, no matter how carefully manufactured, has a slightly different
sensitivity. To take this difference into account each load cell is checked after
being manufactured and the exact sensitivity is determined. A record of these
sensitivity measurements is delivered with the loadcells. Values from these
measurements determine the corresponding adjustment made by the LoadGard
system to assure an equal output for the same load for each loadcell. Since we
carried out the loadcell calibration and zero adjustments very carefully an error
caused by a loadcell reading is very unlikely.
3) Differences in the data processing or signal conditioning for the different
input channels of the data acquisition system.
To examine differences in data processing of the different input channels of the
data acquisition system, the same procedure as the one for the amplifier was
followed. This involved switching loadcell hookups to different channels.
Again, readings didn't change. Therefore, we concluded that this could not be
the error cause either.
Since all of the electromechanical parts are usually manufactured and checked
with very tight tolerances the above listed errors are not very likely to cause the
problem or have a major influence in the finally obtained inaccuracies.
- 65 -
4.1.2 Dimensional irregularities.
Other parameters which are possibly influencing the difference in force readings
are dimensional irregularities, such as parallelity of two surfaces or waviness of
one surface in circumferential direction. These are summarized below. For
clarity, a drawing of the tooling together with the numbers corresponding to
differenet sources of errors as explained below is shown in Figure-4.2.
1) Surface irregularities of the cushion platen.
It is possible that there ue irregularities in the platen surface. However, these
irregularities are hard to measure. The platen is fixed in its position so the
contribution of this error to the final error will be constant.
2) Difference in die cushion pin length.
The lengths of the cushion pins can be determined. The cushion pins in the
inner circle can only be taken out if the upper slide is dismantled. There should .
.be proper ways to determine the final height of the cushion pins measured
against a zero surface. Then, the cushion pins, can be shimmed. This would
also straighten out the platen irregularities. At the moment, two pins are
carrying the weight of the upper and lower die cushion rings all the time no
matter what the position of the die. cushion is during unloaded situation,
Figure-4.3. Because of safety reasons it is impossible to feel the pins when a load
is applied to them.
3) Surface irregularities of the lower die cushion ring.
It is quite likely that the cushion ring has some irregularities on its surface.
However, even if the orientation of the cushion ring is changed by rotating it, it
is observed that the same two pins carry the load all the time. If surface
irregularities had a major influence, it would have been most likely that pins at
other places would also carry load when the cushion ring was rotated.
4) Difference in load cell hole depth.
We judged this by looking at it with bare eyes, but we didn't measure it
quantitatively yet. However, it looked like one of the load cells was positioned
deeper than the other two.
- 66 -
3
!
~ . . ~ , .
, /" ,./ .!
.... , ,.,
I
I I
~ - - - - - - 0
i
i
,
I
v //!
I /"
! // I
(.,/ .. ,<
1
Figure-4.2 Schematic drawing of the tooling of the Minster press for drawing
axisymmeric cups. The numbers indicate the position of errors.
- 67 -
5) Differences in loadcell heights.
Since load cells are usually manufactured with very tight tolerances an error
caused by this reason is very unlikely.
6) Improper spacing of the loadcells concerning:
-angle
-off center
This type of error is illustrated in Figure-4.4. If a force and moment balance is
carried out, it is clear that the closer the loadcell is positioned to the center, the
higher the force measured by that particular loadcell will be. For unequally
spaced loadcells, the problem is that the closer the loadcells are positioned to
each other the lower the load they measure will be.
7) Surface irregularities of the upper die cushion ring (both sides).
Since the surfaces of upper and lower die cushion ring are assumed to be the
same, the same reasoning is valid for this ring as for the lower ring as explained.
above, Le. their influence is likely to be minor.
8) Surface irregularities of the upper slide.
The surface of the upper slide is never measured so no exact data is available.
However, it is not unlikely that it has the same characteristics as the die cushion
rings have. .
9) Unparallellism of slide and die cushion.
Unparallelism would be easy to measure if the ram could be fixed in a certain
position. The problem is that the load of the ram combined with unavoidable
leaks in the hydraulic system makes the upper slide creep. This seriously
troubles accurate measurements to determine unparallelism.
The second set of tests carried out were to find out if one of the above mentioned
errors has a major influence which is high enough to make the other
irregularities insignificant, Le. if the highest and/or lowest readings were related
to a particular geometric configuration. If we would find one, we could
eliminate it and considerably improve the accuracy with which we carried out
experiments. For better understanding of this problem, it is convenient to
- 68 -
o
o
Die cushion pins
which are carryi ng
o
ower die
cushion ring
o
Figure-4.3: Support of the die cushion by pins in an unloaded situation.
o
o
Loadcell offset
o
o
Figure-4.4: Improper loadcell positioning.
- 69 -
separate the above mentioned geometrical irregularities into two groups, see
Figure-4.5. These are;
la- -Surface irregularities and unparallelism of the upper slide.
Ib- -Surface irregularities and unparallelism of the cushion platen.
- Difference in die cushion pin length.
2- -Surface irregularities and unparallelism of the lower die cushion.
- Difference in load cell hole depth.
- Difference in load cell height.
- Improper spacing of the loadcells concerning:
-angle
-off center
-Surface irregularities and unparallelism of the upper die cushion (both
sides).
Since the die cushion freely turns around its symmetry axis we could easily.
change the configuration and test if there is a major error. Errors belonging to
group 1 will always occur at the same pla'ce with reference to the press frame,
whereas, errors belonging to group 2 will always occur at the same place with
reference to the die cushion. For example, if one of the loadcells would be
positioned 0.1" higher than the other two, we would always measure the highest
load at that loadcell, or vice versa for a lower positioned loadcell. It could as
well be that one of the cushion pins is longer than the other ones so we would
always measure the highest load above that pin. We have performed test runs
using configurations shown in Figure-4.6. For each configuration of the
loadcells, positions of the highest and lowest load measurements are shown in
that figure.
The test runs were all carried out without a blank and with a nominal blank
holding force of 36 Metric Tons. To take into account the scatter of the results we
conducted 3 experiments in every configuration. The forces measured are listed
in Table-4.1. All forces are in metric tons.
- 70 -
./
I
I
!
I
( //:
~ /// 'I
,/ " /.
~ / . . I
I >/'!
~ ' . :
,
i I
;
la
2
Ib
Figure-4.5: The geometrical errors in two groups.
- 71 -
o
o
",,--......
/ "
/ \
I ,
\ J
~ X
, /
---
o
o o
o
.... -&..J..oadc
/ "
I \
[ ,
~ 9J
11#1 '--_/ L
Configuration #1
o
o
Front of press
Front of press
o
o
,--......
/ "
I \
( ,
I J
X. I;i
, /
---
o
o
o
o
.... v..J..oadc
/ "
/ \
I ,
~ d>
II #2'---/ L
Configuration #2
o
o
Front of press
Front of press
o
Configuration #3
o
o
o
o
Front of press
Front of press
Figure-4.6: Three configurations used to measure the die cushion force with
corresponding load maximum and minimum.
The meaning of the symbols used in the figures is
X : Lowest load measured
d : Highest Load measured
- 72 -
Table-4.1: Blankholder Force Measurements
BHF measurements (tonf) Max. Average
Config.
1
#2
L.C. #1 L.c. #2 L.C. #3

1 12.1 10.8 9.4 2.7
1 2 12.1 10.8 9.7 2.4 2.37
3 12.0 10.0 10.3 2.0
1 11.2 9.4 11.2 1.8
2 2 10.9 10.0 11.6 1.6 1.57
3 10.6 10.1 11.4 1.3
1 10.8 11.3 10.8 0.5
3 2 10.5 11.5 10.2 1.3 1.07
3 10.6 11.5 10.1 1.4
1 Configuration numbers correspond to the ones shown in Figure 4.6.
2 Tests are repeated three times for each configuration. .
3 This is the difference between the highest and lowest load measurements in the three loadcells
at a particular configuration.
The above results clearly show that:
1) neither the maximum nor the minimum load occurs at a particular
position with reference to the die cushion ring.
2) neither the maximum nor the minimum load occurs at a particular
position with reference to the press
This leads to the conclusion that neither error group 1 nor error group 2 has a
major error affecting the total error the most, and, hence, that several errors are
roughly of the same importance. By changing the configuration, these errors
add or subtract. This explains the varying differences between the maximum
and minimum load measurements with varying configurations.
- 73 -
4.1.3 Determination of the most accurate loadcell and tooling configuration
It was likely that tracing and readjusting all errors accurately would be an
extremely time consuming and possibly expensive job. So, we would use the
press as it was available to us at that moment. However, we wanted to find a
particular position where the errors would equal out each other as much as
possible. Then, we would use this most ,favorable position for all successive
experiments. In order to find this position not only the upper die cushion ring
would be rotated with respect to the lower ring but also both rings would be
turned together. However, this idea of equaling out geometrical errors, only
holds true if loadcell readings give the real load distribution on the die cushion.
In other words, what the loadcells indicate has to be the load by which the
material is constrained. It was not likely that this was untrue since no systematic
error showed up in force readings. To justify this assumption, the following
system parameters had to be error free:
amplification and signal conditioning of each loadcell
different loadcell sensitivities had to be taken into account
data processing in the data acquisition system
geometrical offset of the loadcells
First, we took a closer look at these parameters to make sure that these did not
contain errors.
As mentioned in section 4.1.1, no systematic errors showed up when switching
loadcells to different input channels.
Each loadcell had been calibrated by the manufacturer, and from those data
unique calibration numbers were derived. These take the slight differences
between loadcell sensitivities into account. To carry out the calibration
procedure more accurately, the manufacturer provided us with calibration
numbers which were even more accurate than the ones usually used by industry.
To take the possible errors introduced by the data acquisition system into account
we used a modified procedure to enter the calibration numbers. To explain this,
a short introduction to the calibration procedure will be given below:
- 74 -
The final calibration is completed by adjusting two parameters, namely a zero
point and a gain/slope 'parameter adjustment. The zero adjustment is
obtained by tuning a potentiometer until a zero is displayed in an unloaded
situation. The gain adjustment is carried out by using a shunt resistor as a
simulated load. The resulting output is previously known and corresponds to a
certain calibration number. This number has to be displayed accurately by tuning
a second potentiometer. It is possible to use the data acquisition readings to
enter both previously described numbers. In other words, the data acquisition
system and the signal conditioner are used as one system, and possible errors in
the data acquisition system will be taken into accouIt when using this procedure.
The final possible error could 1?e caused by a geometrical offset error of the
loadcell positions, Figure-4.7. The influence of it is described in the previous
section. To obtain more insight, a quantitative analysis will be given for the
offset position 1, using the SYmbols given in Figure 4.7, below..
Force balance:
F
1
+F
z
+F
3
-Fa =0
F
1
+F
z
+F
3
= Fa (4.1)
where Fl,F2,F3 are the forces measured in three loadcells respectively
FO is the total cushion force .
Moment balance with respect to line L
Moment balance with respect to line M
r r- =0
2F
1
r-F
2
r- =0
- 75 -
(4.2)
(4.3)
Line M
ie cushion
Line L
Detail A
Offset loadcell
~ . ; l o l t l - - - - + - - Ideal position
Figure-4.7: Loadcell position offset.
Geometrical offset shown as situation #1
- 76 -
Solving equations 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 yields:
F= F(.!.- 2..J3s J
1 0 3 s(3v'6r+S(3- ..J3))
F - -fiFor
3 - 3-J2r + s(..J3 -1)
A graphical representation of these formulas,
position 1, is shown in Figure-4.8.
(4.4)
(4.5)
(4.6)
which are derived for the offset
The only difference in the graphical representations of the offset positions 2, 3,
and 4 are that the order of the line representation changes. The slopes of the'
lines do not change. Hence, the other plots ~ e not printed in this report.
As can be seen from Figure-4.8, an offset error is not likely to cause serious
problems since the maximum, estimated, offset distance is 1 mm.
After investigating and eliminating these errors in more detail, we have made
sure that the loadcell readings were as good a representation of the real force
distribution as one could possibly get with the used equipment.
4.1.3.1 Orientation of Upper and Lower Cushion Rings with Respect to Each
Other
Having reached this conclusion explained in the previous section we would try
to determine the best configuration possible. This is done by repositioning the
upper and lower die cushion rings as described below.
The lower die cushion ring and the loadcells will be positioned in 3 basic
configurations with respect to the press frame, as shown in Figure 4.9.a, by
rotating it around its axis. In each configuration, the upper ring can be
- 77 -
-e-Foree loadeell #1
-El - Foree loadeell #2
- ~ - Foree loadeell #3
20.3
20.2
~ 2 0 . 1
.9
s::
.....
~
...
rf 20
19.9
19.8
i 1
: :
.........................u.i .cu n.uol.. . t:: .
: : :
: : :
1 ~ !
! : :
: ! !
: : :
~ 1
: ;
o 1 2 3
Offset distance in mm
4 5
Figure-4.8: Loadcell offset distance with corresponding force distribution for
a total die cushion force of 60 Tons.
- 78 -
positioned in 4 possible configurations with respect to the lower ring, as shown
in Figure-4.9.b, by rotating it around its axis. This would mean that there are 12
possible configuration for the lower cushion ring, the loadcells, and the upper
cushion ring with respect to each other. Then, we would perform dry runs and
by calculating the difference between lowest and highest reading of the loadcells
we would judge which configuration was the best. .
The configurations will be named using a configuration number in the form of
(a.b). Where (a) refers to the position of the lower ring, and (b) to the position of
the upper ring. Each number represents the position given in Table-4.2, and
shown in Figure 4.9.
The tests were carried out with a nominal input die cushion force of 50 tons.
The normal speed setting (65 mml s) was used with the fast approach off.
are printed in Table-4.3, and plotted in Figure 4.10.
4.1.3.2 Orientation of The Cushion Rings with Respect to The Press Frame
After the series of experiments explained in the previous section, we decided to
?se the upper ring in position of (a.4) during all subsequent tests. This is because
changing the upper ring is a time consuming job, and as can be seen from the
results shown in Figure-4.10, not much improvement was expected from
positions other than (a.4). Upper and lower cushion rings are attached to each
other to carry out the following set of experiments. As the previous
show, it is likely that for a certain position of the diE7 rings the difference
between highest and lowest readings will be the least of all. Our intention was to
find that particular position. An extra complication, however, is that a
supposedly optimum configuration can only be determined for a certain die
cushion force range. This is because an alteration of the load causes a changing
deflection of the cushion pins and cushion rings. The changed force distribution
results in a change of the optimum setting. We decided to determine four
optimum settings for four different die cushion forces. Namely 7.5, 30, 60, and
90 tons die cushion force. Sixteen different configurations of attached cushion
rings are tested in these experiments. These configurations are shown in Figure
4.11. Figures 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, and 4.15 show the results of these experiments.
- 79 -
Position of lower ring Position of upper ring
Loadcell #1
o
2*
1 ..
Front of press
(a)
Loadcell #3
Loadcell #2
o
o
2*
3"
1 *
Front of press
(b)
4*
o
o
Figure-4.9: Basic configurations of upper and lower cushion rings.
Table-4.2: Positions of t h ~ upper and lower die cushion ring.
(resulting in12 possible alternatives, as listed in Table 4.3)
Position
a 1 as shown in Figure 4.9
2 turned 12()Ol
3 turned 240
0
b 1 as shown in F i ~ r e 4.9
2 turned 90
0
3 turned 180
0
4 turned 270
0
1 All angles are measured in clockwise direction.
- 80 -
Table-4.3: Die cushion force measurements in different configurations
BHF Measurements Total Max.
Config. L.C. #1 L.c. #2 L.C. #3 BHF Difference
1.1 19.6 22.2 23.4 65.2 3.8
1.2 20.8 22.7 23.4 65.9 1.9
1.3 19.9 21.9 23.4 65.2 3.5
1.4 20.8 22.6 22.6 66.0 1.8
2.1 21.3 21.2 23.1 65.6 1.9
2.2 21.9 21.3 22.8 66.0 1.5
2.3 22.1 19.8 23.3 65.2 2.5
2.4 22.0 21.5 22.4 65.9 0.9
3.1 21.3 21.9 22.5 65.7 1.6
3.2 21.7 22.8 21.0 65.5 1.8
3.3 21.0 21.9 23.0 65.9 2.0
3.4 21.8 22.8 21.3 65.9 1.5
- 81 -
3 2
a (Configuration of Lower Ring)
--=-- -- __ T
i
'--------=_:--====-----.:-==:::::-:.-.=!
_ = _ =..=.:-:..: ".
..............................................._ : _.._ .
-e-config a.1
.............................._......................_r- -EI -config a.2
....................................................c1' -. -con'fig a.3
:
......................................... -.::::.::::=r --M--config a.4
-... i
................................................................................................. .... ....::::::...............................................................................
I ---
-
........................................................................................................} _ u u
4.5
4
3.5
-
(I)
c
0
3
-
-
(I)
Q)
0
2.5
..
0
I.L
C
.-
2
==
is
><
1.5
ftS
:e
1
0.5
1
Figure-4.10: The maximum differences among the loads measured in three
blankholder loadcells at different configurations. These results are
also given in Table 4.3. Configuration numbers and corresponding
positions of upper and lower cushion rings are given in Figure 4.9
and in Table 4.2.
- 82 -
Configuration nurnbers
o
o
6
5
4
9
o
Loadcell
Blankholder
ring
Cushion pins
Figure-4.11: Configuration of the cushion rings attached together. The location
of the loadcell #1 (as shown by *) is taken as a reference point. This
point is rotated around its axis to obtain a particular configuration.
These configuration numbers are used in Figures 4.12, 4.13, 4.14,
4.15, and 4.16.
- 83 -
Ii!I Loadcell #1
Loadcell #2
tI Loadcell #3
30 Ton BHF
7.5 Ton BHF
12 3.5
3
10
2.5
8
'iii
'iii
2
c:
c:
0
6
0
C.
C.
" i
1.5
GI
0
0
...l
4 ...l
2
0.5
0
0
2 3
5 e
2 3
5 e 7 e 0 10 11 12 13
,.
15 16
Configuration #
Configuration #
90 Ton BHF
60 Ton BHF
35
25
30
20
25
'iii
20
'iii
15 c:
c:
~
~
"
15
..
i
10 .9
0
...l
10
5
5
0
0
2 3
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1. 15 16
2 3
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 ,. 15 16
ConfIguration #
Configuration #
Figure-4.12: Loads measured in three blankholder loadcells at four different die
cushion load settings. Configuration numbers are shown in Figure
4.11.
- 84 -
III Loadcell .1
Loadcell .2
12 Loadcell .3
7.5 Ton BHF
30 Ton BHF
'0
35
8
30
I
8
..
c
20
~
i
4
i
'5
!
i
~
~
'0
2
5
0
0
,
2

5
7

to 11
12 13 14 15 ,.
,
2

5
7

,. 11 12 13 u ,.
11
Configuration
,
Configuration
,
60 Ton BHF
110 Ton BHF
70 '00
80
80
50
~ 40
i
80
e
J
30 J
40
!
I 20
20
'0
0
,
2

7

10 t 1 12 13 '4 11 ,. ,
2
7

10 11 12, ,S '4 1S 1.
Configuration , Configuration
,
Figure-4.13: Composition of the loads given in Figure 4.12 at four different die
cushion force settings. Configuration numbers are shown in Figure
4.11.
- 85 -
Blank Holding Force 7.5 Ton
~ Blank Holding Force 30 Ton
f1JI Blank Holding Force 60 Ton
a Blank Holding Force 90 Ton
5
I
I

I I I I I I I I I
~
4

-
-
~
t/)
C

0
I-
3

-
- -
Q)
(,)
c
!
2 -
..
Q)
=
..
.-
Q
1 -
~
..
><
as
I
I
:.e
0
I
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 13141516
Configuration #
Figure-4.14: Maximum differences in the blankholder load measurements
among three loadcells at four different die cushion load settings
plotted against the die cushion configurations. Configuration
numbers are shown in Figure 4.11.
- 86 -
BHF =7.5 TOl
'ii' 4 +-+_i---i-L
3 ri-i-+-t-HH--+-+-+---t.-\.--
I 2
:! TTi-t-t--t-HHH--+-+-+-l--+---+-4.
Q
i 1
o
5 6 7 a 9 10111213 14 15 16
Configuration #
o
5 7 8 10 11 12 13 U IS I'
Configuration ,
j
5 8 7 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 18
Configuration #
BHF =90 Ton

7 a 10 11 12 13 U 15 18
Configuration #
2 -t-+-+-HH-
o
3oj--t-f-HH-+-+--+--+--+---l-
BHF =60 Ton

4-j--t-t--HH-+-+--+---i----l--l-J...-L
Figure-4.15: The maximum differences in the loadcell readings versus the
configuration at four different die cushion loads. Configuration
numbers are shown in Figure' 4.11.
- 87 -
From Figure-4.12, it can be seen that the difference between the loadcells varies
less with increasing loads. The reason is that minimal variations in die cushion
pin length have more influence when'the total applied force is low. This is
because geometrical irregularities cause a constant error up to a certain limit.
This, however, does not mean that the die cushion force is more equally
distributed with increasing load as it will be shown later on. It also shows that
when operating the press close to its maximum capacity an increase in accuracy
occurs. The reason most likely is that parallel guidance of the tooling is harder to
maintain at lower forces.
Figure 4.13 shows the contribution of each loadcell to the total load.
Measurements are made for different die cushion force settings versus the
configuration. Again, it can be seen that geometrical errors have more influence
when the total load is low. The reason for it is the same as above. The
geometrical errors are absolute errors.
The variation of the total load is caused by inaccuracies of the press control
system. Scatter is largest when operating close to the lower limit of the capacity
of the press. This is most likely because designing a hydraulic control system that
is accurate over a large range is very difficult and expensive.
Figure-4.14 shows the maximum differences in the loadcell readings versus the
configuration for four different die cushion force settings. From this figure, it is
possible to determine the optimum set ups for various experiments. Obviously,
not one particular configuration is the best for all different die cushion forces.
Hence, depending on the necessary blank holding force variation, a choice
should be made. Under most circumstances, a trade off will be necessary in
choosing the optimum setting.
Figure-4.15 basically presents the same data in a different way. The maximum
load differences are given separately. The values shown in Figures 4.14 and 4.15
are absolute forces and not percentages of the total force.
The maximum differences in blankholder loadcell readings as a percentage of the
total load are shown in' Figure-4.16. Configuration numbers used in this figure
- 88 -
are shown in Figure 4.11. Since most of the errors are independent from the
applied load, highest percentages are obtained for the 7.5 ton blank holding force.
As can be seen from the previous settings, there is a big difference between the
highest and the lowest readings for the die cushion force. Recommended
settings are listed in Table 4.4.
When experiments are carried out using the recommended configurations the
maximum difference in the blankholder loadcell readings will not exceed 1 Ton
in most of the cases, whereas in the 20-70 Ton blank holding force range it has
the possibility of getting about 0.5 Ton. This translates to less than 1% of the total
load, except for the lower range, i.e. less than 10 Ton total load, where it will be
between 5 and 10 percent.
4.2 Hydraulic Press Control System Accuracy.
4.2.1 Die cushion force input and output values
During preliminary tests which were carried out to learn more about press
characteristics, it was observed that the pre-set input values for a constant die
cushion force, F
c
, did not exactly match the cushion forces measured during the
press operation. In order to verify this observation quantitatively and to find
the exact response curves we did a number of tests. The first experiments were to
see if the following parameters had any influence in the die cushion force (Pe>
input versus output curve:
-forming speed
-pre set limit of the slide force
The tested speed settings were:
-normal speed setting (nominal speed of 65 mml s)
-slow speed setting (nominal speed of 12 mm/s)
- 89 -
Table-4.4: Recommended settings
Die cushion force Recommended
(tonf)
configuration
1
Constant 7.5 11
30 5
60 2
90 11
Variable 1-10 11
1-30 5
10-60 5
30-60 2/5
30-90 2/11
60-90 11
1These configuration numbers are shown in Figure 4.11.
Blank Holding Force 7.5 Ton
&'l Blank Holding Force 30Ton
fliI Blank Holding Force 60 Ton
51 Blank Holding Force 90 Ton
Z i
I :
I I! 'I I
! til ! i i . ; ; i
'--'r-'r--I--r'l--Ti -t___+-__t-_t
, I I I I I j \.: I:: !.:, I,
II HI TTl
I ! 1 i I I I I I
...t. i :... :,: -.- .. ;j .... :" -!,.. :I ... ,---!.i:... 'i, , .. , --'... :i.
,
! - --i "-"T---1 -
, I I I
l _1 - "'--1 -r -a. -- _-. --oJ
l l l I I I I I
;I. I I I I I I i
o
0.25
0.2
"
1\1
.2
i6
0.15
S
cD
:5
fti
0.1
(/I
1\1
:::
is
M
1\1
0.05
::E
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16
Configuration II
Figure-4.16: The maximum differences in the loadcell readings as a percentage
of the total load versus the configuration at four different die
cushion force settings. Configuration numbers are shown in Figure
4.11.
- 90 -
For the pre set limit of the slide force we chose:
-a constant limit of 150 Tons
-limit of the slide force =die cushion force (F
c
) + 20 Tons.
Force measurements and recordings were made of three die cushion loadcells
which, after addition, give the actual output of the die cushion force. These
experiments were performed without a blank in the tooling. All tests were
carried out twice to ensure reproducibility. Tests are done by increasing the die
cushion force by 5 tonf intervals except for the 33-36 tonf range where we had
noticed a jump in the measurements and decreased the increments in die
cushion force to 1 Ton.
The first result of these experiments is shown in Figure-4.17. Repeatability
turned out to be very well, all tested setups give the same result. Every mark
corresponds to one test. In Figure-4.18 to 4.21, all plotted results are average
values of the same experiments repeated twice.
In Figure-4.18, the input-output curves for a constant die cushion force setting
are plotted. The normal speed setting (65 mml s) is used, and two different
maximum slide force settings are tested. The ideal input-output relation is also
shown in Figure 4.18.
One can see, from Figures 4.17 and 4.18, that the output (F
c
) does not follow the
pre set input very accurately throughout the whole range. However, the lower
end, from 5 to 34 tons is very close to the desired input output relation. It can
also be seen that there is a certain jump in cushion force output (Fe>
corresponding to 34-35 Tons cushion force input. The reason for these
inaccuracies lies in the control of the die cushion cylinder. The die cushion force
is controlled in two different settings, low (F
c
= 1-34 Tons) and high (Fc = 35-100
Tons). For the normal speed setting, these two ranges do not connect very well,
and, hence, do not cover the whole range. For clarity, a brief explanation will
be given about the control of the die cushion cylinder.
If the press is operated with a die cushion force having a value within the range
F
c
= 1-34, then both ports #12 and #16, shown in Figure-4.19, are pressurized.
This means that only the area under the piston ( part no. 7) which does not have
- 91 -
pressure from both sides can be used effectively to supply pressure to the piston
which will result in the final cushion force. When the press is operated in the
higher range, F
c
=35-100 tons, pressure is applied only to port #12. Therefore,
all area under the piston is effective which allows higher forces. Obviously, it is
hard to control the switch of pressurization very accurately.
The jump in the die cushion force characteristic is highly affected by the
maximum slide force setting. The greater the difference between die cushion
force (Fe) and maximum slide force, the larger the gap. The two curves get closer
with increasing die cushion force values. At about 75 Tons, these are almost the
same. The fact that the slide force has so much influence is due to the difficulty
of controlling the pressure in hydraulic cylinders for different settings. Under
the circumstances of the current practice, two cylinders are acting against each
other, namely the die cushion cylinder and the slide cylinder. For both
cylinders, the fluid flow and pressure, which have to be controlled separately,
result in the required force and speed.
To get a better idea about how the maximum slide force influences the finally
obtained die cushion force (Fe) we did a number of tests, using the normal speed
setting, 65 mml s. The results are plotted in Figure-4.20. As can be seen, the die
cushion force (Fc> shows an increase with an increase in the maximum slide
force setting. However, the second and third bars plotted at the 20 and 50 Tons
die cushion force (FC> setting show that once the die cushion force output has
shown a substantial increase it is not affected by an even larger difference
between die cushion force and maximum slide force.
Another observed characteristic is that the upper end shows a decreased accuracy.
The output force never reaches the desired value of 100 Tons but instead reaches
a maximum value of 90 Tons.
It has to be noted that, despite the fact that the obtained constant die cushion
force characteristic is of good help when choosing the right pre set input values
for the die cushion force, for a normal speed setting it is not possible to obtain
certain values such as die cushion forces above F
c
=90 Tons and in the range of
Fe =37-45.
- 92 -
-... --input = output
! j -series #1
__..
100
80
-
(I)
c
60
-...
::J
a.
40
...
::J
0
(,)
20
11.
O+-----+-----t------t------r------t-
o 20 40 60 80 100
Die Cushion Foree (Fe) Input (Tons)
Figure-4.17: Comparison of pre-set die cushion force (Fe> with the cushion force
measured during the experiments. These experiments are done
using the normal speed setting, i.e. 65 mmls ram speed. Every
mark corresponds to one experiment performed using the
corresponding constant die cushion force, and 150 tons maximum
slide force.
- 93 -
100 80 60 40 20 o
o
40.
80
20
60
100 -1------4-----1------4-----1-------.1-
Figure-4.18: Constant die cushion force input and output values for a normal
speed setting, 65 mmls, for two different maximum slide force
settings.
- 94 -
SAE #16 PORT
SAE #12 PORT
SAE *16 PORT
Figure-4.19: Layout of the die cushion cylinder.
- 95 -
In Figure-4.21, the input output curve for a constant die cushion force setting is
plotted. This time the slow speed setting (12 mm/s) is used, and the same two
different maximum slide forces settings are tested. The ideal input=output
relation is also plotted.
The first observed fact is that the slide force does not have an influence. The two
plotted curves are very close. The output follows the input quite well however it
shows a consistent difference of about 5 Tons. The curve exhibits the same drop
off as the normal speed setting curve at the high end which results in the fact
that a die cushion force greater than Fc = 85 tons can r ~ o t be obtained. The best
improvement is that no gap in die cushion force output shows up at the switch
from 34 to 35 Tons.
In Figure-4.22, all curves for both normal and slow speed settings, 65 and 12
mm/s respectively, using two different slide force settings, are plotted together.
When comparing both speed settings it is obvious that the slow speed setting.
gives better results than the normal speed setting. Taking into account that it is
not easy to control a hydraulic system very accurately over a large range, the
overall characteristics of our press are quite good. In later experiments, we will
use these obtained results as guidelines to set input values (Fe) for the die
cushion forces.
4.2.2 Velocity profiles
Fast approach
The Minster press has two default speed settings. These are called slow and
normal speed settings. Currently, these speeds are set as follows;
slow speed: 12 mm/sec
normal speed: 65 mm/sec
Either one of these speed settings can be selected as the forming speed. There is a
third speed setting which is called fast approach. The speed in the fast approach
mode is 450 mm/sec for the normal speed setting and 80 mm/s for the slow
speed setting. This is intended to reduce the cycle time during production. The
- 96 -
Maximum
Slide forces
30 tons
rsJ 60 tons
~ 100 tons
E3 150 tons
100
.-..
en
c
o 80
+oJ
-....;
(I)
U
L
o
u.. 60
+oJ
:::;,
0-
+oJ
:::;,
a 40
c
o
--
.c
en
~
U 20
(I)
o
o
20 50 90
Die Cushion Input Force (tons)
Figure-4.20: Die cushion force (Fc> input and output values for different
maximum slide forces for a normal speed setting, 65 mmls.
- 97 -
100 +-------1------I
j
----+----I-------:7I-
-- input = output
~ i -I - slide f. = d.c. 1. + 20 tons ...
I I -e - slide 1. = 150 tons
en
c 80
~
-
-
::s
Q.
'S 60
o
~
If 40
c
.2
.r;
UJ
::s 20
o
G)
is
0-+-----+-----1------1-----+----1-
o 20 40 60 80 100
Figure-4.21: Constant die cushion force input and output values for a slow speed
setting, 12 mm/s, for two different maximum slide forces.
- 98 -
fast approach mode is turned off and the ram velocity decreases to either slow or
normal speed mode before the forming starts.
Objective of these test series is to find the optimum speed-stroke program. The
optimum program would be the one with the shortest cycle time without
sacrificing accuracy. So, the aim of this test series is to find out what the
minimum distance is at which one has to ,switch from fast approach speed to
drawing speed without influencing the stamping operation.
The influence of the following parameters on the obtained velocity profile are
studied:
-pre set constant die cushion force
-normal speed setting (65 mm/s), with fast approach.
-slow speed setting (12 mm/s), with fast approach.
For the pre set limit of the slide force and die cushion force we chose:
-die cushion force F
c
= 10 Tons, limit of the slide force 30 Tons
-die cushion force F
c
= 50 Tons, limit of the slide force 80 Tons
All tests were repeated three times to look at reproducibility. The results of these
tests are plotted in Figure-4.23. As can be seen from the figure, three velocity
profiles a r ~ about the same. In all subsequent tests, the speed profiles will be
calculated as an average of the three repeated experiments.
In the next test, the influence of the pre set limit of slide force and die cushion
force on the velocity profile is studied. Results are shown in Figure-4.24. The
velocity profiles are not influenced by the force settings. Hence in later tests no
extra comparison will be made between velocity profiles obtained from different
slide force settings.
The first test series are for a normal speed setting, 65 mm/ s. The fast approach
was switched of 100 mm and 50 mm before the slide would hit the die cushion.
Velocity profiles are shown in Figure-4.25. After switching off the fast approach
the slide slows down to the desired forming speed in about 60 mm. However,
- 99 -
100
U)
c 80
{:.
-
-
:::s
Q.
'S 60
o
8
...
o
LL. 4 O'
c
.2
.c
UJ
a 20
CD
is
--input = output
-I -slow sp., slide 1. = d.c. f. + 20 tons
- * -slow sp., slide f. = 150 tons
- - -0- - norm. sp., slide f. =d.c. f. + 20 ton
.. +. norm. sp., slide f. = 150 tons ,. ......

i 1 / 1
.
I ::'1' 7 I I

. : :
I I I I
0..+------1-----+----+-----t----t-
o 20 40 60 80 100
Die Cushion Force (Fe) Input (Tons)
Figure-4.22: Constant die cushion force input and output values for normal
and slow speed setting, 65 and 12 mm/s respectively, both for
two different maximum slide" forces.
- 100 -
the pre set limit for the switch from fast approach to forming speed has built in
an extra safety which switches off the fast approach about 40 rom before pre set
limit is reached. So, even when the limit is set to 50 mm before contact, this
results in a velocity profile good enough not to influence the actual drawing
operation.
In Figure-4.26, results are shown from the second test series. The velocity is set
to the slow speed setting, 12 rom/s. The fast approach limit is set to 50, 25 and
10 mm before contact. In the slow speed setting, it takes about 10 mm to slow
down from fast approach to the desired forming speed. Again, the built in extra
safety limit of 40 mm provides the slide from hitting the die cushion with a high
speed when the pre set limit is set to 10 mm before contact. From the figure, it
looks like it is possible to set the fast approach limit to a value closer than 10 rom
before contact. However, for safety reasons, we did not try that.
In conclusion it can be said that considerable decrease in cycle time can be
obtained without sacrificing the accuracy for the following limits:
-normal speed setting; 50 mm before contact
-slow speed setting; 10 ~ m before conta!=t
Second draw speed
In the normal speed setting mode, the ram speed can be reduced to a percentage
of the pre-set drawing speed at a pre-defined punch travel. This is called the
second draw speed, and it may be necessary for a coining operation towards the
end of the forming stroke. The second draw speed option has the possibility to
reduce the speed to a certain percentage of the normal speed (65 mm/sec), and it
is done by using the numbers "1" thru "9" in the control panel. If the second
draw speed is turned on before the deformation starts, it can be used as the
second option to have a different forming speed throughout the forming stroke.
It is however not possible to tum the second draw speed off during a stamping
operation once it is turned on. Also it is not possible to use the second draw
speed with the slow setting speed.
- 101 -
--slide velocity 1
............; , ,: \\t - -slide velocity 2
I I~ I ! - - -Sl.ide v e l o c ~ t y 3
400
-
.!!!
E 300
E
-
'u
o 200
l
CD
:s!
en 100
o 50 100 150 200 250
Slide Displacement (mm)
300 350
Figure-4.23: Velocity versus stroke profile for fast approach with a normal
speed setting, 65 mm/s. Fast approach is switched off at 100 nun
before the die touches the blankholder. The same test repeated
three times.
- 102 -
100 -t-------l----I----t----t-----t----r
-
~
E
-
-
'u
o
~ .
~
CiS
80
60
40
20
o
. : . 1 --profile #1
~ i ~ .c c
i : I ! ----- profile #2
t I" : :'"-__...._ ...
f \. \, i ~ - :
j ~
: : :" r I , I "
lt.............. : l J ~ ~ : t .. ~ : : : .. . - - l - ~ . l .
i ! i ; Slide hits die i:ushion
I I I i
350
100 150 200 250 300
- 2 0 -+------I-----t---.-t-----.L..-t------t----t-
50
Figure-4.24: Velocity profile for fast approach with a slow speed setting, 12
mm/s. Fast approach is switched of 10 mm before the slide
touches the die. Two different velocity profiles for different
values of maximum slide force and die cushion force (FC> are
plotted.
Profile #1: Max. slide force 30 tons, die cushion force 10 tons
- 103 -
Profile #1
400
500 -+-----+---+----+-----+---+-----t-----+
en 300
-
E
E
-
>- 200
~
(,)
o
Q)
> 100
Go)
"C
--
en
Profile #2
o
i i \ i Slideihits die cushion
I I I I I I
-1 00 -+-----+---+----+-----+----Jr:--+-----t--..l...-----+
o 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
Figure-4.25: Comparison of 2 velocity profiles for a fast approach (450 mm/s)
with a normal speed setting, 65 mm/s.
Profile #1: Fast approach is off 100 mm before the contact
- 104 -
350 300
Profile #2
Profile #3
Profile #1
250 200 150 100
40
80
20
60
...... ......
i \ i\ \ !
:
o \ ; , 1. l.. l .
I I I 1 slide hits diJ cushion
I I I . I
- 2 0
50
Figure-4.26: Comparison of 3 velocity profiles for a fast approach (80 mml s)
with a slow speed setting, 12 mml s.
- 105 -
The objective of this series is to investigate the capabilities of the second
draw speed setting more thoroughly.
The parameters observed, to see if they have any influence in the obtained
velocity profile, are:
-pre set constant die cushion force
-second draw speed setting 1
-second draw speed setting .s
-second draw speed setting 9
For the pre set limit of the slide force and die cushion force we chose:
-die cushion force Fe =20 Tons, limit of the slide force 100 Tons
-die cushion force Fe = 60 Tons, limit of the slide force 100 Tons
All tests were repeated 2 times to look at reproducibility. The result of one of
these tests is plotted in Figure-4.27. Two velocity profiles are about the same. In
all subsequent tests, the speed given will be calculated as an average of
the two repeated experiments.
As will be shown in Figures-4.28 through 4.30 the pre set limit of slide force and
die cushion force influence the obtained velocity profiles. Hence, from
tests both obtained velocity profiles will be shown.
In Figure-4.28, the velocity profile versus stroke is shown for the second draw
speed setting of 1. For this setting, the obtained velocity is 22 mm/s. As can be
seen from Figure 4.28, for a high die cushion force, the normal speed, 6S
mm/sec, decreases. The second draw speed, however, is not influenced by the
higher die cushion force. The second draw speed is set to S in Figure-4.29,
resulting in a final velocity of 14 mm/s. Again, it can be seen that the normal
speed but not the second draw speed is affected by the higher die cushion force.
The same reasoning is true for Figure-4.30, where the second draw speed is set to
9 and a final speed of S mm/s is obtained.
- 106 -
Finally, the second draw speed setting is plotted versus the obtained velocity.
The results are plotted in Figure-4.31. As can be seen an almost linear
relationship is obtained.
In conclusion, it can be said that the second draw speed setting is a perfect feature
to control the actual forming speed very accurately in the range 5 to 22.5 mm/s.
- 107 -
-slide velocity #1
- - -slide velocity #2
80
70
60
en
-
50
E
E
-
>-
40
...
0(3
0
- 30 CI)
>
CI)
"t:S
20
.-
CiS
10
0
100 150 200 250 300 350
Figure-4.27: Velocity versus stroke profile for the second draw speed set to 1
with a normal speed setting, 65 rom/so The same test is repeated
twice.
- 108 -
80
70
60
(i)
-
50
E
-E
-
40
...
"u
0
Q) 30
>
CD
:2 20
(j)
10
0
100
-profile #1
- - -profile #2
150 200 250 300 350
Figure-4.28: Comparison of 2 velocity profiles for the second draw speed set to 1
(22 mm/s) with a normal speed setting, 65 mm/s. Results are
plotted for two different values of maximum slide force and die
cushion force (PC>.
- 109 -
-profile #1
350
#2
300 250 200 150

100
40
20
80
60
-
rn
-
E
E
-
(,)
o
Q)
"C
.-
en
Slide Displacement- (mm)
( 14 mm/s) with a normal speed setting, 65 mm/s. Results are
cushion force (Fe>.
- 110 -
80 -4----1------+----\----1------+-----+-----1-
! . I , " \! . !
..a.................... ...~ u _ _ t
n
~ ~ l. .. ..t.. t..
\ ~ ~ I !I I !
1 l ~ 'A 1\ I i I \ II l
1 i i II - \ I Ii: ~ \
. . . N I .
! l ! II L I II I
.........................................................1. 1.. L..!1.. 1. ~ L .
-profile #1
- - -profile #2 Oli, hits die CUOrlOn I! I
I ! I .
O-+----+----+----f------t----"ll-----\------'-
40
20
60
-
en
-
E
E
-
-
.(3
o
~
CD
"0
.-
en
o 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
(5 mm/s) with a normal speed setting, 6S mm/s. Results are
cushion force (Fe).
- 111 -
25 +---+---+---+---+----t-------1r--------i---r
20
~
E 15
E
-
>.
- 6
o 10
~
CI)
'a
.-
iii 5
O+----'-----+----I-----I-----+-----r---+-----t-------t-
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Second Draw Speed Setting
Figure-4.31: The velocity measurements at different second draw speed
settings.
- 112 -
CHAPTERV
MATERIAL PROPERTIES AND PROCESS PARAMETERS
5.1 Materials.
To carry out deep drawing experiments we had five materials in our disposal.
l'hese are; two different aluminum alloysl (AA), and three types of steel
2
These materials and their thicknesses are shown in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 Materials which are used in the experiments.
Material Thickness [mm] (in)
AA 1100-0 0.8128 0.031
AA 2024-0 1.016, 1.6002 0.040, 0.063
High Strength Hot Dipped
Galvanized Steel 0.889 0.035
Interstitial Free Steel 0.8382 0.033
Univit Steel 0.7874 0.031
The stock material came in large sheet, and needed to be cut into circular blanks.
Since the punch diameter is constant, Le. 154.4 mm (6.0 in), sheet metal blanks
are cut into different diameters to study the effect of draw ratio on strains, forces,
and failure evaluations.
1 Aluminum alloys which are used in these experiments are obtained from the following companies;
AAI100-o : ALCAN Rolled Products Co.
AA2024-0 : Grumman Aerospace Co.
2 All types of steel which are used in these experiments are obtained from ARMCO Research and Technology,
Carbon Steel Flat-Rolled Products, Middletown, Ohio.
-113 -
In order to carry out simulations using Finite Difference Method (FDM) based
computer program, several material parameters, such as n, K, eO' and R value,
are needed. Using FDM simulations, We could estimate the necessary initial
BHF to carry out the experiments. The material properties we obtained are listed
in Table 5.2.
Material n
K [Nmm-
1
]
R
0
AA 1100-0 0.2297 161.736 0.8955 0
AA 2024-0 0.134 266.15 0.73 0
High Strength Hot Dipped
Galvanized Steel 0.143 603.83 1.40 0.000328
Interstitial Free Steel 0.263 622.38 1.95 0.000846
Univit Steel 0.254 525.19 1.45 0.008742
5.2 Strain Measurements.
A grid is etched on the blanks to enable us to do strain measurements to verify
the results of the FDM program. There are two methods available to produce
circles on a surface:
Photo printing
Electrochemical etching
Photo printing is usually used for small components with low friction during
the stamping operation, i.e. mainly stretching and no draw in.
1 Material properties for different materials are obtained as follows;
AAI100-0; from tensile tests. (Ahmetoglu. 1992)
AA2024-0; from literature. (Nagpal. 1979).
All three types of steel; from the supplier.
-114-
Electrochemical etching produces a grid much more resistant to wear during
deformation, since it is etched into the material. The depth varies from 0.0025
mm - 0.25 mm, and is not supposed to influence the sheet metal properties.
Since this type of grid is more robust we choose electrochemical etching for our
experiments. Circle diameters vary from 1.27 mm - 12.7 mm. The
recommended size of the circles depends on the expected strain gradient and the
sheet geometry. For our geometry and st!ain distribution, a 2.54 mm circle
diameter would be accurate enough.
. To measure the circle diameters after deformation a traveling microscope which
is located in Material Science and Engineering Department is used. Major and
minor strains are calculated from the measured diameters in two orthogonal
directions, and later compared to the strain predictions by the FDM simulations.
S.3 Lubrication.
Two types of friction conditions are used in the experiments. These are;
1- Dry friction
2- Lubricated1 .
Different lubricants are used for different blank materials. These lubricants are
listed below;
- for aluminum alloys: product no. DB-42S1
- for steel: product no. DB-4210N
Both lubricants are water base emulsified drawing compounds. DB-42St is
especially designed for use over aluminum surfaces. It contains neither
pigmented nor extreme pressure additives. DA-4210 is a heavy duty, lightly
pigmented, synthetic drawing compound for use in stretch drawing ferrous
metals.
The friction coefficients we used are listed in Table S.3.
1 Lubricant for both aluminum and steel are obtained from Metal Lubricants Co.
-115 -
Table 5.3: Friction coefficients used in the
Friction condition Friction coefficient
dry friction 0.25
1
DB-4251 0.13
2
DB-421ON 0.13
1The friction coefficient for dry friction is based on suggested values from literature.
2 The friction coefficients for the two water base lubricants we used are derived from preliminary
FDM simulations.
Several simulations were conducted using different friction coefficients to
simulate the deep drawing process under lubricated conditions. Predicted strains
and punch forces were compared with the experiment results, and the best
match is obtained using the friction coeeficients given in Table 5.3.
-116 -
CHAPTER VI
ANALYSIS OF THE DEEP DRAWING PROCESS
The FDM based analysis program SHEET_FORM is used to simulate the deep
drawing process. In this chapter, a brief description of SHEET_FORM will be
provided. For a detailed description of the concepts, references will be made to the
previous reports. Although SHEET_FORM can be used to simulate plane-strain
geometries and redrawing operations, only the axisymmetric deep drawing module
will be explained in this chapter. Detailed explanations for plane-strain, and
redrawing simulation modules can be found in the references (Ahmetoglu, 1990),
and (Ahmetoglu, 1992a) respectively.
6.1 Description of the analysis program, SHEET_FORM.
SHEET_FORM is an interactive computer-aided design system for analyzing
axisymmetric and plane-strain deep drawing and stretch forming processes. The
input to the system includes important process and material variables such as blank
diameter, sheet thickness, punch diameter, die opening diameter, die and punch
profile radius, blankholder force, sheet metal-tool interface friction, anisotropy
value, and strain hardening exponent. The output from the system includes punch
load-displacement variations, and the distribution of radial, circumferential and
thickness stress-strain values along the length of the cup at any stroke of the punch.
Constant as well as variable blankholding forces as a function of punch
displacement can be simulated during the analysis process. SHEET_FORM is
implemented in FORTRAN, runs on both VAX/VMS and PC/DOS operating
system and uses PLTPAK, developed at The Ohio State University, for graphics.
The deep drawing analysis used in SHEET_FORM is based on Woo's approach,
(Woo, 1964; Woo, 1968). Any cup drawing process can be divided into two major
stages: embossing stage and the drawing stage. In the initial embossing stage, the
punch bottom shape is merely impressed on the flat blank, therefore, the punch
-117 -
load required is small. In the drawing stage, the flange is compressed, the material
is bent over the die radius -and then unbent and straightened to form the wall of the
cup. During this stage, the workpiece can be divided into six distinct zones, as seen
in Figure 6.1,
Zone 1:
Zone 2:
Zone 3:
Zone 4:
ZoneS:
Zone 6:
Radial drawing of the flange between the die and the blankholder
with frictional resistance present at the interface,
Radial drawing of sheet not in contact with the blankholder,
Radial drawing and bending over the die comer radius,
Unbending and straightening to form the wall of the cup,
Bending, sliding, and stretching over the punch profile,
Biaxial tensile stretching of sheet over the bottom surface of the
punch.
The equations for volume constancy and equilibrium governing the mechanics of
sheet metal forming at each zone listed above can be found elsewhere, (Ahmetoglu, .
1990; and Sitaraman, 1989).
6.2 Prediction of stresses, strains, and punch force
SHEET_FORM is based on the Finite Difference Method, uses incremental
deformation theory, and assumes that the material is rigid-plastic. The sheet
material is further assumed to be isotropic in the plane of the. sheet, and anisotropic ?
in the normal or the thickness direction. Hill's "old" yield function is used to define
. -
the yield surface, and Hollomon's power-lawequation is used to describe the
hardening curve of the material. The tool-workpiece interface friction condition is
modeled using the modified Coulomb friction law. For a detailed description, see
the references (Ahmetoglu, 1990; and Sitaraman, 1989).
One half of the sheet metal blank is modeled during the simulation. The blank is
divided into N elements of equal length. For N elements, there are N+1 bOundaries
or nodes. The deep drawing process is modeled stage by stage as a quasistatic
process, and for a given stage J of the punch displacement, all strains ana stresses
throughout the workpiece at the end of the previous stage J-l are known. The stress
-118 -
6
Figure 6.1: General geometry and different zones in a deep drawing
operation
-119 -
I
I
I
and strain distributions in the workpiece at the current stage during the deformation
are determined by solving the equilibrium, geometry, and constitutive equations
simultaneously. At any stage, the punch force required to draw the sheet can be
determined from the knowledge of stresses in the sheet at the beginning of Zone 4
(see Figure 6.1) because this zone serves as a link for transmitting the punch force to
the flange compression.
6.3 Failure evaluation
During the simulation, stresses and strains are evaluated to predict wrinkling and
fracture. Failure criteria that are used in the failure evaluation module are;
1) Forming limit diagram,
2) Absolute thickness strain,
3) Thickness strain gradient,
4) Cockroft and Latham criterion
5) Stress based fracture criterion
6) Wrinkling criterion.
A detailed description of these criteria can be found elsewhere, (Asthana, 1991).
During the simulation, stresses and strains are predicted at incremental punch
travels, after which the failure evaluation module is called. If failure is not
predicted, the simulation continues with the next stage. Ha failure is predicted, a
message indicating the position and reason for the failure is displayed on the screen,
and the user is allowed to terminate the simulation and make changes in the process
and geometry data. The user may override the failure message and continue with
the simulation.
6.4 Optimization of the Blank Holder Force (BHF)
During the deep drawing of axisymmetric. cups, the important failure modes are
wrinkling and fracture. The most commonly used method to prevent wrinkling is
the application of blank holding forces (BHF) at the periphery of the cup. The value
-120 -
of the BHF is an important factor to eliminate wrinkling, and in the mean time, not
to cause fracture. If the BHF is low, wrinkling may occur. On the other hand, if it is
too high, fracture will occur. If a constant BHF is used, then the BHF should be
kept within a certain operating range to obtain the desired depth, as shown in
Figure 1.2.
Considering the fact that different modes of failure becomes important at different
punch travels during the deformation, the BHF does not have to be kept constant
throughout the deformation. Wrinkling is important at the beginning of ~
deformation due to the large compressive stresses in the flange of the cup. ~ I
However, as the deformation progresses radial stresses buildup in the wall of the
cup and fracture may occur due to an excessive amount of stretching. Therefore,
. .
the BHF should be varied during the forming process instead of being kept constant.
There are several methods suggested in the literature to predict the variation of the
BHF during the forming process. Three of these methods are programmed into.
SHEET_FORM. In this se<:tion, these methods will be explained.
6.4.1 Punch Force Control Method
In deep drawing, the main reason fo 'applying the BHF is to control the metal flow
and prevent wrinkling. The pun force control method comes from the idea that
the BHF should be as high as 0 to prevent wrinkling without causing fracture
in the sheet metal. One method to predict fracture in the sheet metal is to monitor
the punch force since it is related to the forces in the sheet metal. The procedure for
the punch force control method is explained below.
In deep drawing, deformation is obtained by the application of a punch force to the
bottom of the cup. This force is carried to the wall and the flange of the cup in the
form radial stress, Figure 6.2. Considering the free body diagram of the cup
between the points A and C, Figure 6.2, the punch force, Fp' should be in
-121-
r
B
I
I
I
I
r
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
I
A
B
I
I
I
Figure 6.2: Forces acting on the sheet metal during the deep drawing operation.
-122-
t:h:1J- adlt.v.

&S gtofH' 1JeuacWL<-!'/
#CleM- ()/J..
r;to-n dee,( eii." 0<:a.k.le"
I
equilibrium with the vertical component of the tangential force, F
ty
' at the punch
nose.
(6.1)
The tangential force should not be so high as to cause fracture or necking in the sheet
metal. The maximum value of the tangential force, Ft' can be calculated from the
necking conditions.
where
(6.2)
Combining equations 6.1 and 6.2 gives
(6.3)
where A: normal area of the sheet at point C
F
t
: tangential force at point C
9: separation angle of the sheet at the punch nose
K: strength coefficient
n: strain hardening exponent
Eo: initial strain
During the process simulation, the starting value for the BHF is defined by the user.
At each step of the simulation, the punch force is calculated and compared to the
value calculated from the Equation 6.3. In the beginning of the deformation, when
there is not much metal flow, the punch force is low compared to the value
calculated from Equation 6.3. To increase the punch force, the BHF should be
increased to a high level. This will cause an extensive amount of stretching and
fracture at the punch nose in the very early stages of the deformation. Therefore,
the punch force control scheme starts after a certain amount of deformation or when
the punch force reaches the value calculated from Equation 6.3. By adjusting the
BHF, the punch force computed during the simulation is kept close to the optimum
punch force calculated from the Equation 6.3. Several iterations with an adjusted
value of the BHF are required to obtain the desired tolerances.
-123 -
Punch force control method is illustrated using High Strength Hot Dipped
Galvanized Steel and the geometry shown in Figure 3.2. The cup geometry,
process, and material parameters are given in Table 6.1. A blank of 330.2 mm
diameter and 0.889 mm thick was used in the simulations. Two different starting
value of the BHF were used. The predicted BHFs are shown in Figure 6.3. As can be
seen in Figure 6.3, the BHF initially stays constant until the critical punch force
calculated from the Equation 6.3 is reached, and it is lowered initially to reduce the
punch force and prevent fracture. Towards the end of the deformation, as the
flange area decreases, the punch force drops, and at this point the BHF can be
increased. After the sheet metal leaves the blank holder area, there is no need for
the BHF, and it stays constant, as shown in Figure 6.3.
Punch force distributions resulted from the BHF variations starting from 200 kN,
and 400 kN are shown in Figures 6.4 and 6.5 respectively together with the optimum
punch force distribution calculated from the Equation 6.3. Punch force distributions
obtained by using constant BHFs of 200 kN and 400 kN in the simulations are also
shown in these figures. As shown, fracture was predicted in each case using
constant BHFs. However, during the simulations using both BHF variations shown
in Figure 6.2, fracture was not predicted.
Starting from two different value, a l m o ~ t the same variations are predicted. The
punch force distributions resulting from both BHF variations shown in Figure 6.2 are
plotted in Figure 6.6.
6.4.2 Radial Stress Control Method
Instead of comparing the punch force with an optimum value, the maximum radial
stress computed during the process simulation can be directly compared to a critical
value. This critical value can also be obtained from the stress necessary for necking:
(6.4)
If the maximum radial stress exceeds this critical stress, necking will start and will
result in fracture. On the other hand, if the radial stress is too low which means a
low BHF, it will result in wrinkling. Therefore, the BHF is varied during the
process simulation to keep the maximum radial stress close to the critical value
-124 -
-- BHF Var.-I (kN)
- - - BHF Var.-II (kN)
............u j.. u+ i ..
: : :
~ i l
: : :
: : :
70
140
210
280
350
-z
~
-
o
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.3: BHF variation predictions based on punch force control method.
-125 -
Material: High Strength Hot Dipped Galvanized Steel
Control Criterion: Maximum Punch Force
Starting BHF=200 kN
0=330.2 mm
140 120 100
BHF.200 kN (constant)
80 60 40 20
!/ - !
: Optimum ! ! A
: I Punch Force ! ! i
............... 1.\_
r I i ! 1 BHF.Var.-1I 1 \
1l1_._..
I I I Ii! \
I I I I I I I \
OE..JI.-.L--1-....L-.....L-...L..-.L......JI.-.L--1-....L--1-....I.-.L.....JI.-.L--1--L.. ...L..- .........
o
50
200
100
150
-Z
.:.=
-
If
.c
u
c
i.
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.4: Punch force distributions using constant 200 kN, and variable BHF
based on punch force control method together with the optimum
punch force distribution calculated from the Equation 6.3.
-126 -
Control Criterion: Maximum Punch Force
Starting BHF=400 kN
0=330.2 mm
250
-Z
.llII:
-
200
150
100
50
o
.. 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.5: Punch force distributions using constant 400 kN, and variable BHF
based on punch force control method together with the optimum
punch force distribution calculated from the Equation 6.3.
-127 -
250
BHF=VarAI
200
140 120 100 80 60 40 20
....................., j,I .
i(J i Optimum 1 1 \
VI i Punch Force iii\

/ I I I I I I \
50
o
o
-z
150
ti.
.c 100
(,)
C
:3
D.
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.6: Punch force distributions using the BHF variations given in Figure 6.3
together with the optimum punch force distribution calculated from
the Equation 6.3.
-128-
Table 6.1: Summaryof tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of HSG steel.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die opening diameter
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
Material properties and blank dimensions
r (anisotropy factor) 1.40
K (strength coefficient) 603.83 [MPa]
n (strain hardening exponent) 0.143
0 (pre strain) 0.000328
Blank diameter 330.2 [mml
Blank thickness 0.889 [mml
(87.58 [ksi])
(13")
(0.035")
Process conditions
Lubrication condition
Initial blank holder force
dry
200 kN, 400 kN
-129 -
within a tolerance. An iteration is performed on BHF at each step during the
simulation to predict the optimum BHF variation.
Two BHF force variations are predicted starting from the initial values of 200 kN and
400 kN, Figure 6.7. Radial stress control method is activated when the radial stress
reached to the critical value. BHF is initially reduced and later increased towards the
end of the deformation. This increase towards the end of the deformation may not
be necessary for most of the materials because wrinkling will not be important since
the flange area is reduced considerably at that stage.
The maximum radial stress distributions resulting from the BHF variations shown in
Figure 6.7 are plotted in Figures 6.8 and 6.9 together with ,the results of constant
BHFs. As can be seen in Figures 6.8 and 6.9, in both cases, fracture was predicted
using constant BHFs.
Both maximum radial stress distributions resulting from two BHF variations given .
in Figure 6.7 are plotted in Figure 6.10. As can be seen in the figure, the difference.
in the initial value of the BHFs does not affect the resulting distribution very much.
6.4.3 Thickness Strain Control Method
Thickness strain computed during the process simulation can be used to predict
fracture. If the thickness strain is more then a predefined limit, than BHF can be
modified to reduce it.
BHF variations starting from 200 kN and 400 kN initici1 values are shown in Figure
6.11. In these simulations, a limit of 10% thickness strain was used. The BHF was
reduced in the beginning of the deformation and stayed constant until the end of the
deformation.
Maximum thickness strain distributions for both BHF variations given in Figure 6.10
are given in Figures 6.12 and 6.13. As can be seen in Figure 6.13, the maximum
thickness strain has reached 25% and fracture has predicted at this point. However,
by varying the BHF it was possible to keep the maximum thickness strain around
10% and complete the deformation. Failure criterion was turned off during the
-130 -
-- BHF Var.-I
........................................ .... i j .
1 ! i - - BHF Var.-II i
~ ~ ! i
i i l i
! i ! . . ~
f rl1"I"l .
70 --looor--"i=-ro-o---r-----
o
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140.
Punch Travel (mm)
210
140
280
350
420
-Z
.:.=
-
~ .
If
..
CD
'tJ
'0
:r:
.:.=
c
.!!
m
Figure 6.7: BHF variation predictions based on radial stress control method.
-131-
Material: High Strength Ho'" Dipped Galvanized Steel
Control Criterion: Maximum Radial Stress
Starting BHF=200 kN
0=330.2 mm
140 120 100 80 60 40 20

....................J .h I J j 1.....
i /;-- i i
700
600
500
-
t.
:i
-
400
en
en
!
-
300
en
1i
=a
ca 200
a:
100
0
0
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.8: Maximum radial stress versus punch travel using constant 200 kN,
and variable BHF based on radial stress control method together with
the critical radial stress calculated from the Equation 6.4.
-132 -
Material: High Strength Hot Dipped Galvanized Ste.1
Control Criterion: Maximum Radial Stress
"Startlng BHF=400 kN
0=330.2 mm
. ! ~ ~ i i !
1 ~ I ---+-- BHF..400 kN (constant) 1
rr,t+ + .
i / iii Critical Radial Stress
140 120 100 80 60 40 20
700
600
-
500
as
a.
:E
-
400
fI)
!
(j) 300
'ii
-
i
200
II:
100
0
0
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.9: Maximum radial stress versus punch travel using constant 400 kN,
and variable BHF based on radial stress control method together with
the critical radial stress calculated from the Equation 6.4.
-133 -
600
500
-
as
I:L
400
:E
-
tn
300
tn
!
...
UJ
200
-
as
.-
'tJ
as
100
a:
T . ! !' .
i ! ! ! Critical Radial Stress

I- ..t+f+ /.\ -
II BHF=Var.-1 i 1 i i
a
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
Punch Travel (mm)
140
Figure 6.10: Maximum radial stress distributions using the BHF variations given
in Figure 6.7 together with the critical radial stress calculated from the
Equation 6.4.
-134-
-- BHF Var.-I
- - - BHF Var.-II
\
\
70
280
210
I - - - - - - - = ~
140
o
o 30 60 90 120 150
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.11: BHF variation predictions based on Maximum Thickness Strain
Control method.
-135-
Control Criterion: Maximum Thickness Strain
Starting BHF=200 kN
0=330.2 mm
0.1 5
kN ! /' - - 1- __ t-",
; i / i 1
Thickness Strain Limit' ! 1
0.12
0.09
I //! !
i / i 1
0.06
0.03
o
o 30 60 90
Punch Travel (mm)
120 150
Figure 6.12: Maximum thickness strain versus punch travel using constant 200 kN
,
and variable BHF based on thickness strain control method together
with the maximum desirable thickness strain.
-136-
0.3
Control Criterion: Maximum Thickness Strain
Starting BHF:400 kN
0:330.2 mm

.
1/ ! . 1
..............................1',. rr "]" .
..-=-+-- ..
/ I BHF..Var.-1I I I
I 1 i i
0.24
0.18
0.12
0.06
o
o 30 60 90 120 150
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.13: Maximum thickness strain versus punch travel using constant 400 kN,
and variable BHF based on thickness strain control method together
with the maximum desirable thickness strain.
-137 -
simulation using the constant BHF of 200 kN. In this case, the maximum thickness
strain has reached 14%.. By varying the BHF, it was possible to reduce the
maximum thickness strain to 10%, as shown in Figure 6.12.
BHF variations predicted using the three methods explained before are shown in
Figures 6.14 and 6.15 for the starting value of 200 kN and 400 kN, respectively. All
three methods yielded similar variations. In the BHF variation obtained by
maximum thickness strain method, an increase is not predicted because this method
does not try to approach an optimum thickness strain trajectory; rather it tries to
keep the thickness strain lower than a certain value.
-138 -
Material: High Strength Hot Dipped Galvanized
Starting BHF=200 kN
.0=330.2 mm
240
140 120 100 80 60 40 20
!
i -- Punch Force Control

; \ ; \ ;
o
o
60
180
120
-Z
JIl:
-
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure 6.14: BHF variation predictions based on punch force, Maximum radial
stress, and maximum thickness strain control methods with an
initial BHF of 200 kN.
-139 -
Starting BHF=400 kN
0=330.2 mm
--r-T--
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Punch Travel (mm)

,1 ! i -- Punch Force Control
: \: :
!C t L..... - - Radial Stress Control
I, \ I I ---Thickness Strain Control
o
o
70
280
210
140
350
Figure 6.15: BHF variation predictions based on punch force, maximum radial
stress, and maximum thickness strain control methods with an
initial BHF of 400 kN.
-140 -
CHAPTER VII
RESULTS OF EXPERIMENTS AND COMPUTER SIMULATIONS
Deep drawing experiments have been conducted using the axisymmetric tool
geometry shown in Figure 7.1 in the 160 ton hydraulic double-action press whose
specifications are given in Figure 3.1 and table 3.1.
The purpose of these experiments was; first, to verify the results predicted by the
FDM based analysis program SHEET_FORM, and second, to study the effect of
BHF on the deep drawn cup quality. Both constant and variable BHF as a function
of punch travel were used in these experiments. BHF variations were first predicted
by SHEET_FORM, and later, verified and further developed by conducting a series
of experiments.
Different Aluminum Alloys and steels were used in the experiments. All the
materials which are used in the experiments are summarized in Section 5.1.
Two different friction conditions used in the These are;
- water based lubricant
- dry friction
These friction conditions are explained in Section 5.3.
7.1 Deep Drawing Experiments and Comparison with Simulation Results
Deep drawing experiments were performed using the cup tool geometry shown in
Figure 7.1, and strain and punch force measurements were compared with the
simulation results. The effect of draw ratio, material, friction, and BHF on the
strains and punch force have been studied. Strains were measured based on the
circle grid analysis method. All of the circle grid measurements were performed on
a traveling microscope located in the Materials Science and Engineering Department.
- 141 -
<1154.0 mm
<1152.4 mm
<l158.2mm
Figure 7.1: Tool geometry for axisymmetric deep drawing experiments.
- 142-
Aluminum Alloy 1100-0
The first material tested was 0.81 mm thick Aluminum Alloy (AA) 1100-0. For
clarity a summary of the tool geometry, material, and process conditions are given
in Table 7.1 Two different blank diameters were used in the experiments. These are
254.0 mm and 266.7 mm corresponding to draw ratios of 1.667 and 1.75, respectively.
Different constant BHFs, given in Table 7.1, were used in the experiments.
An experiment was performed using 254.0 mm diameter blank under 38.22 kN BHF.
The cup was fully drawn to the h ~ i g h t of 73.8 mm. The force profile predicted by
FDM results corresponds very well with experimental data as shown in Figure 7.2.a.
Since no friction study has been done using the water based lubricant, the friction
coefficient was not known a priori. Therefore, several friction coefficients were tried
in the simulations. The best agreement is found for a friction coefficient of 0.13. The
predicted punch load maximum, however, appears slightly after the experimental
determined one. Once the force starts declining, it can be seen that the FDM .
predicts a steeper drop than the experimentally obtained one. The most likely.
reason for this is that due to earing, the outer' most parts of the ears are still under
the blank holder while the mean flange diameter is on the die comer radius. This
will supply a force to the flange which will in tum result in a higher punch force.
The FDM code does not take non-axisymmetry due to anisotropy into account, i.e.
no earing is simulated. Thus as soon as the (mean) diameter has left the blankholder
the punch load will drop sharply to zero. The predicted radial strain profile matches
the experimentally determined one quite well, too, as shown in Figure 7.2.b. As can
be seen, a variation in friction coefficient does not alter the strain distribution very
much.
Another experiment was carried out under the same process conditions except with
an increased BHF. The BHF was increased to 78.4 kN in this experiment. Tl1e
predicted punch force profile shows a good match again with the measured one as
shown in Figure 7.3.a. The best match again is found for a friction coefficient of 0.13.
A slight shift of the load maximum can be seen in this plot, too, in experimental
measurements. The radial strain profile shows a good match except at the edge of
the cup as shown in Figure 7.3.b. In this region, the experimentally measured
strains show a drop off. The reason for this is that strain measurements were done
in a section between the two ears. Since towards the end of the forming process, the
- 143-
Table 7.1: Summary of tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of AA 1100-0
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
() (pre strain) 0
Blank diameter 254.0, 266.7 [mm]"
Blank thickness 0.8128 [mm]
(23.46 [ksi])
(10", 10.5")
(0.032")
Process conditions
Blank holder force
water base lubricant ....
38.2, 51.5, 54.0, 78.4 [kN]"
.. The values indicated with a asterisk (..) vary with different experiments in one
test series. For the exact value see the header of the specific simulation plot.
.... The resulting friction coefficient used in the simulations for this lubrication
condition is listed in the legend of the corresponding plot.
- 144-
Material: AA1100-0, BHF=38.22 kN
0=254.0 mm, t=0.81 mm
water base lubricant
i
: :--
,.- : .........
__/1-. ,______1-______: _,._\;.._._ , .
" / '!J : __.._ Experiment 1 \1 I
-- FDM. fric.=0.09 "/"" _.."!"._ .
-i-i=::: :::::: Jr.'+-:----
30
25
-
20
Z
-CI)
CJ
...
15
0
U.
.c
CJ
C
10
:::J
a.
5
0
0 20 40
60 80
100
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.2.a: Punch force versus stroke diagram measured dwing the deep drawing.
of AA 1100-0.
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
I
Experiment !
! : :
-- FDM. frlc.-0.09
- - FDM, frlc.-0.13! i Z ,
i 1. i
- - - FDM, frlc.-0.15
o
- 0.1
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Original Distance. From Center (mm)
Figure-7.2.b: Comparison of predicted radial strain with the experimentally
measured ones in deep drawing of AA 1100-0.
- 145-
D=254.0 mm, t=0.81 mm
100 80 60 40 20
,

/'l! i .\ \ i
_...... ----.1 _- + .
,/! ! " \ !
.. __-t-_ \\;1,-----1--.._...._..
, , --..- Experiment i \ '41 i
........//i-
L
- .....,......._. -- FDM, fric.=0.09 1---.. ......
/ 'i ! \' i
.. -, _ :::::::::: +..- i.\.. .. -..
/.' i i \ i '
! !
35
30
25
-Z
..:.::
-
20
CI)
Co)
...
0
U.
15
s::.
Co)
c:
a.
10
5
0
0
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.3.a: Punch force versus stroke diagram measured during the deep drawing.
of AA 1100-0.
0.35
Experiment
0.25
0.15
0.05
-0.05
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Original Distance From Center (mm)
- 146-
BHF is applied only over the ears there is not much restraining force between the
ears. Therefore, radial stresses and radial strains are lower in these regions. Again,
it can be seen that a difference in friction coefficient does not make much of a
difference in the finally predicted strain distribution. Both friction coefficients of
0.13 and 0.15 result in virtually the same strain distribution which is close to the
experimentally obtained one.
As can be expected, a higher punch load appears with increased blankholding force
when comparing the previous two experiments.
Another experiments was performed using the same process conditions given in
Table 7.1 except in this case a blank of 266.7 mm diameter was formed using a BHF
of 54.0 kN. In this experiment, the cup was partially formed to 50 mm height. The
comparison between predicted and measured punch forces using three different
friction coefficients is shown in Figure 7.4.a. The increase in the predicted punch
forces is found to start slightly later in almost all of the comparisons with the.
measured punch force distributions. The radial strain distribution is shown in .
Figure 7.4.b. Since the cup was not fully formed and a flange was left under the
blankholder, the strains reduce toward the edge of the cup. Towards the very edge
of the blank, the strain increases slightly. The reason for this is that due to earing,
the strains are not fully axisymmetric.
The previous experiment was repeated with the same process conditions except this
time the cup was fully formed without leaving a flange under the blankholder.
Punch force and radial strain distributions are shown in Figures 7.5.a and b. Both
punch force and strain distribution show a good match with the same slight
irregularities as the ones found in previous comparisons. Concerning different
friction coefficients, for the punch force versus stroke comparison, it looks like the
best agreement occurs for a friction coefficient between 0.13 and 0.15. For the radial
strain distribution, the friction coefficient does not have much effect on the resulting
strain predictions.
After having simulated the above described four experiments using three different
friction coefficients, the best overall agreement was found for a friction coefficient of
0.13. This value was used in all of the subsequent simulations where the water base
lubricant was used.
- 147-
0=266.7 mm, t=0.81 mm
50 40 20 30
Punch Travel (mm)
10
,
,
-- FDM, fric.=0.09 1..--------,..-.. J : :;:. :::::: .
- - FDM, fric.=0.13 ! ! i. __ ----=:

40
35
30
-Z
25
.:.:
-
(I)
U
a-
20
0
LL
.:
U 15
c
:::J
Q.
10
5
0
0
of AA 1100-0.
0.25
0.2
c
0.15
'i
a-
u;
CG
0.1
'0
CG
a:
(I)
0.05
::J
a-
0
-0.05
0
20
Experiment
40 60 80 100 120 140
- 148-
0=266.7 mm, t=O.81 mm
100 80 40 60
Punch Travel (mm)
20
I t __: :
.............._.._ J .. .. L .
i ,.' //It,a \" I
............................_ !._ : ... __ _ L 1 L. .
i ,rill I i I
.. _ +:;L... ....-1.._...._ +_ ......
: : \ \ :.
-=- ...::::"":'=0.:.
, I! i \ '
: I! - - FDM, fric.=0.13 i '.
4----- ---FOM. "'0.=0.15 ---f-
35
30
25
-
E
E
-
20
4)
>
as
...
... 1 5
.c
(,)
c
::::J
10
Q.
5
0
0
Figure-7.S.a: Punch force versus stroke diagram measured during the.deep drawing.
of AA 1100-0.
- - FDM, fric.=O.13
Experiment
- - - FDM, fric.=0.15
-- FDM, fric...0.09
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
0.5
0.4
C
0.3
ii
...
-
C/)
ii
0.2
is
as
a:
CD
0.1
::::J
...
...
0
0.1
0
Figure-7.S.b: Comparison of predicted radial strain with the experimentally
- 149-
Aluminum Alloy 20240
The second set of experiments were performed using AA 2024-0. A summary of the
tool geometry, material properties, and process conditions are given in Table 7.2.
The water base lubricant was used in these experiments. Therefore, a friction
coefficient of 0.13 was used in the simulations based on the previous results obtained
during the forming of AA 1100-0. In this section, only two experiments are
discussed. The only difference between these two experiments is the thickness of the
blank.
An experiments was performed using a 1.016 mm thick and 304.8 mm diameter
blank. The punch load versus stroke profile is shown in Figure 7.6.a. A good
agreement between simulation and experiment can be seen except in the beginning
of the punch travel where a slight irregularity shows for the FDM predictions. This
is due to a too large initial step size. Since the FDM code automatically adjusts its
step size if no convergence occurs, this problem could not be solved. The ..
maximum punch force predicted by FDM simulations is also slightly higher than the_
measured one. However, 6% difference is within acceptable limits. The predicted
radial strain distribution, shown in Figure 7.6.b, is also in good agreement with the
measured one.
Another experiment was performed using 1.60 mm thick and 304.8 mm diameter
blanks. The punch force and the strain distribution plots are shown in Figures 7.7.a
and b, respectively. Quite good agreement is obtained in both plots. The only slight
mismatch shows for the radial strains measured at the edge of the cup as shown in
Figure 7.7.b. This is due to the fact that the strains are measured along a line which
is in between two ears. This is the direction where the restraining forces and radial
strains are lower than average at that diameter.
Finally, both punch load versus stroke profiles and radial strain distributions
obtained in two experiments are plotted together in Figures 7.8 and 7.9,
respectively. As expected, loads increase with increasing sheet thickness, and the
radial strain distribution shows slightly lower strains for increasing sheet thickness.
- 150-
Table 7.2: Summary'of tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of AA 2024-0.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
K (strength coefficient> 266.15 [MPa]
EO (pre strain) 0
Blank diameter 304.8 [mm]
Blank thickness 1.016, 1.60 [mm]'"
(38.6 [ksi])
(12")
(0.040", 0.063")
Process conditions
Blank holder force
water base lubricant ......
60 [kN]
.. The values indicated with a asterisk (*) vary with different experiments in one
test series. For the exact value see the header of t h ~ s p ~ c i f i c simulation plot.
- 151-
Material: AA2024-0, BHF:60.0 kN
0:304.8 mm, t:1.016 mm
Water base lubricant
100 80 60
-- FDM, fric.=O.13
- - Experiment
40 20
i I", . '. .._ __1 _ ; .
..................--1 . ~ ~ $ 1.. --$ .
;
!
-------r-i---r-------r--
o
o
20
40
80
60
z
-
e
o
u.
.c
Co)
c
~
Q.
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.6.a: Punch force versus stroke diagram measured during the deep drawing
of AA 2024-0.
0.45
0.35
0.25
0.15
0.05
-0.05
o
Experiment
40 80 120 160
- 152-
0=304.8 mm, t=1.60 mm
130
104
100 80 60 40 20 o
o
26
-z
78
Q)
(,,)
o
LL
.c 52
(,,)
C
:J
D.
Punch Travel (mm)
of AA 2024-0.
160 120 80
_
_ III
40
,
!
1111
_fII_ ----
j
I !
0.25
0.05
0.15
0.35
0.45
-0.05
o
- 153-
Material: AA2040
BHF=60.0 kN, D=304.8 mm
100 80 60 40
,
,
,
i -a-- C - Cl--s- j
- t=1.016 mm
--e - t..1.60 mm
!
20
120
100
-
80
Z
.:.:
-
CD
()
60
..
0
LL
s:::.
()
C
40
:::J
C.
20
0
0
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.S: Comparison of measured punch force distributions for different
thicknesses used in the experiments with AA 2024-0.
0.45
0.35
0.25
0.15
0.05
o t..1.016 mm, experiment I
-- t=1.016 mm. FDM i 0;
_::::::,'
-----------r.---- I r ? ! 8 r9
j iii 0
- - _- - ..- - -._--.--.I .. !- .._-. __ "" .. i
- .. -- - .....-_. --.;;,- .i,...--.__ .__-__ ... _..- ................
: !.:. i
!
-0.05
o 40 80 120 160
Figure-7.9: Comparison of radial strain distributions for different thicknesses used
in the experiments with AA 2024-0.
- 154-
High Stren&th Galvanized Steel.
The third series of tests were carried out using high strength galvanized steel (HSG).
The influence of blank holding force, draw ratio, and lubrication conditions are
studied in this series of experiments. First, the individual experiments will be
discussed, later comparisons between experiments with different process conditions
will be made. A summary of tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions are given in Table 7.3.
Experiments using dry friction, and constant BHF:
A 304.8 mm diameter blank was formed to the height of 60 mm using a BHF of 158.0
kN. In this case, the cup is not fully formed, there is a flat flange left under the
blankholder. In this experiment, no lubricant was used, and the die and
blankholder surfaces were cleaned using alcohol to obtain dry friction conditions as ..
much as possible. Punch force and radial strain distributions measured in the
experiments together with predicted ones are shown in Figures 7.10a and b
respectively. There are two discrepancy areas between predicted and measured
punch force distributions as shown in Figure 7.10a. Firstly, there is the small
irregularity in the onset of the force p r o ~ i l e predicted by the FDM simulation. As
explained previously, the reason for this discrepancy is that if the program does not
converge in the beginning of the simulation it automatically increases the step size,
and with this large step size, it underpredicts the punch force at that stage.
Secondly, the FDM usually predicts a slightly higher maximum load than the
experimentally determined one. However, these differences are relatively small.
Another experiment was performed using a 279.4 mm diameter blank under the
same process conditions. The punch force distribution for this experiment is shown
in Figure 7.11. As can be seen from this figure there is a sharp drop off in the FDM
predictions towards the end of the process. The reason is that due to earing one or
two ears still are constrained between the die and blank holder when the mean
flange is already on the die corner radius. This causes a small punch load which is
not simulated by the FDM since the code considers deformation to be fully
axisymmetric and thus uses the mean diameter for calculations.
- 155-
Table 7.3: Summary' of tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of HSG steel.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
() (pre strain) 0.000328
Blank diameter 254.0, 279.4,
and 304.8 [mm]"
(87.58 [ksi])
(lO", 11",
and 12")
(0.035")
Process conditions
Blank holder force
dry and water base lubricant ....
85, 117, and 158 [kN]"
variable see Figure 7.9
* The values indicated with a asterisk (*) vary with different experiments in one
** The resulting friction coefficient used in the simulations for this lubrication
- 156-
BHF=158.0 kN, 0=304.8 mm, t=0.889 mm
Dry friction
200
-- FDM, fric.=0.25
Experiment
-- ..-
i I
I
... er
i ~
~
150
-Z
.:.::
-
CD
C,)
...
100 0
LL
.c
C,)
c::
j
Q.
50
o 10 20 30 40 50 60
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.10.a: Punch force versus stroke diagram in deep drawing of HSG steel.
1
25 50 75 100 125 150
0.4
0.35
0.3
c::
"i
0.25
...
-
en
"i
0.2
:c
a:s
a:
Q) 0.15
j
...
~
0.1
0.05
0
0
Experiment
............. -- FDM, fric.=0.25
Figure-7.10.b: Radial strain distributions in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 157-
BHF=158.0 kN, 0=279.4 mm, t=O.889 mm
Dry friction
200
160
120
80
40
o
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.11: Punch force versus stroke diagram in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 158-
In another experiment, a 254.0 mm diameter blank was formed to the height of 60
mm using a BHF of 158.0 kN. Punch force and radial strain distributions are shown
in Figures 7.12a and b, respectively. As can be seen from these plots, quite good
agreement is obtained between the predicted and measured distributions. However,
the same discrepancies explained in the previous paragraphs associated with the
punch force distributions can also be seen in this experiment. Radial strain drops at
the edge of the cup due to the flat flange left under the blankholder.
The effect of the initial blank diameter on the radial strain distribution is shown in
Figure 7.13. In this figure, the radial strain distributions, both measured and
predicted, shown in Figures 7.10b and 7.12b are plotted together. These
experiments were performed using a BHF of 158.0 kN and dry friction conditions
starting from the initial blank diameters of 304.8 mm and 254.0 mm. Since a larger
flange results in a greater restraining force the radial strains increases with
increasing initial blank diameter. This increases the maximum strain with the larger
blank diameter as shown in Figure 7.13.
In the next experiment, a 254.0 mm diameter blank is fully formed under the same
process conditions as in the previous experiment. Punch force and radial strain
distribution plots are shown in Figures 7.14a and b, respectively. The sudden drop
in the predicted punch force distribution at 60 mm punch travel can also be seen in
Figure 7.14a. A drop off in the measured radial strain at the edge of the cup wall can
be seen in Figure 7.14b. This is because the cup wall is not totally straightened at the
very end which results in a reduction in the hoop strains which in tum causes a
reduction in the radial strains. The reason for the slightly unstraightened cup wall is
that the clearance between the punch and die is more than the sheet thickness to
prevent ironing. Thus, the cup wall is not totally pressed against the punch. Also,
there will be a small amount of spring back after the cup is drawn through the die.
The effect of the initial draw ratio can be seen in Figure 7.15. In this Figure, the
measured punch force distributions shown in Figures 7.11a and 7.14a are plotted
together. Both experiments were performed using the BHF of 158.0 kN and dry
friction conditions starting with different initial blank diameters, and both cups
were fully formed without leaving a flat flange. As can be seen from Figure 7.15,
the punch force increases with increasing draw ratio.
- 159-
BHF=158.0 kN, 0=254.0 mm, t=0.889 mm
Dry friction
60 50 20 30 40
Punch Travel (mm)
10
! - e - _ ~
- - Experiment
- ~ ~ ~ t - ----r---l--- -- FOM. fric.=0.25
o
o
160
120
-Z
..lll::
-Q)
()
...
80
0
I.L
.r:;
()
C
~
Q.
40
Experiment
-- FDM, fric.=0.25
0.3
0.25
0.2
C
as
...
-
0.15
(J)
as
:0
ca
0.1
a:
Q)
::s
...
0.05
....
0
-0.05
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Figure-7.12.b: Radial strain distribution in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 160-
BHF=158.0 kN, t=0.889 mm
Dry friction (Fric. coeff.=0.25)
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
-0.1
o 40 80 120 160
Figure-7.13: Comparison of radial strain distributions obtained using different
initial blank diameters in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 161 -
BHF=158.0 kN, 0=254.0 mm, t=O.889 mm
Dry friction
100 80
40 60
Punch Travel (mm)
20
....................................../. _ ;."... = _ .. _..; :_.
\
\
I 1'-_
180
150
-
120
Z
.:.::
-Q)
Co)
....
90
0
u..
.c
Co)
c
60
::s
Q.
30
0
0
0.35
0.25
0.15
0.05
ie
I
!e
1
-0.05
o 20 40 60 80 100 120
140
Figure-7.14.b: Radial strain distributions in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 162-
BHF=158.0 kN, t=O.889 mm
Dry friction
125 100 75 50 25
, ,
.
i::.
!
............_ _..__ _ ~ - - - - - _-_.._--{--_ _._.. . I .0--0- l __ j 1""-._ .
1/ ~
-_ -_ _ _.-V_-____-i-___--\____--r- \._ .
- - ~ t : J = - - t r ~ ~ = ~ t = = ~ ~ ~ ~
--- --- - 0-2540 mm ~ - - - - ~ - - - - - - -
i'-
180
150
-
120
Z
.:.:
-
CD
()
...
90
fl.
.c
()
c
60
::::J
Q.
30
0
0
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.15: Comparison of punch force versus stroke diagrams for different initial
blank diameters in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 163-
Experiments using water base lubricant, and constant BHF:
The next experiments were performed using lubricated friction conditions, and a
water base lubricant specifically developed for deep drawing of steels was used.
In the first experiment, a 304.8 mm diameter blank was formed using a.BHF of 117.0
kN. All the other conditions are similar to the ones given in Table 7.3. The punch
force and radial strain distributions are shown in Figures 7.16a and b at the punch
travel of 60 mm.
In the second experiment, a 254.0 mm diameter blank was formed under similar
conditions to those used in the previous experiments. Punch force and radial strain
distributions are given in Figures 7.17a and b.
The effect of the initial blank diameter on the punch force distribution is also seen in
Figure 7.18. In this figure, the measured punch force distributions shown in Figures .
7.16aand 7.17a are plotted together at a punch travel of 60 mm. These experiments
were performed under similar conditions using a BHF of 117.0 kN except with a
different initial blank diameter. Again, the maximum punch load increases with
increasing draw ratio.
The increase in the maximum radial strain with increasing initial blank diameter is
also seen in Figure 7.19. In this figure, radial strain distributions, both measured
and predicted, shown in Figures 7.16b and 7.17b are plotted together at a punch
travel of 60 mrn. These experiments were done using the same process conditions
starting from different blank diameters.
Experiments using dry friction conditions, and variable BHF:
In this set of experiments, 304.8 mm diameter blanks were formed to the height of
93 mm under dry friction conditions. Punch travel was limited to 93 mm because
very small flat flange was left under the blankholder to prevent puckering over the
die corner radius. In these experiments, three different BHF variations were used.
These BHF variations are' shown in Figures 7.20.a,b, and c. The purpose of these
experiments is to study the effect of variable BHF on the punch force and the strain
-164 -
160
BHF=117.0 kN, D=304.8 mm, t=0.889 mm
120
-Z
~
-
CD
(,)
80
-
0
U.
J:
(,)
s:::
:3
a.
40
o
o 10 20 30 40 50 60
Punch Travel (mm)
0.3
0.25
0.2
s:::
as
-
0.15
-
en
as
"
0.1
as
a:
CD
:3
-
0.05
t-
o
-0.05
0
Experiment
-- FDM. fric.=0.13
20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Original Distance From Center (mrn)
- 165-
BHF=117.0 kN, 0=254.0 mm, t=O.889 mm
60 50 40 30 20 10
I i
.........+ + ..1.. .
1 : .....e-
1 .-"" j_$....
..1........r...... ,/ i : -.-
- - Experiment
A -T-- -- FDM. fric.=0.13 :

120
100
-
80
Z
.lll:
-
G)
(,)
a-
60
0
La.
.c
(,)
c
40
::J
C.
20
0
0
Punch Travel (mm)
I
__--1___..-1..___..-'1' ......'1"........ 11&...... . , ..
Experiment i $ lB
.............._ '1" t......tij' .

140 120 100 80 60 40 20
0.3
0.25
0.2
C
.;
a-
-.
0.15
en
as
't:J
as 0.1
a:
G)
::J
a-
0.05
....
0
0.05
0
- 166-
BHF=117.0 kN, t=O.889 mm
--0 - 0=254.0 mm
- 0=304.8 mm
16 0 ..
,
I
120
-Z
-
CD
(,,)
...
80
0
U-
.s::
(,,)
c
D.
40
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.18: Comparison of punch force versus stroke diagrams for different initial
blank diameters in deep drawing of HSG steel.
-167 -
BHF=117.0 kN, t=O.889 mm
Water base lubricant (Frlc. coeff.=O.13)
0.25
0.35
-- 0=304.8 mm, FOM
160
o
40 80 120
0=254.0 mm, experiment
- - - 0=254.0 mm, FOM
e
-0.05
o
o 0=304.8 mm, experiment
c
as
...
- en
(ij 0.15
:s
'" a:
CD
::J
...
I- 0.05
Figure-7.19: Comparison of radial strain distributions for different initial blank
diameters in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 168-
200 I- + -+
IIL-" 15 0 / - 1\ j ..- , -
- J-l---
i 10 0 I-.- - + 'I/.I---- -r I!
Ii' ! 'I '" I I , i
5 0 f- ... - .....- .. +.-.........-+-.....-.--.-... .. + -j-"--"-r-"- "'-
f I! ; I
I I 'I
I I I I I i
OLL.....L.Ji-L........"...J-.1--L....L..L.-l.-'-L-L...LJL......L...L...JL-L...L.....I....L.............l.-J
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Punch stroke (mm)
Figure-7.20.a: and approximated BHF profiles according to Variation-I.
140 120 100 80 60 40 20
iii i ! ! ..
! I 1 i ! !
---1"--..-- ..1-------.. I ....--t-- -
l.---J-....- -...J.-.... --.-L........--.- .. I.. -l... -..
! ! I ! I I

I
[ ! !
, I !
I , 1
---1-----,--.... --- --..---r..---..l------I--.. -
I I I' i
250
200
Z
150
IL
::t:
100 III
50
0
0
Punch stroke (mm)
Figure-7.20.b: Measured and approximated BHF profiles according to Variation-n.
140 120 100 80 60 40 20
I . I I l' I I
......- --..-..--.-1.....-..- -..1. -.-- --.. - - - .1..- .. .. t ..
I " '1 '
... -..-1--...... -.... 1.. ....-..1----.... --.......1...........:.
I I 'I I
..--......-1- ..--- .. 1- ...------ ---- ....l---..-..-j ..---.. --t-.. -..
"'-'-"1---.- ....
1
-_.-.....- ....-....-..-L.----- .... )...j..-... -..
I
ii ,
I i!
i i! I
100
80
Z
60
IL
::t:
40
III
20
0
0
Punch stroke (mm)
Figure-7.20.c: Measured and approximated BHF profiles according to variation m.
- 169-
distributions. The results obtained from variable BHF experiments are compared
with each other as well as with the results obtained from a constant BHF experiment.
The first experiment was performed using a constant BHF of 85.0 kN. The punch
force and radial strain distributions are shown in Figures 7.21.a and b respectively at
the punch travel of 93 mm.
The second experiment was performed using the BHF Variation-I which is shown in
Figure 7.20.a. The punch force and radial strain distributions are shown in Figures
7.22.a and b respectively at the punch travel of 93 rom.
The third experiment was performed using the BHF Variation-IT which is shown in
Figure 7.20.b. The punch force and radial strain distributions are shown in Figures
7.23.a and b respectively at the punch travel of 93 rom.
The fourth experiment was performed using the BHF Variation-III which is shown .
Figure 7.20.c. The punch force and radial strain distributions ,are shown in
Figures 7.24.a and b respectively at the punch travel of 93 mm.
The effect of BHF variations on the punch force distributions is shown in Figure 7.25.
In this figure, measured punch force shown in Figures 7.21.a thru
7.24.a are plotted together. The blank holding force has a direct influence on the
obtained punch force. Thus an increase in blank holding force will result in an
increase in punch force, and, similarly, a reduction in blank holding force result in
a reduced punch force. This effect shows mainly at about the maximum load, and
immediately after it, as can be seen from the Figure 7.25. Although there are
substantial differences between blank holding forces, until a stroke of 30 rom (1.18"),
virtually no difference is seen. After this stroke punch force differs greatly. For
comparison, a punch force profile resulting from a constant blank holding force is
also plotted. As expected, punch force profiles resulting from blank holding force
variations I and II" see Figures 7.20 a-b, look the same until a stroke of 60 rom
(2.36"). After that they change directions with the BHF. Since blank holding force
variation lIT has the largest increase towards the end, the resulting punch force
profile is the highest there also.
- 170-
BHF=85 kN, 0=304.8 mm, t=0.889 mm
Dry friction
100 80 60 40 20 o
o
2 00
I 1
i i....... - - 1- -
i '
......_ , _ _ _ !.. , _._ .
! I 1
-e- Experiment
- - - FDM. fric.=0.25
I
I
/'
150
-Z
-Q)
Co)
100
...
0
u.
.c
Co)
c:
::J
Q.
50
Punch Travel (mm)
-- FDM, fric.=O.25
,
i
!
.. _ 1.-._ _................ .. ;. _ - .
! e i 4)
i 1
t j
I
Experiment
0.45
0.25
0.35
0.05
0.15
-0.05
o 40 80 120
160
- 171 -
BHF=Variatlon-l, 0=304.8 mm, t=0.889 mm
Dry friction
200
100
80
60
40
20
!
-1......... f
" 1.:>--- :::" , + .
...... 1
:'
......................................1.. _.._ J. __ ".1. _ 1.. : .
1/// I i i
= -----
--)--T---T---r---l-------
a
80
o
40
160
120
E
E
-
.f
.c
(,)
c
::J
a.
Punch Travel (mm)
160 120 80 40
,
I
...... .._....l .. _..__ I" _!!L _t .. _ .
Experiment ! iIiI !
............... . $ ; $.e... . .
-- FDM, fric.=O.25 i I Ell
J . e
....._._ __ _ f. __.o__..____-i _1.._ .
0.5
0.4
C
0.3
'(ij
...
- en
.
0.2
'tJ
'"
a:
CD
0.1
::J
...
t-
o
.. 0.1
0
- 172-
BHF=Varlation-lI, 0=304.8 mm, t=0.889 mm
Dry friction
100 80
- - - FDM, fric.=0.25
40 60
Punch Travel (mm)
20
, _--1-
.... .1.._ _ ..__._ _.._ i- .
, I" I
--------17
'

--e- Experiment
40
o
o
160
-Z
120
@
tl.
.s: 80
(,)
C
:s
c..
. Figure-7.23.a: Punch force versus stroke diagramin deep drawing of HSG steel.
e
0.39
0;06
e
c
..
as 8
0.2
- en
'ii
i3
as
a: 0.17
CD
:s
...
....
0.5 ....---,r--...,....--r-.-.....,..-r--.......--,
l
I '.
-0.05
o
40 80
120
160
- 173-
BHF=Variation-lII, 0=304.8 mm, t=0.889 mm
Dry friction
250
- - - FDM, fric.=O.25
-e- Experiment
-.
100
80
60
40
20
o
o
50
100
150
200
Z
.:.::
-
...
o
u.
.c
()
c:
a.
Punch Travel (mm)
t
----+-----r--T.f;:-----
Experiment! i
-- FDM, fric.=O.25 --_.., .._ __ _ _t ..
e
;: ..
. I I

1'-----$-------... ' i
..jjj.. .._..__ ..r ....1...._.._.. _..1'.... .. .
i
0.5
0.4
c: 0.3
t!
-
(/J
1ij
0.2
is
as
a:
Q)
0.1
...
0
-0.1
0 40 80 120 160
- 174-
200
Dlameter=304.8 mm, rhickness=O.88 mm
Dry friction
150
-Z
.::tt.
-
CD
~
100
If
.c:
()
c
~
a.
50
o
o 20 40 60 80 100
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.25: Comparison of punch force versus stroke diagram for different BHF
variations in deep drawing of HSG steel.
- 175-
Generally speaking the predicted strain distributions for HSG tests match the
experimentally obtained strains well. The ramps and maxima are predicted fairly
accurately. However, a common scatter in almost all of the strain comparisons can
be seen at the edge of the blank. Due to the fact that the outer rim of the blank
thickens most, most of the blank holding force will be applied at that area resulting
in very high frictional forces, and, therefore, the circle grids are wiped off. Because
of this the outer most circles of the grid are not measurable anymore. The grid
becomes so poor due to high friction between flange and blank holder that it is hard
to measure accurately.
Univit Steel <UVl
This test series was carried out to study comparisons between FDM simulation and
experimental results for UV steel. First, the individual experiments will be
discussed, later comparisons between experiments with different process conditions .
will be made. A summary of the tool geometry, material properties, and process
conditions is given in Table 7.4.
An experiment was performed using a 304.8 mm diameter blank and a BHF of 158.0
kN. The punch force and radial strain distributions are shown in Figures 7.26.a and
b at a punch travel of 55 mm. The punch load versus stroke simulation shows quite
a nice agreement with the experimentally determined curve, see Figure 7.26.a. One
common discrepancy which is already mentioned in the previous simulations shows
up. That is the small irregularity in the onset of the punch force profile predicted by
the FDM simulation. The reason is as explained in the previous section. The
predicted strain distribution also matches the measured one very well, see Figure
7.26.b.
In Figure 7.27, the influence of a different initial blank diameter on the resulting
punch force distribution is shown. Three measured punch force distributions
corresponding to three different initial blank diameters are plotted together in
Figure 7.27. All the process conditions other than the initial blank diameters are the
same in these three experiments and summarized in Table 7.4. As expected the
punch force increase with"increasing draw ratios. Also, the punch force profile for
the smallest blank diameter shows a drop off towards the end of the stroke. This is
- 176-
Table 7.4: Summaryof tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of UV steel.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
eo (pre strain) 0.008742
and 304.8 [mm]"
(76.17 [ksiD
(l0", 11",
and 12")
(0.031")
Process conditions
Blank holder force
dry friction ....
158 [kN]
- 177-
Material: UV Steel, BHF=158.0 kN
0=304.8 mm, t=0.7874 mm
Dry friction
160
-
120
-z
-
Q)
u
"-
80
0
U.
J:
U
C
::::J
Q.
40
_ - Experiment
-- FDM, fric.=0.25
60 50 40 30 20 1 0
.................J--'-""""""''''''''''''.1.-J.-&-'''''''''''...1-'''''''''..&-.I.....I
o
Punch Travel (mm)
. Figure-7.26.a: Punch force versus stroke diagramin deep drawing of l?V steel.
0.45
0.35

Experiment .
0.25
0.15
- FDM, fric.=0.25
0.05
-0.05
o 40 80 120 160
Figure-7.26.b: Radial strain distribution in deep drawing of UV steel.
(Punch travel is 55 mm)
- 178-
Material: UV Steel
BHF=158.0 kN, t=0.7874 mm
Dry friction
150
- 0=304.8 mm
- - 0=279.4 mm
I
.._ _ _ __._ ._.__.._ .._.__ _. _._.._.._.._ -. - 0..254.0 mm
. i j
: j
I I
90
30
60
120
o 10 20 30 40 50 60
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.27: The effect of different draw ratios on the punch force versus stroke
profile in deep drawing of UV steel. (Punch travel is 55 mm.)
- 179-
also expected since with decreasing blank diameter the force maximum will shift
towards the origin.
Interstitial Free Steel <IF)
The last series of experiments to verify FDM simulations was performed using IF
steel. A summary of tool dimensions, material properties, and process conditions
for this series of experiments is given in Table 7.5.
An experiment was performed using 304.8 mm diameter blank and a BHF of 158.0
kN under dry friction conditions. The punch force and radial strain distributions are
shown in Figures 7.28.a and b. The punch load versus stroke simulation shows a
nice agreement with the measured curve, see Figure 7.28.a. Virtually no
irregularities show up, although the predicted force tends to increase too much
towards the end. This is the same inconsistency measured during all comparisons, .
but lies within the acceptable range. The predicted strain distribution also matches
the measured one quite well, see Figure 7.28.b. The slight scatter towards the end
of the cup flange is caused by the fact that the grid is damaged due to very high
friction between blankholder and blank.
Figure 7.29 displays the effect of different initial blank diameters on the punch force
versus stroke profile. The same characteristic that is seen in the previous
comparisons shows up; an increase in punch force with increasing initial draw ratio.
Also the drop off in punch load towards the end occurs for the profile resulting from
a drawing operation with a 254.0 mm (lO") initial blank diameter.
- 180-
Table 7.5: Summary"of tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of IF steel.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
K (strength coefficient) 622.38 [MPa] (90.27 [ksiD
EO (pre strain) 0.000846
Blank diameter 254.0, 279.4, (l0", 11tI,
and 304.8 and 12")
[mm]"
Blank thickness 0.7874 [mm] (0.031")
Process conditions
Blank holder force
dry""
158 [kN]
..* The resulting friction coefficient used in the simulations for this lubrication
- 181 -
Material: IF Steel, BHF=158.0 kN
0=304.0 mm, t=0.8382 mm
Dry friction
200
150
-Z
.:.c
-Q)
(.)
100
..
0
u..
.r:
(,)
c:
Q.
50
--. - Experiment
-- FDM, fric.=0.25
o 10 20 30 40 50 60
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.28.a: Punch force versus stroke diagram in deep drawing of IF steel.
160 120 80 40
Experiment
,
$ I
_- -I
-_ -..- _ : j ; ..
-- FDM, fric.=0.25
I
i
-----
i
-r------+--------
0.35
0.25
-0.05
o
c:
e
CiS
Cii 0.15
=s
as
a:
Q)
..
... 0.05
Figure-7.28.b: Radial strain distribution in deep drawing of IF steel.
(Punch travel is 55 mm)
- 182-
Material: IF Steel
BHF=158.0 kN, t=O.8382 mm
Dry friction
-
E
E
-
e
If
s::
()
c
~
0.
120
80
40
,
I
----t-----r---l- =: : ~ ::
10 o
ot::::..................-L...&---I--'-...........JL...............................L.,..;...........""""-'I-...-.1..-'-L-L.......L.-l....J--'-........
20 30 40 50 60
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.29: The effect of different draw ratios on the punch force versus stroke
profile in deep drawing of IF steel. (Punch travel is 55 mm.)
- 183-
Effect of material parameters on the punch force and radial strain distributions
Finally, a comparison is made between different steels. For these experiments, all
process conditions were kept the same except the thickness. There are slight
differences in the sheet thicknesses for different materials. However, differences in
thickness are small enough not to make the different material parameters
unsignificant.
For clarity the properties and thicknesses of the different materials used in these
experiments are listed again in Table 7.6.
Table 7.6 Material properties.
Material n K [MPa] r
EO
Thickness
[mm] (in)
HS Galvanized Steel 0.143 603.83 1.40 0.000328 0.889 0.035
(HSG)
Interstitial Free Steel (IF) 0.263 622.38 1.95 0.000846 0.8382 0.033
Univit Steel (UV) 0.254 525.19 1.45 0.008742 0.7874 0.031
If all process parameters except for the material properties are kept the same, the
punch load versus stroke profile will be mainly determined by the strain hardening
exponent (n) and the strength coefficient (K). The r value also has a minor influence,
see explanation in Sections 2.2.1, 2.2.2, and 2.2.3. The measured punch force versus
stroke distributions for three different steels are shown in Figure 7.30 at a punch
travel of 55 mm. Since HSG steel has a high K value combined with a low n-value
this material is expected to show the highest punch force as shown in Figure 7.30.
Additionally, HSG also has the largest thickness. IF steel has a slightly higher K
value but also a considerably higher n-value. Mainly because of this high n value
the stresses will be lower in the beginning, of the deformation, and thus the force
resulting from these stresses will also be smaller. The lowest punch force versus
- 184-
BHF=158.0 kN, 0=279.4 mm
Dry friction
Z
.lII:
-
200
160
120
80
40
,
,
--:------1------;---- ~ - - - ~ - - - -
,
____t______r-_ .
_HSGSleel
- -IF Steel
-. - UVSteel
o
o 10 20 30 40 50 60
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.30: The effect of material parameters on the punch force versus stroke
profile. (Punch travel is 55 mm.)
BHF=158.0 kN, 0=304.8 mm
Dry friction (Frlc. coeff.=0.25)
0.4
0
HSG Steel. experiment
I
0
--HSG Steel. FDM
I
I
0.3 D IF Steel, experiment
_-__-t..__
c: - - IF Steel, FDM
I
'<0
0
...
x UV Steel, experiment ...
en
ca
0.2
- - - UV Steel, FDM
:s
as
a:
Q)
j
...
I-
0.1
x
- - -
x
0 0
0
0 40 80 120 160
Figure-7.31: The effect of material parameters on the radial strain distribution.
(Punch travel is 55 rom.)
- 185-
stroke profile results for UV steel which combines a low K value with a high n-value.
Also this material is the thinnest one of all.
Another interesting effect to be seen is that the steepness of the initial slope is mainly
determined by the n value. If the n-value is lower then the slope is steeper. This
effect of the n-value on the slope in tum also results in a shift of the punch force
maximum to the left for lower n-values, as it is seen in Figure 7.30.
As mentioned in Section 2.2.3 a high r-value decreases the punch load. This effect is
not very clearly observed since the r-values do not differ too much with the different
materials. Even though differences are not that great the material with the lowest r-
value, UV steel, also has the lowest maximum punch load which agrees with the
theoretical explanation.
The radial strain distributions for different steels are shown in Figure 7.31. In
general, a higher punch load profile will also result in a higher radial strain .
distribution, as can be seen in Figure 7.31. The influence of the n value on the strain
distribution is already explained in Section 2.2.1. A high n value tends to further
distribute strain localizations. This effect shows for both IF and UV steels which
have smooth strain maxima. HSG steel on the contrary has quite a sharp, Le.
localized, maximum which is due to the low n value.
7.2 Fracture predictions, using constant UHF.
A failure evaluation module is built into SHEET_FORM. This module can be used to
predict failure, Le. winkling and fracture, based on the calculated stresses and
strains during the process simulation. In this section, fracture predictions in deep
drawing of different materials, and comparison with the experimental results will
be summarized.
Three different materials were used in these experiments. These materials are High
Strength Galvanized Steel (HSG), Interstitial Free Steel (IF), and Univit Steel (UV).
Three different initial blank diameters, Le. 254.0 mm, 279.4 mm, and 304.8 mm, of
each material tested. The effect of the draw ratio as well as the material parameters
on the cup height at fracture was studied.
- 186-
Dry friction condition was chosen at the material-tool interface since this is a
lubrication condition which is easy to reproduce. To ensure dry friction conditions
we cleaned all blanks and the tool surfaces with a special cleaning solvent before
each experiment.
To compare the effect of the material on the fracture, process conditions were kept
constant, and only the blank material was changed throughout the experiments.
For this purpose, a BHF which would cause fracture in all the blank materials and
all the draw ratios should have been determined. Preliminary simulations were run,
to estimate the BHF necessary to fail the blank of the best formable material for the
smallest draw ratio. This BHF would than cause fracture in all larger diameter
blanks of worse formable materials. Among the materials that we have the best
formable material was IF steel, and the smallest tested blank diameter was 254 mm.
Preliminary simulations showed that this blank would fail under dry lubricated
conditions for a blank holding force of 250 kN. To be on the safe side, a blank .
holding force of 270 kN was chosen for all experiments to be carried out.
As described in Chapter VI, the failure evaluation module of SHEET_FORM
consists of several different failure criteria. For the fracture predictions in this
section, only the Forming Limit Diagrams (FLD) will be used. As described in
section 2.3 every material has a unique FLD for each thickness. These FLDs are
usually determined experimentally. For many materials FLDs are available in the
literature. Furthermore, formulas are available to calculate the plane-strain
interception (FLDo), Equation 7.1, (FLD User's Conference Notes, 1991). Exact
FLDs for the materials that we are using could not be found in the literature.
Therefore, FLDs based on the Equation 7.1 were estimated.
n
FLD
o
=- (23.3+3.59t
o
)
0.21
n S; 0.21
(7.1)
FLD
o
= (23.3 + 3.59t
o
) n ~ 0.21
where n: strain hardening exponent
to : initial thickness of the blank
- 187 -
In SHEET_FORM, the FLD is approximated by four constants. These constants are;
1) plane-strain interception, (FLD
o
)
2) slope of the line approximating the FLD in negative minor strain region, (5
t
)
3) slope of the line approximating the FLD in positive minor strain region, (52)
4) band width separating the safe and fracture regions, (B)
The values of FLDO for different materials are calculated from Equation 7.1, and the
slopes are estimated from similar curves in the literature, (A5M 1985). The
parameters used in the simulations to estimate FLDs for different materials are listed
in Table 7.7.
Table 7.7: Parameters to approximate Forming Limit Diagrams
Material FLDO 51 52
HSG5teei 18.04 -1.35 0.5
UV steel 26.13 -1.2 0.5
IF steel 26.31 -1.25 0.5
High Strength Galvanized Steel
The first material tested was HSG steel. A list of tool dimensions, material
properties, FLD parameters, and process conditions can be seen in Table 7.8. A
picture of the fractured cups is seen in Figure 7.32. Failure predictions by
5HEET_FORM are listed in Table 7.9 together with the cup heights at fracture
measured during the experiments. As it can be seen from Table 7.9, FDM
predictions agree well with experimentally obtained data. Especially when one
takes into consideration that experimentally determined failure heights are always
subject to some scatter. This is because the failure height is very sensitive for small
variations in material parameters, e.g. thickness variations, inclusions or voids, etc.
- 188-
Table 7.8: Summary of tool dimensions, material properties, FLD parameters,
and process conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of HSG steel.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
1,52.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(O.63")
and 355.6 [mm]
(87.58 [ksi])
(10", 12",
and 14")
(0.035")
FLO parameters
FLDO
51
52
B
Process conditions
Blank holder force
18.04
-1.35
0.5
10
dry friction
270 [kN]
- 189-
Figure-7.32: Fracture in high strength galvanized steel cups.
- 190-
Table 7.9: Predicted, and measured cup heights at fracture for HSG steel.
Measured Predicted
Blank Diameter Cup Height at Cup Height at
Fracture Fracture
Test No. (mm) (in) (mm) (in) (mm) (in)
1 254.0 10 54 2.13 59.31 2.34
2 304.8 12 52 2.05 47.61 1.87
3 355.6 14 43 1.69 41.59 1.64
The FLDs and strain plots for different draw ratios are shown in Figure 7.33. In
Figure 7.33, each mark corresponds to the node for which failure is predicted. As
can be seen, the strain state for which failure is predicted lies in the negative minor
strain region. In Figure 7.33, the strain paths of the failed nodes are also displayed.
One of the limitations of FLDs is that they are dependent on the strain path. By
having a complex strain path, which occurs in stamping operations with complex
shapes, sometimes considerable larger strains than the ones predicted by a FLD can
be obtained.
Univit Steel
The next set of experiments were done using UV Steel. A list of tool geometry,
material parameters, FLD parameters, and process conditions is given in Table 7.10.
A picture of the fractured cups can be seen in Figure 7.34. The predicted cup heights
at fracture are all very close to the experimentally determined ones, see Table 7.11.
The FDM predictions can be seen from Figures 7.3S.a thru 7.35.c. The failed nodes
again are situated in the left half of the FLD. The strain path has followed a slightly
curved line and is almost the same as for HSG steel simulations.
- 191 -
GOCAD f'AILURE MODULE SHUT rOAM
E1
1M.'
."",.....hLf
....
j
,
,
?a
."",......U
,
,
, i
,
,
,
Pu..ch
, ,
, ,
... , i
24.' ",.,,,,.,,,.
Pu"Ch
\',
, ... ",.,,,,. ... ,,,.' ,
i
-[2
,,' .2 i
....
a)'.'
12.' l2.' n . ....
""..eh
railur. 1$ predicted lD occur .t the following nodes
s,......,,""'...
based on the f'LD crtterton:
:t: 50, '1, '2, '3, 55, ".
60 : o " 0"
on
0"
., on
0"
Preunt punch depth (_) ".31 ..
on ...
II o HrTIio.
rORMING LIMIT DIAGRAM
13-JIIN-'2 3:37:12 PH PG 1
Figure-7.33.a: FLD for deep drawing of 254.0 rom diameter HSG Steel blank.
GOCAO 'AlLURE MOOULE ... SH!T rOAM
I
E1
1M
._,......u
...,
1

72.'
i
I
, ,

, ,
, ,
, ,
i ' , , ,
I
" "
'..,ftCh
'"
a.... ",.",.'"
.', .......,. ....,. ...
I
-n .'
.2
..... -n. -II.' U h ....

ratlure ,. pred'cted to oec:ur at the followtno nod
S,..I ....
bad Oft the F'LD crtterlon:
..
91. 92, 93, ".
0"
Prlltnt punc" dtpth (., ,".61
"
..
.IT HETUltH
'CAMINQ t.1Mll DIAGRAM 13-JUN-'2 3:42:1' PH PG 1
Figure-7.33.b: FLD for deep drawing 304.8 nun diameter HSG Steel blank.
GOCOO 'AIlURE MODULE SHEET rOAM
E1
1M.'
.""".....hlE"
""
j
,
.""".....
7a
I
I
, ,

, ,
, ,
, ,
! ' ,
" "
I
" '
24.'

.',
.,.,... , ...... ""
i
-[2
.'
.2 I
.

..... -,... -la. la. U ....
htlur. 1. predicted to oeeur .t tn. ollo.'ng nodes
"""I,,,...
b..... CH'l tn. Fl.O ern.rion: .u.
119. 120. 121. 122. 123.
.1"
Itt.Stnt Punct'l d.pt" (_) 41."
.111
.12'
.111
HIT "ETUft"
'OAHIMG LIMIT DIAGRAM 13... JUH..92 ):":01 PM PGl
Figure-7.33.c: FLD for deep drawing 355.6 mm diameter HSG Steel blank.
- 192-
Table 7.10: Summary of tool dimensions, material properties, FLO parameters,
and process conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of UV steel.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
arid 355.6 [mm]
(76.17 [ksi])
(10", 12",
and 14")
(0.031")
FLD parameters
FLDO
S1
S2
B
Process conditions
Blank holder force
26.13
-1.2
0.5
10
dry friction
270 [kN]
- 193-
Figure-7.34: Fracture in UV Steel cups.
- 194-
GOCAO
'AlLURE NODULE" SHEET FORM
E1
tH.'
P_. "P,.U
,...
,

12.'
I
,.
P",nch
" " ... .; ... ; ...
"".. ''''' ..... ... ...
" "
...............
...... JO ........
i
i
""',
............
P...nch ,
2.............
,
-- I
-EZ
.[2 I
i
.....
"16.'
12.' la ..
".f PII"Ch
r.Hurt t. predicted to occur ,t t.h, follow1ng nodll tr..... ,..IN
b...d on t.he F'LO crtterton:
62 : ::
o e'
0"
'2, 54, 55. 54. 51, n. S9. 60. 61,
0"
o .J
n. '4, 'S. ", ". ".
,. 0" ."
..
0"
o .s
P,....nt punch dlPU\ (M) 51.17
e. o 'klT o!,thuo
rORMING LIMlT OIAGRAM 13..JUN-92 2:46:0 PH PGl
Figure-7.35.a: FLD for deep drawing of 254.0 mm diameter UV Steel blank.
GOCAO FAILURE MODULE ... SHEET fORM
n
UI.'
p.."..po.Le
t
J
P_
la ,
"''',
i
-'

" "
" ""..
................
I
......... .,............ , .......
""'"
a...............

--
,
I
-[2
.2
I
..... -I. -12.' 12:.' U ....
Punch
at the ro110.'ng nod .,...,,..."
IS, ". 17. a,. 90. 91. 92. n. 9.,
95 : ::
0"
0"
0"
'.oomt pundI IIOpt. (-I 53.'1
"
0"
II
."
"
tltn IIl.lllAN
fOAMING LIMIT DIAGRAM 134 JUN..n 2,":2) ... PGl
Figure-7.35.b: FLDfor deep drawing 304.8 mm diameter UV Steel blank.
GileAD F'AILURE MOOUU .. SHEET F'DRH
,
!l
lat.'
.'P,.U:-
....
I
,"",Mh
n .
I
"" ""
P_h d.P..
", '"
"" ...... """"............ ""_....
I
'"
'"",...ch d.,tIJ.,-L';---
."
...... "" ...
--
-2
.
.[2
I .
...... .,... 4 12 12.' l . ....

Fal1UrI t. predIcted to occur It ttle rollowtng nodn

belld on tht F'\.O c:rHerton:
.1IC
11'.
Pt ..,t punct'I dlptn (_, 52.50
HlT 01'_
F'ORMING LlNlt DIAGRAM 13..JUN92 3:00:02 PM PGl
Figure-7.35.c: FLD for deep drawing 355.6 mm diameter UV Steel blank.
- 195-
Table 7.11: Predicted, and measured cup heights at fracture for UV steel.
Measured Predicted
Blank Diameter Cup Height at Cup Height at
Fracture Fracture
Test No. (mm) (in) (mm) (in) (mm) (in)
1 254.0 10 51 2.01 51.17 2.01
2 304.8 12 53 2.07 53.61 2.11
3 355.6 14 49 1.93 52.50 2.07
Interstitial Free steel
The last material tested is IF steel. A list of tool geometry, material parameters,
FLD parameters, and process conditions is given in Table 7.12. The fractured cups
from these experiments are shown in Figure 7.36. The resulting failure predictions
again show a very nice agreement with the experimentally obtained failure heights,
see Table 7.l3. As expected the strain state of the failed nodes is situated in the left
part of the FLD, see Figure 7.37a to 7.37c. Also for these tests the strain path
followed is along a line with a slight curvature.
Table 7.13: Predicted, and measured cup heights at fracture for IF steel.
Measured Predicted
Blank Diameter Cup Height at
Cup Height at
Fracture
Fracture
Test No.
(mm) (in) (mm) (in) (mm) (in)
1 254.0 10 79 3.11 79.79 3.14
2 304.8 12 68
2.68 72.03 2.84
3 355.6 14 62 2.44 65.25 2.57
- 196-
Table 7.12: Summary of tool dimensions, material properties, FLO parameters,
and process conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of IF steel.
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63") . ~
Blank diameter. 254.0, 304.8,
and 355.6 [mm]
(90.27 [ksiD
(l0", 12",
and 14")
(0.031")
FLD parameters
FLDO
S1
S2
B
Process conditions
Blank holder force
26.31
-1.25
0.5
10
dry friction
270 [kN]
- 197-
Figure-7.36: Fracture in IF Steel cups.
- 198 -
GOCAO I
...
'AiLUAE "DaULt - SHUT FORM
I
El
lat.'
u
P...nch de"'h
i
. t
,..,
I
I
,
',ft" W
12.' I
, ,
.,,,,,p lf
' ,
, ,
, ,
. ,
, ,
0'" '"
I
", ..... '.
I
"
, ... , ..... I
"
. "
24 ..... ' ......
.'
-2
.
.2
f
-,t . -),.,
-12.' II.'
) .., .,.,
P",nch
'611ur, " predtcted to occur at the followinO ned..
S"-'I fltl"
b.lld an the FLO cr1terion:
." 3',
Prestnt Punch d.pth (_) 7'.79
Hll RTUAH
FOAMING LIMn OlAGRAM 13-JUN-92 3:12:5Z PM PC1
Figure-7.37.a: FLD for deep drawing of 254.0 nun diameter IF Steel blank.
. -
GDCAO FAILURE SHEET rORN
1 1M.'
,...
.t the rol10winO nodes
43. Sol. n. ". '7. A. tt, 70, 71.
P'I..nt punch dlpt" (M) 72.03
fORMING UNIT DIACRAM
S,"'I ",I"
U 0 ..
'4 0 ..
" 0"
." 0 II
" HIT "ElUAN
3:19:" PM PC 1
Figure-7.37.b: FLD for deep drawing 304.8 nun diameter IF Steel blank.
. -
GOCAO F'AlI..URf: HOOUI.E - SHEET rORM
n
IH.'
P,,,,,PlE'
" ..
I
I
P,ft,'
1'2.'
!
" "
,...._hd...
" "
. ,
, ,
, ,
, ..", ......... '
i
' ,
o ""
... "",
.'
'_h
"
24.1,"
.
"
-[2 . .[2
I
..... -h 12.'
".. 36.'
....
P",nch
FaHur. " prtdicted to OCCU' at tht rol10.1na nod..
rpMl""....
b,..d on the FLO c,tterton:
Ita
101.
"'.tnt punch dept" (_) n. u
HIT REtURN
roAMING LINlT OUGRAM U ..JUN-U 3:27:'0 PM fOG 1
Figure-7.37.c: FLD for deep drawing 355.6 mm diameter IF Steel blank.
- 199-
Finally, a comparison between the cup heights at fracture obtained in the previous
experiments for different materials will be done to show the influence of the material
properties on the fracture. In the previous experiments, all the process conditions
were kept the same, the same experiments were repeated with three different
materials. The only parameter which could not be kept constant was the sheet
thickness. This means a comparison is not made solely based on material properties,
since the failure height increases with sheet thickness, (Kotthaus, 1955).
However, the differences in sheet thickness are small enough not to have too much
influence in the obtained failure heights.
For clarity, the material parameters, FLD constants, and sheet thicknesses of the
different materials are listed again in Table 7.14.
Table 7.14: Material properties, FLD parameters, and sheet thicknesses for
HSG, IF, and UV steel.
HSGSteel IF Steel UVSteel
n 0.143 0.263 0.254
1< [MPa] 603.83 622.38 525.19
r 1.40 1.95 1.45
EO
0.000328 0.000846 0.008742
Thickness
[mm] 0.889 0.8382 0.7874
(in)
0.035 0.033 0.031
FLD
o
16.0 26.31 26.13
S1 -1.35 -1.25 -1.2
S2 0.5 0.5 0.5
B 10 10 10
Both predicted and measured cup heights where fracture occurs in deep drawing
HSG, UV, and IF steels are plotted in Figure 7.38. The material having the overall
lowest fracture height is HSG steel. This is because HSG steel possesses a small n-
- 200 -
2.4 2.3 2.2 2.1 2 1 .9
-
1.8 1.7
--jp-HSG Steel
rr"""""""-rT""'T-r-T1-r--r-T-'--r-T-'-T""'T-'-T""'T""'-...-.-I --. -UV Steel
-. -IF Steel
-.*' -HSG Steel (FDM)
--[3 -UV Steel (FDM)
- -.-IF Steel (FDM)
50
30
1.6
40
70
60
80
90
E
E
c:
-
.c
0)
.-
(1)
.c
!
::J
- .-
If
Draw Ratio
Figure-7.38: Comparison of failure heights for different draw ratios for different
materials.
- 201-
value which means that not much stretching is possible as explained in Section 2.2.1.
Additionally, the r value is not very high which also limits the fracture height. The
fracture heights show a decrease with increasing draw ratio which is according to
expectations.
The material yielding failure heights close to the ones found for HSG steel is UV
steel. UV steel has a high n-value with a fairly high r-value which makes it very
feasible for drawing operations which involve stretching. When looking at the
fracture heights one notices a peculiar increase for an increase in blank diameter
from 254.0 mm to 304.8 mm. This is unusual since commonly the failure height
decreases with increasing draw ratio. This is because the restraining force increases
with an increasing flange surface area and the restraining force is usually the most
important factor determining the deepest possible draw. The uncommon increase in
failure height can be explained as follows. Stretching starts, in the test carried out
with a blank diameter of 254.0 mm (lO"), when the punch has progressed about
halfway which means not much flange is left, Le. not much material is left to be:.
stretched into the die cavity. On the contrary, for a stamping operation with a 304.5_
mm (12") blank quite a large flange is left when stretching starts. This means for a
not localized stretch of the material, less thickness strain will occur and thus the
material can be stretched further. Since HSG steel does not posses a large n-value
this effect does not show, and thus the failure heights of UV steel will be larger for
greater draw ratios as can be seen from experimental data.
When comparing fracture heights of UV and HSG steel, it can be seen that for small
draw ratios the failure heights are similar, but for increasing draw ratios UV steel
shows larger fracture heights. This can be explained as follows. The test which is
performed with a blank diameter of 254.0 mm (lO") is almost pure deep drawing,
Le. almost no stretching is involved. Thus the maximum drawing depth will be
mainly determined by the r-value. Therefore, it can be expected that the fracture
height is roughly the same as the one found for HSG steel since the r-values of both
materials do not differ too much. On the contrary, the deformation associated with
larger draw ratios involve a considerable amount of stretching. Thus, the n-value
will become more dominant in d e t e ~ n i n g the maximum drawing depth. This can
be explained as follows: Since the outer rim of the material thickens most, most of
the BHF is applied at that region. Thus, the material closer to the die comer radius
can relatively easily be stretched over the die comer radius into the die cavity. As
- 202-
explained before, the higher the n-value the better the material can resist local
thinning which results in an improved stretchability. This effect shows for the larger
draw ratios of UV steel.
Related to this is the reason for the increase in failure height for a drawing operation
applying an initial blank diameter of 304.8 mm (12"), when comp>ared to one
performed with an initial blank diameter of 254.0 mm (lO").
The material yielding the highest failure heights of all is IF steel. This material
possesses a high n-value combined with a high r-value which give it a superior
drawability. The high n-value also distributes localized strains which clearly aids
drawing when some stretching is involved. This is the reason why still a
considerable failure height can be obtained for larger draw ratios. As expected the
line connecting the failure lines shows a steady decrease with increasing draw ratio.
7.3 Wrinkling
When carrying out the tests discussed in section 7.1.1 and 7.1.2, often problems
occurred with wrinkling/puckering over the die corner radius. This phenomena
will be studied in more detail. Puckering occurred for most materials tested under
different process conditions. ntis was the most severe with Aluminum
Alloy 1100-0. Thus, the next series of experiments will concentrate on this material.
For tool dimensions, material properties, and process conditions see Table 7.15 and
7.16.
Drawing of cups using a large die corner radius often causes problems. The reason
is that the sheet material drawn over the die corner is only semi-supported, Le.
there is no means to apply a load perpendicular to that specific part of the cup. Thus
when tangential compressive stresses are applied to the sheet, it will easily start
wrinkling. With decreasing blank thickness, it will become more severe, since the
moment of inertia decreases. This wrinkling phenomena is often called
-
when it occurs over the die corner radius.
Since puckers appear close to the blank edge they are impossible to remove and
therefore highly unwanted. Investigations by Beisswanger have shown that
- 203-
Table 7.15: Summary of tool dimensions, material properties, and process
conditions for axisymmetric deep drawing of AA 1100-0
Tool dimensions
Punch diameter
Punch nose radius
Die rounding radius
152.40 [mm]
20.07 [mm]
158.24 [mm]
16.00 [mm]
(6.00")
(0.79")
(6.23")
(0.63")
EO (pre strain) 0
Blank diameter 254.0 [mm]
(23.46 [ksiD
(10")
(0.032")
Process conditions
Blank holder force
water base lubricant ..
see Table 7.16
.. Lubrication was put on both sides but not on the area where the punch would
come into contact with the blank. A water base lubricant (product no. DB-4251)
was used. All blanks were cleaned with a special cleaning solvent before the
experiments.
- 204-
Table 7.16: Process parameters for tests using AA 1100-0
Test Maximum BHF
No. punch travel
(kN)
(mm)
01 no limit.. 6.4
02 no limit.. 38.2
03
no limit.. 78.4
04
no limit.. 113.7
05
no limit.. variation #1....
06 no limit'"
variation #2....
07 no limit'"
variation #3....
08 55
variation #1....
09 65
variation #1....
10 70
variation #3....
* No limit. means that a cup will be fully drawn provided that no failure occurs.
** For variation profiles see Figures 7.39a-7.39c. These profiles are input profiles for
the die cushion force, and, therefore, actually measured BHF profile might
slightly differ from the input values due to inaccuracies explained in Chapter IV.
- 205-
Blankholder Force Variation I
Punch Travel (mm)
Definition points for
BHF Variation-I
P. Stroke BHF
(rom) (kN)
0 78.5
40 78.5
60 196.2
140 196.2
100 80 60 40 20
40 ........._ ..........
o
100

10 ----;:====::::.!::---t-------"'9f-------j
I
lii 10
ii
Figure 7.39.a: BHF Variation-I
81ankholder Force Varletlan ..
Punch Travel (mm)
BHF Variation-II
P. Stroke BHF
(rom) (kN)
0 78.5
45 78.5
57 196.2
140 196.2
'00 80 60 40 20
10 ........._ ..........
o
140
...
1
,.1
I
.!! 100
lD
Figure 7.39.b: BHF Variation-II
BI.nkholder Force Variation til
Punch Travel (mm)
2.0
200
Z
200
l!
0
...
"0
:;;
i
140
C
.!!
lD
110
10
0 20 40 60 80
100
BHF Variation-ill
P. Stroke BHF
(rom) (kN)
0 78.5
15 68.7
74 9.8
140 9.8
Figure 7.39.c: BHF Variation-II
- 206-
puckers formed in the early stages of the draw in thick sheet can be reduced during
continuing deformation, but puckers in thin sheets always tend to grow,
(Beisswanger, 1947).
All recommended actions to eliminate puckering are based on the elimination of the
tangential compressive stress. Lange presents 3 different ways to avoid puckering
when drawing conical shapes, (Lange, 1985). These recommendations can also be
applied, in some modified form, to our geometry. The recommendations are:
1) Increase of the blank holding pressure. This increases the restraining force
applied to the material, and, the radial stress in the material. According to the flow
criterion tangential stresses are reduced and puckering is less likely to occur.
2) Increase of the initial blank diameter dO. The reason is the same as the one
mentioned under recommendation 1. It causes an increase in the radial stress over
the die corner radius, and, hence a decrease in the tangential compressive stress in :.
that region. The larger is the blank diameter the larger the resulting radial stress is. _
When drawing conical shapes, it is even possible to increase the radial stress so
much that the tangential stress changes sign and becomes tensile near the punch,
see Figure 7.40.
3) Use of drawbeads. Since drawbeads increase the restraining force the risk of
puckering is reduced as explained under recommendation 1. An additional benefit
is that the material also is cold worked when it passes through a drawbead. This
increases the inertia of the material which makes it harder for wrinkling or
puckering to start.
These recommendations cannot readily be transferred to our problem which is
caused by the large die corner radius. The specific problems encountered during
experiments were:
1) The material, AA 1100-0, used in experiments possessed a fairly large M value
which resulted in large ears. When getting close to the final stage of the drawing
process, the flange only consisted of 4 ears since the valleys already had passed over
the starting point of the die corner. Thus BHF is only applied to the ears since those
are the only parts constrained between die and blankholder. When this situation
- 207-
+a
-a
After tension has
been increased
., a1=a
r
,
Figure-7.40: Schematic diagram of drawing of conical shapes, and the
corresponding stress distribution, (Lange, 1985).
- 208-
appeared puckers easily formed at the unsupported valleys. This problem could not
be solved by increasing the BHF.
2) The other problem was that puckering already started when there was still some
flange left all around the die corner radius. From tests done when stopping the slide
after it had progressed halfway, it was found out that puckers start occurring
simultaneously with the onset of earing. And curiously puckering showed more
severe with increasing blank holding force. The reason for this is that due to earing
an uneven restraining force distribution acts on the flange. As can be seen, the
restraining force will increase at the cross sections with ears. The h5:gher is the BHF
the more uneven the restraining force distribution is. Thus, puckers will show up
more severely.
The effect of increased puckering with increased BHF can be seen from tests #01, 02,
03, and 04, see Figure 7.41. All these tests were carried out under the same process
conditions except for the BHF which was gradually increased in each experiment but:.
kept constant during the experiment, see Table 7.16. During the first test (cup #01) _
the blank holding force was kept very low and very serious wrinkling shows up
This can be expected because wrinkling will already start under the blank holder
since the BHF is not high enough to suppress wrinkle initiation. Test sample #02
shows almost no wrinkling. This is according to expectations since an increased
blank holding force will suppress wrinkling. The minor wrinkles which still show
up, all appear after the flange has left the blank holder and is unsupported
compressed over the die corner. After increasing the blank holding force again,
wrinkling gets more severe (cup #03). The reason for this is the uneven restraining
force distribution as explained under point 2 in the previous paragraph. Finally,
when carrying out test #04, the cup fractures due to a too high blank holding force.
A brief investigation was decided to be done about varying the blank holding force
to see if improved cup characteristics could be obtained by that. The tests carried
out to investigate this were #05, 06, and 07, see Figure 7.42. For the blank holding
force variations, see Figures 7.39a to 7.39c. Tests #05 and 06 were carried out with
increased blank holding force towards the end. Test #07 was carried out with
decreased blank holding force towards the end. As explained in the beginning of the
section, if the blank holding force is very high when only ears are constrained
between die and blank holder puckering gets very severe. This effect shows for cups
- 209-
Figure-7.41: Cups #01, 02, 03, and 04.
Figure-7.42: Cups #05, 06, and 07.
- 210-
#05 and 06. When carrying out test #07 this effect was omitted by releasing the
blank holding force towards the end. Compared to tests #05 and 06 the cup
characteristics of test #07 are improved a great deal. Also compared to constant
blank holding force experiments, e.g. tests #02 and 03, cup #07 has slightly
improved cup characteristics.
Finally, an investigation of the BHF variation on the initiation of wrinkling was
decided to be carried out. Therefore, the slide was stopped after a stroke of 55 and
65 mm in experiments #08 and 09 respectively, see Figure 7.43. The BHF variation
was according to profile #1, as shown in Figure 7.39.a, which has an increase
towards the end. Both partially drawn cups exhibit severe puckering over the die
corner radius. Cup #10 is drawn with a blank holding force variation according to
profile #3, as shown in Figure 7.39.a, which has a decrease in BHF towards the end
of the stroke. The cup could easily be drawn, even deeper than cup #09, without
showing any wrinkling at all. The slide was stopped just before the flange would be
drawn over the die radius.
Figure-7.43:
- 211 -
7.4 Increasing the Limiting Drawing Ratio Using Variable BHF
In the previous experiments, blank diameters were all less than 12 inches. For this
section, the blank diameter was increased, and the effect of BHF on the quality of
the cup was studied. The BHF variations were first estimated by using
SHEET_FORM, and later will be modified to improve the cup quality. Several
comparisons with the constant BHF are made.
The geometry of the tooling is the same as the one shown in Figure 7.1. Dry friction
conditions were used in the experiments. Three different steel blanks of 13 and 14
inches diameter were used in the experiments. It was not possible to completely
form the blank with 14 inches diameter without fracture. However, using a variable
BHF it was possible to increase the attainable cup height. These experiments will be
summarized in the following paragraphs.
High Strength Hot Dipped Galvanized Steel:
Material properties, process conditions, and tool geometry used in these
experiments are the same as the ones given in Table 7.3 except the blank diameter,
and the BHF. The blank diameters are 13 and 14 inches. The BHF variation and the
resulting punch force distribution measured during the experiments are shown in
Figure 7.44. Cup was fully formed using this BHF variation without fracture and
w r i n k l i n g ~
Several other experiments were done using a constant BHF, and a blank of 13 inches
in diameter. These experiments are;
(1) Using a constant BHF of 151 kN, cup was fractured at a punch travel of 28.5
mm.
(2) Using a constant BHF of 100 kN, cup was fractured at a punch travel of 73.0
mm. BHF and the punch force distribution measured during these experiments
are shown in Figure 7.45. As it can be seen in this figure, punch force is still
increasing close to the position where the fracture occured. If the BHF was
reduced close to 70 mm punch travel to decrease the punch force it would be
possible to fully form this cup. There were also some minor wrinkling which
probably occured during the initial stages of the deformation.
- 212-
-
o
c::
o
-
-
LL
:J:
m
-
8
..
If
.c
u
c::
~
Q.
15
10
5
o
o 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.44: Punch force and BHF distributions measured during the deep drawing
of High Strength Hot Deep Galvanized Steel.
Blank Diameter: 13 inches
- 213-
100 80 60 40 20
--BHF
.... - - Punch Force 1""" =....t..==;..r.. ..
~ / ,-- I \ I
o
o
5
15
1 0 ~ ........ - - + - - - - - + - - - - = t = = 4 ~ F
20
-
(t)
c
g
U.
:::t:
rEI
-
Punch Travel (mm)
of !Ugh Strength Hot Deep Galvanized Steel.
- 214-
(3) Using a constant BHF of 70 kN, severe wrinkling has occured and the
deformation was not completed.
Experiments were also conducted using a blank of 14 inches in diameter. But, it was
not possible to for this blank completely due to severe wrinkling and fracture at the
early stages of deformation.
Univit Steel:
Process conditions, material properties, and the tool geometry used in these
experiments are the same as the ones given in Table 7.4 except the blank diameter
and the BHF. 13 and 14 inches diameter blanks were used in the experiments
together with variable and constant BHFs described in the following paragraphs.
Using a constant BHF of 151 kN and a 13 inches diameter blank, fracture has.
occured at 38 mm punch travel.
An experiment using the BHF variation shown in Figure 7.46 and a 13 inches
diameter blank was performed. The punch force distribution measured during this
experiment is also shown in Figure 7.46. Reduction in the BHF after the punch travel
of 35 mm was not enough to reduce the punch force and fracture was occured at a
punch travel of 43 mm. This BHF was modified in the second experiment. In this
experiment, BHF was sharply reduced after the punch travel of 20 mm as shown in
Figure 7.47. Using the BHF variation shown in Figure 7.47, it was possible to
increase the cup height, however, fracture has occured at apunch travel of 87 mm.
By further reducing the BHF after 70 mm punch travel it would be possible to fully
form the cup.
Using a constant BHF of 80 kN and 13 inches diameter blank both wrinkling and
fracture has occured at the early stages of the deformation.
It was not possible to form a 14 inches diameter blank due to severe wrinkling and
fracture at the early stages of the deformation.
- 215-
1 6 .......... --..
-
U)
s
-
U. 12
::c
CD
-
~
If
.c
Co)
c
~
D.
8
4
- - Punch Force
Punch Travel (mm)
of Univit Steel.
- 216-
100 80 60 40 20
/i i -BHF l
..............................+ : j......... . 1 \ ..
/ 1 1 - - Punch Force 1
-71-----\-----:------\---\-
16
14
-
1 2 (I)
C
0
-
-
10
U.
::t:
m
-
8
CD
(,)
..
0
6
U.
.c
(,)
c 4
:::I
D.
2
0
0
Punch Travel (mm)
of Univit Steel.
- 217-
Interstitial Free Steel:
Process conditions, material properties, and the tool geometry is the same as the
ones given in Table 7.5. However, different BHFs were used together with 13 and
14 inches diameter blanks.
The first experiment was conducted using a constant BHF of 151 kN, and a 13 inches
diameter blank. Fracture has occured at 58 mm punch travel.
The second experiment was conducted using the BHF variation shown in Figure
7.48. The punch force measured during the experiment is also shown in Figure 7.48.
Cup was fully formed without fracture and wrinkling. The third experiment was
conducted using a 13 inches diameter blank but this time with a constant BHF of 70
kN. Results of this experiment is shown in Figure 7.49. Cup was again fully formed
without fracture but, there were some minor wrinkling. Punch force was slightly
lower than the one obtained in the second experiment, as shown in Figure 7.48.
Another experiment was conducted using a constant BHF of 100 kN. Results of this
experiment is shown in Figure 7.50. This time fracture has occured at a punch travel
of76mm.
Several experiments were conducted using 14 inches diameter blank. Non of the
cups were fully formed due to fracture, but some improvement in the attainable cup
height was obtained. Using the BHF variation shown in Figure 7.51, cup was
fractured at a punch travel of 97 mm. In this variation, BHF was sharply reduced to
40 kN at 65 mm punch travel. In the second variation, BHF was reduced to 30 kN at
65 mm punch travel as shown in Figure 7.52. Punch force distribution obtained in
the second experiment is also shown in Figure 7.52. In this case, fracture has
occured at a punch travel of 110 mm.
- 218-
2 0 1""""I"'""r"""Ir-T'""T""T-r""T""T"-r"'1r""T""T""'I-rT""'T"'T'il-r"T"T"'T'"TT"T"1r-rT"1"'T'"TT"T"1f"'1
180 150 120 90
--BHF
60 30
[1 j....................... - - Punch Force
: .--t- - :
4
o
o
8
12
1 6
u.
:x:
m
-
U)
c
o
-
-
Punch Travel (mm)
of Interstitial Free Steel.
- 219-
.
180
.............-
150
- - Punch Force
120 90 60 30
2 0 r-T"""T"""I"""'T'""'T'"""'1I"""T'""T"""1"""T"""T"""T-r-T""'T"""T"""T""'T""T"""I"""'T'""'T'"""'1r-r"T"""1"""T"""T"""T-rT""'T""T""'T""'T""1
I I I _i_
BHF
i
/ i 1 ! \ !
4
v l .! I j j
OI'...L.-L..L...I.....&...JL......I..,...I....JL....L....L....J-L.................L...L....L...I-L...I......L....I........,...I....JL....L...........-O"'........-'-.............
o
12
16
-
CD
f
.c
(,)
c
::::I
Q.
u..
:c
m
-
en
c
o
-
-
Punch Travel (mm)
- 220-
-
UI
C
o
-
-
U.
J:
En
-
2 0 --r-,.-r--T'; ---.-r--"T"'""I
--BHF 1
16 - -""''''' Force-'-I:::-:::::::-j=-=t--
i / ! \!
1 2
i / i i .vtM
: . . 'n" .
i /! i l'
8
4
/ i ; ;
V I i I. I
..............
o 20 40 60 80 100
Punch Travel (mm)
- 221 -
120 100 80 60 40 20
--BHF
r----..:.--- 1
I
... - - Punch Force t-t::::::=.!:::=::::.::::: + .
: ~ : :
. 1 --- i ! 11
4
o
o
8
12
16
-
j
'5
c
.=
D.
Punch Travel (mm)
Figure-7.S1: Punch force and BHF distributions measured during the deep drawing
- 222-
--BHF
4
8
;
I
1 6 .. - - Punm Force t--::"r:-:=--"'"=-f==--""
. V : : : \
12
-
If
.c
u
c
::s
Q.
'iii'
~
-
LL
:t:
m
Punch Travel (mm)
- 223-
CHAPTER-VIII
CONCLUSIONS and FUTURE WORK
8.1 Conclusions
In this report, deep drawing experiments conducted in a 160 ton Double Action
Hydraulic Minster press have been summarized, and the analytical results using the
finite-difference based program SHEET_FORM have been compared with the
measurements done during the experiments. Experiments were conducted using
both constant and variable BHF as a function of Punch Travel, and the effect of the
BHF on the quality of deep drawn products were studied.
The main purpose of this study was to verify the results of the analysis program, .
SHEET_FORM. SHEET_FORM has different modules built into it. These modules-
are:
1- Process simulation module;
[deep drawing and redrawing (direct and reverse)]
a- axisymmetric
b- plane-strain
In this study, only axisymmetric geometries are considered.
2- Failure evaluation module;
Several criteria are used to predict wrinkling and fracture during the
process simulation. For a detailed description of these failure criterion,
see Asthana, et al., 1991.
3- Blankholder force (BHF) variation module;
The BHF can be kept constant or varied during the process simulation as a
function of the punch stroke. The BHF profile can either be pre-
determined and input by the user, or it can be optimized based on several
criteria, such as punch force, thickness strain, wrinkling, etc. These
control criteria are explained in Chapter 6.
-224-
SHEET_FORM is used to predict strains, stresses, and punch force during the deep
drawing process. Punch and blankholder forces were measured during the forming
process, and the circle grid analysis technique was used to measure the strains.
These measurements are compared with the analytical results in Chapter 7. In
general, the predictions are in reasonably good agreement with the measurements.
Based on the prediction of stresses and strains under certain process conditions,
such as different lubricant, material, and BHF, a failure evaluation is performed
during the analysis to predict if failure would occur during the experiments.
Attainable cup height,:; under constant BHFs are calculated and compared with the
failure cup heights obtained in the experiments in Chapter 7. These comparisons are
also in reasonably good agreement.
BHF variations were predicted using SHEET_FORM for three different types of steel
blanks. These predictions were later modified and tried out in the experiments.
These experiments are also summarized in Chapter 7.
8.2 Future Work
In practice, die design for sheet metal forming processes are usually based on trial-
and-error. In general, a sheet metal forming die is quite complex, and it requires
several trial-and-error stages to come up with the final die design. Therefore, this
method is time consuming and costly. Any technique which will help die designers
to reduce the number of trial-and-error stages will result in a considerable amount of
time and money savings. One method is to supply die designers with a robust and
easy to use simulation program which will predict failure so that die design can be
fine tuned before the dies are manufactured. Such a simulation program should
consist of a simulation module with failure prediction capabilities, and it should be
easy to use. SHEET_FORM has all of these capabilities, and it can be used in such a
design environment. However, further modifications should be done in
SHEET_FORM to improve its capabilities:
1- A user interface should be developed to present the results from a
designers point of view and to make suggestions to improve the design based the
simulation results.
-225-
2- Axisymmetric and plane-strain geometries are not very widely used in the
sheet metal forming industry. However, in complex shaped sheet metal parts,
there are usually sections close to axisymmetric and plane-strain geometries.
Approximate formulations may be used to evaluate these sections without going
through a full 3-D analysis of the complex geometry. The application of
SHEET_FORM to analyze complex geometries should be verified, the formulation
should be improved, if necessary, and guidelines should be developed.
Another feature of the SHEET_FORM which would be very useful for process
designers for sheet metal parts is the prediction of the optimum BHF variation. With
a constant BHF, the attainable cup height is limited by either wrinkle or fracture.
There is no need to keep the BHF constant throughout the forming process. The
BHF can be varied as a function of punch travel to obtain deeper cups and to
increase the limiting drawing ratio. The BHF predictions by SHEET_FORM can be
used as an initial estimate, and, later, fine tuned by the designers to find the
optimum BHF variation. The BHF prediction module should be further improved ..
and it should be extended to more complex geometries such as rectangular cups.
-226-
REFERENCES
Duncan, J.L., 1986, Sowerby, R., "Reviewof Practical Modelling Methods for
Sheet Metal Forming", Advanced Technology of Plastici1y, vol. I, pp.
615-624.
Eary, D.F., 1974, Reed, E.A., Techniques of Sheet Metal, Prentice-
Hall Inc., Englood Cliffs, NJ.
Ahmetoglu, M.A., 1990, Kinzel, G.L., and Altan, T., "Sheet Metal Forming
Process; State of the Technology and Analysis", Report No. ERC/NSM-5-
90-46, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
Ahmetoglu, M.A., 1992, Kinzel, G.L., and Altan, T., "Multi Stage Deep Drawing
of Aluminum Alloys, Simulation and Experiments", Report No.
ERC/NSM-5-92-25, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH.
ASM, 1988, Forming and Forging, Metals Handbook, 9th Edition, Editors S.L.
Semiatin et.al., vol. 14.
Doege, E., 1987, and Sommer, N., i'Blank Holder Pressure and Blank Holder
Layout in Deep Drawing of Thin Sheet Metal", Advanced Technology of
Plastici1y, vol. IT, pp. 1305-1314.
Hill, R., 1950, The Mathematical TheeIY of Plasticity, Oxford University Press.
Hosford, W., 1962, Backofen, W., and Burke, J., "TextUre hardening",
Transactions of ASM, no. 55, pp. 264-267.
Lange, K., 1985, "Deep Drawing", Handbook of Metal Forming, Editors K. Lange,
et al., McGraw-Hill, NY.
Nakamura, K., 1987, "Sheet Metal Forming with Hydraulic Counter Pressure in
Japan", Annals of CIRP, vol. 36. .
-227-
Oehler, G., 1966, "Design of drawn sheet metal components" (in German),
Konstruktionsbiicher, no 11, Springer.
Ramaekers, J.A.H., 1988, Houtackers, L.J.A., Peeters, P.B.G., Plastic
Manufacturing of Materials (In Dutch), OMTEC, 2nd edition.
SMG, 1990, Hydraulic Presses Brochure, no. 140/3000/6/90.
TMEH, 1984, Forming, Tool and Manufacturing Engineers Handbook, 4th
Edition, Editors C. Wick, J.T. Benedict, and RF. Veilleux, vol. II.
Ziinkler, X., 1973, "Workhardening Influence on Drawing Force and Limit..
Drawing Ratio During Deep Drawing" (in German), Blech Rohre Profile,
no. 20, 1973, pp. 343-346.
ASTE, 1955, Die Design Handbook/1st Edition, American Society of Tool
Engineers, Deqoit, Michican, F.W. Wilson, et al. Mc Graw-Hill.
Sommer, N. 1986, "Blank Holder Force and Design of Blank Holders in Deep
Drawing" (in German), Doctoral Dissertation, Technical University of
Hannover.
Sitaraman, S.K., 1989, Kinzel, G.L., and Altan, T., "Process Sequence Design in
Sheet Metal Forming", Report No. ERC/NSM-5-89-33, The Ohio State
University, Columbus, OH.
-228-

468623

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

468623

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Deep Drawing of Round Cups Using

Variable Blank Holder Pressure

0.32 0.4 0.48 0.56 0.64.

These materials and their thicknesses are shown in Table 5.1.

Вам также может понравиться