Search Results

The use of commercial finite element analysis (FEA) software to perform stamping feasibility studies of automotive components has grown extensively over the last decade. Although product and process engineers have now come to rely heavily on results from FEA simulation for manufacturability of components, the prediction of springback has still not been perfected. Springback prediction for simple geometries is found to be quite accurate while springback prediction in complex components fails to compare with experimental results. Since most forming simulation FEA software uses a dynamic explicit solution method, the choice of various input parameters greatly affects the prediction of post formed stresses in the final component. Accurate stress prediction is critical for determination of springback, therefore this study focuses on the effects of some of the simulation parameters such as, element size, tool/loading speed and loading profile.

Draw beads are widely used in the binder of a draw die for regulating the restraining force and control the draw-in of a metal blank. Different sheet materials and local panel geometry request different local draw bead configurations. Even the majority of draw bead is single draw bead, the alternative double draw bead does have its advantages, such as less bending damage may be brought to the sheet material and more bead geometry features available to work on. In this paper, to measure the pulling force when a piece of sheet metal passing through a draw bead on an inclined binder, the AA5XXX and AA6XXX materials were tested and its strain were measured with a digital image correlation (DIC) system. Five different types of double bead configurations were tested. The beads are installed in a Stretch-Bend-Draw-System (SBDS) test device. The clearance between a male and a female bead is 10% thicker than the sheet material. A tensile machine was used to record the pulling force.