Search Results

Abstract This article presents a strategy for the virtual calibration of a large-scale model representing a self-piercing rivet (SPR) connection. The connection is formed between a stack of three AA6016-T4 aluminum sheets and one SPR. The calibration process involves material characterization, a detailed riveting process simulation, virtual joint unit tests, and the final large-scale model calibration. The virtual tests were simulated by detailed solid element FE models of the joint unit. These detailed models were validated using experimental tests, namely peeling, single-lap joint, and cross-tests. The virtual parameter calibration was compared to the experimental calibration and finally applied to component test simulations. The article contains both experiments and numerical models to characterize the mechanical behavior of the SPR connection under large deformation and failure.

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of alclad sheet and plate supplied in the -T861 temper.

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of alclad coiled sheet from 0.010 to 0.128 inch (0.25 to 3.25 mm), inclusive, in thickness supplied in the -T4 temper (see 8.5).

This specification covers a titanium alloy in the form of welding wire (see 8.5).

Multiple experimental studies were performed on galling intiation for variety of tooling materials, coatings and surface treatments, sheet materials with various surface textures and lubrication. Majority of studies were performed for small number of samples in laboratory conditions. In this paper, the methodology of screening experiment using different combinations of tooling configurations and sheet material in the lab followed by the high volume small scale U-bend performed in the progressive die on the mechanical press is discussed. The experimental study was performed to understand the effect of the interface between the sheet metal and the die surface on sheet metal flow during stamping operations. Aluminum sheet AA5754 2.5mm thick was used in this experimentation. The sheet was tested in laboratory conditions by pulling between two flat insert with controllable clamping force and through the drawbead system with variable radii of the female bead.

Electrification is the future of the automotive industry and with the rapid growth of Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) market, battery protection becomes more and more crucial. Side pole impact is one of the most challenging safety load cases. Rocker assembly, as the first line of defense, plays a significant role during the event. This paper proposes Cleveland-Cliffs Steel Tube as Reinforcement (C-STARTM) protection as an application for rocker reinforcement. For a component level assessment, three-point bending is used as a testing method to replicate pole impact. The performance is compared with aluminum baseline with respect to peak force and energy absorption. Test and CAE simulations have been performed and a well calibrated CAE model is utilized to predict the robustness of various steel designs using different grades, gauges and geometries.

The design of lightweight vehicle structures has become a common method for automotive manufacturers to increase fuel efficiency and decrease carbon emission of their products. By using aluminum instead of steel, manufacturers can reduce the weight of a vehicle while still maintaining the required strength and stiffness. Currently, Resistance Spot Welding (RSW) is used extensively to join steel body panels but presents challenges when applied to aluminum. When compared to steel, RSW of aluminum requires frequent electrode cleaning, higher energy usage, and more controlled welding parameters, which has driven up the cost of manufacturing. Due to the increased cost associated with RSW of aluminum, Refill Friction Stir Spot Welding (RFSSW) is being considered as an alternative to RSW for joining aluminum body panels. RFSSW consumes less energy, requires less maintenance, and produces more consistent welding in aluminum as compared to RSW.

Battery packs of electric vehicles are typically composed of lithium-ion batteries with aluminum and copper acting as cell terminals. These terminals are joined together in series by means of connector tabs to produce sufficient power and energy output. Such critical electrical and structural cell terminal connections involve several challenges when joining thin, highly reflective and dissimilar materials with widely differing thermo-mechanical properties. This may involve potential deformation during the joining process and the formation of brittle intermetallic compounds that reduce conductivity and deteriorate mechanical properties. Among various joining techniques, laser welding has demonstrated significant advantages, including the capability to produce joints with low electrical contact resistance and high mechanical strength, along with high precision required for delicate materials like aluminum and copper.

As data science technologies are being widely applied on various industries, the importance of data itself increased. A typical manufacturer company has a vast data set of products as 2D&3D drawing formats, but a common problem was that building a database from the 2D&3D drawings costs much, and it is hard to update the database after it once built. Also, it is high-cost job when the new factor researched and necessary to investigate the new factors on previously fixed or uploaded drawings. As new products are developed with time, these problems are getting more difficult. In this paper, an automated database building method using CATIA introduced and future probabilities are suggested. An aluminum wheel part was used as an example. An automated logic used CATIA V5’s VBA functions and was handled by python programming language.

This specification covers an aircraft-quality, low-alloy steel in the form of bars, forgings, mechanical tubing, and forging stock.

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of extruded bars, rods, wire, shapes, and tubing 5.000 inches (127.00 mm) and under in nominal diameter or least thickness (wall thickness of tubing) (see 8.5).

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of die and hand forgings 6.000 inches (152.00 mm) and under in nominal thickness at time of heat treatment (see 8.6).

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of sheet 0.063 to 0.236 inch (1.60 to 6.00 mm), incl, in thickness, clad on both sides (see 8.4).

This specification covers aluminum and aluminum alloy foil in the form of laminated sheet.

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of die forgings and hand forgings up to 6.000 inches (152.40 mm) in nominal thickness at the time of heat treatment (see 8.4).

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of hand forgings 17 inches (432 mm) and under in nominal thickness, and rolled rings up to 6 inches, incl (152 mm, incl) in nominal thickness at the time of heat treatment (see 8.5).

This specification covers an aluminum alloy in the form of hand forgings 11.000 inches (280 mm) and under in nominal thickness and of forging stock of any size (see 8.6).