Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
|Title:||Failure prediction in can’s deep drawing||Authors:||Mendes Carvalho, Pedro Daniel||Orientador:||Oliveira, Marta C.
Barros, Pedro D.
|Keywords:||Deep-drawing; Finite element analysis; Yield criteria; Earing prediction; Failure prediction||Issue Date:||Jul-2016||Abstract:||The deep drawing process is a suitable operation to produce cans. Although those containers are also manufactured with ceramics and plastics materials, aluminum and steel are typically used, considering safety and manufacturing costs. Nowadays, the finite elements analysis is commonly used in the cans tool design since it allows predicting quickly and accurately the earing profile, the thickness reduction and the occurrence of failure. However, the prediction of these phenomena is strongly affected by the material properties and also by the process conditions. Thus, it is important to improve the knowledge concerning the suitable constitutive model and numerical parameters. The process conditions considered in this work are the ones established for the BENCHMARK 1 – Failure Prediction after Cup Drawing, Reverse Redrawing and Expansion, proposed under the NUMISHEET 2016 international conference. In this example, the cup’s deep drawing is performed considering three processes: drawing, reverse redrawing and expansion. The aim is to predict the failure point, knowing this multi-step process causes complex nonlinear strain paths. The two materials considered are an AA5352 aluminum alloy and a TH330 steel, whose mechanical behavior is modelled taking into account the available experimental information. In order to understand the influence of the yield criterion, the mechanical behavior is modelled, for both materials, with the CB2001 yield criterion, which is known for its accurate description of the material anisotropic behavior, and with the CPB06, which also enables the description of tension-compression asymmetry. The numerical simulation of the forming process is performed using DD3IMP in-house code. The punch force evolution and the cup height in all phases, the thickness profile, after the reverse redrawing operation, and the strain paths are the evaluated variables. To try to predict the failure point in both materials, three methods were used, including the strain-based FLC, stress-based FLC and the through-thickness strain rate analysis. Globally, the aluminum alloys show a higher earing profile and number of ears than the steel. Moreover, it was only possible to predict the failure point in the AA5352 aluminum alloy with CB2001 yield criterion. Although the experimental results are not yet available, the aluminum alloy presents lower mechanical strength and lower formability for monotonic loads, as shown in the strain-based FLC. Thus, the fact that the aluminum alloy presents necking while no localized strain is predicted for steel is expected an accurate prediction.||URI:||http://hdl.handle.net/10316/89500||Rights:||openAccess|
|Appears in Collections:||FCTUC Eng.Mecânica - Teses de Mestrado|
Show full item record
checked on Jul 9, 2020
checked on Jul 9, 2020
This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License