Refine Your Search

Search Results

Viewing 1 to 4 of 4
Technical Paper

A Bursting Failure Criterion for Tube Hydroforming

2002-03-04
2002-01-0794
Fundamental differences exist between sheet metal forming and hydroforming processes. Sheet metal forming is basically a one step metal fabrication process. Almost all plastic deformation of an originally flat blank is introduced when the punch is moved normal to a clamped sheet metal. Hydroforming, however, consists of multiple steps of tube making, pre-bending, crushing, pressurization, etc. Each of the above mentioned steps can introduce permanent plastic deformations. The forming limit diagram obtained for sheet metal forming may or may not be used in hydroforming evaluations. A failure criterion is proposed for predicting bursting failures in tube hydroforming. The tube material's stress-strain curve, obtainable from uniaxial tensile test and subjected to some postulations under large stress/strain states, is used in judging the failure.
Technical Paper

The Bulge of Tubes and a Failure Criterion for Tube Hydroforming

2001-03-05
2001-01-1132
The bulge test in hydroforming is a simple fundamental experiment used to obtain basic knowledge in tube expansion. The results can be used to assist design and manufacturing of hydroformed automotive parts. It also can be used to develop a failure criterion for tubes in hydroforming. For these purposes, a section of a long unsupported tube with fixed ends was simulated numerically to obtain the mechanical states of the tube subjected to internal pressure. Steel and aluminum tubes are used. For the bulge tests, the internal pressure reaches a maximum and then decreases in value without failure while the stress, strain and volume of the tube keep increasing. A failure criterion for the bursting of a tube is proposed based on the stress-strain curve of the material.
Technical Paper

Using a Geometric Toolkit to Link Finite Element Calculations in Sheet Metal Forming Analysis

1994-03-01
940748
Sheet metal forming of automobile body panel consists of two processes performed in series: binder forming and punch forming. Due to differences in deformation characteristics of the two forming processes, their analysis methods are different. The binder wrap surface shape and formed part shape are calculated using different mathematical models and different finite element codes, e.g., WRAPFORM and PANELFORM, respectively. The output of the binder forming analysis may not be directly applicable to the subsequent punch forming analysis. Interpolation, or approximation, of the calculated binder wrap surface geometry is needed. This surface representation requirement is carried out using computer aided geometric design tools. This paper discusses the use of such a tool, SURFPLAN, to link WRAPFORM and PANELFORM calculations.
Technical Paper

Evaluation of a Dynamic Explicit Finite Element Code for Binder Forming Calculations

1995-02-01
950693
In order to develop a binder forming analysis model based on contact principle of mechanics and to search for an accurate finite element computer code to analyze the model, ABAQUS/Explicit was evaluated using a benchmark example of a step-die. Because the step-die is a quasi-static problem and ABAQUS/Explicit is a dynamic finite element code, we are particularly interested in avoiding oscillations of the blank in the die cavity after the binder is closed. The study reveals that the oscillations can be eliminated and an asymptotic solution obtained if the die close speed is not too high. The optimum die close time for the benchmark is obtained based on the efficiency of computing and accuracy of the solution. The issues of oscillations and asymptotic solutions related to analyzing a quasi-static binder forming problem by a dynamic finite element code are settled in this paper.
X