Search Results

Predicting AHSS cracking during crash events and forming processes is an enabling technology for AHSS application. Several fracture criteria including MatFEM and Modified Mohr-Coulomb Criterion were developed recently. However, none of them are designed to cover more fracture modes such as bending fracture and tearing fracture with initial damage. A mixed-mode fracture criterion (MMFC) is proposed and developed to capture multiple fracture modes including in-plane shearing fracture, cross-thickness shearing fracture with bending effect and tearing fracture with initial damage. The associated calibration procedure for this criterion is developed. The criterion is implemented in a commercial FEA code and several lab validations are conducted. The results show its promising potential to predict AHSS cracking at large strain conditions.

A detailed investigation of the influence of anisotropic hardening models on drawbead restraining force is presented in this paper. The recently modified Yoshida model is adopted to characterize the anisotropic hardening behavior for steels. A two-dimensional drawbead model is used and the restraining forces corresponding to several different bead penetrations are obtained and compared against experimental results. The comparison of the predicted results for the Modified Yoshida Model with isotropic hardening models indicates that the anisotropic hardening gives lower drawbead restraining forces in general. The impact of hardening models on springback is also presented, and it's demonstrated that the springback amount predicted by the modified Yoshida model is much closer to the experimental data than that predicted by conventional isotropic hardening model.

In automotive body manufacturing, there are two processes are often applied, Nominal Build and Functional Build. The Nominal Build process requires all individual stamping components meet their nominal dimensions with specified tolerances. While, the Functional Build process emphasizes more on the tolerances of the entire assembly as opposed to those of the individual stamped parts. The common goal of both processes is to build the body assemblies that meet the specified tolerances. Although there is strict tolerance specified for individual stamping parts the finished stampings frequently are released to assembly process with certain levels of dimensioning deviations, or they are within the specified tolerances but require heavy clamping during assembly. It is of high interest to predict the dimensional deviations in the stamping sub-assembly or body-in-white assembly process.

Springback is a major concern in stamping of advanced high strength steels (AHSS). The existing computer simulation technology has difficulty predicting this phenomenon accurately even though it is well developed for formability simulations. Great efforts made in recent years to improve springback predictions have achieved noticeable progress in the computational capability and accuracy. In this work, springback simulation studies are conducted using FEA software LS-DYNA®. Various parametric sensitivity studies are carried out and key variables affecting the springback prediction accuracy are identified. Recently developed simulation technologies in LS-DYNA® are implemented including dynamic effect minimization, smooth tool contact and newly developed nonlinear isotropic/kinematic hardening material models. Case studies on lab-scale and full-scale industrial parts are provided and the predicted springback results are compared to the experimental data.

Springback compensation studies on a few selected auto panels from the hot selling Chrysler 300C are presented with details. LS-DYNA® is used to predict the springback behavior and to perform the iterative compensation optimization. Details of simulation parameters using LS-DYNA® to improve the prediction accuracy are discussed. An iterative compensation algorithm is also discussed with details. Four compensation examples with simulation predictions and actual panel measurement results are included to demonstrate the effectiveness of LS-DYNA® predictions. An aluminum hood inner and a high strength steel roof bow are compensated, constructed and machined based on simulation predictions. The measurements on actual tryout panels are then compared with simulation predictions and good correlations were achieved. Iterative compensation studies are also done on the aluminum hood inner and the aluminum deck lid inner to demonstrate the effectiveness of LS-DYNA® compensation algorithm.

A new strain-based forming limit criterion is proposed to assess the localized necking failure for sheet metal forming simulations when deformation paths deviate significantly from linearity. Different from the traditional strain-based Forming Limit Diagrams (FLD) in terms of major and minor strains, the new FLD is constructed based on effective strains and material flow direction at the end of forming. This new criterion combines the advantages of stress-based FLD for its path-independence and the traditional linear strain path FLD for its easy interpretation. The proposed FLD is validated through both theoretical prediction with Marciniak-Kuczynski (M-K) model and available experimental data in literature, and its relationship with stress-based FLDs is discussed.

Sheet metal forming processes change the material properties due to work hardening (or softening) in the thickness direction as well as throughout the entire part. At the same time, uneven thickness distribution, mostly thinning, occurs as the result of forming. This is true for all commonly used sheet metal forming processes including stamping (deep drawing), tube hydroforming, sheet hydroforming and super plastic forming. The effects from forming can sometimes strongly influence the structural performance. Though the CAE analysts have been trying to consider forming effect in their models for performance simulations, there was no easy way to do it consistently and reliably. Some analysts have been trying to modify the initial gage or yield strength to compensate for the property change due to forming. Replace the model with the formed panel is not feasible due to the mesh density difference.