Wear 268 (2010) 241248

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Wear
j our nal homepage: www. el sevi er . com/ l ocat e/ wear
Analysis of the tribological behaviour of polymer composite tool materials for
sheet metal forming
J.H.C. de Souza

, M. Liewald
Institute for Metal Forming Technology (IFU), Universitt Stuttgart, 70174 Stuttgart, Germany
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 27 February 2008
Received in revised form 28 July 2009
Accepted 29 July 2009
Available online 5 August 2009
Keywords:
Polymer composites
Sheet metal forming
Rapid tooling
Friction
Wear
a b s t r a c t
Todays automotive industry shifts its focus on customised production, facing an increasing demand for
mediumand small batch production, where cost-effective manufacturability of sheet metal forming dies
comes into the foreground. Filled polymers offer possibilities to full such requirements in the ambit
of prototype tools manufacturing or in small batch production of sheet metal components. This paper
presents investigations dealing with tribological and tool design aspects of using polymeric materials
for sheet metal forming purposes. Friction and wear behaviour of two polymer composites on sheet
metal counterface materials have been investigated. A new testing method for wear evaluation of poly-
meric materials for sheet metal forming using a Strip Drawing Test facility is presented and discussed.
A method to predict lifetime of polymeric stamping dies using the linear weardistance relation W
l/s
measured with the new testing method is also proposed. Signicant improvements in friction and wear
performance of polymer composites have been observed using sheet materials with structured surfaces.
A theoretical model for abrasive friction and wear of polymer composites on sheet metal counterface
material pairs has been developed, based on the results obtained by measurement of friction and wear.
2009 Published by Elsevier B.V.
1. Introduction
The manufacture of sheet metal forming dies conventionally is
carriedout utilisingmaterials likesteel or cast ironduetotheir good
wear resistance and formstability. The application of other kinds of
materials such as low melting point alloys or polymer composites
for sheet metal forming dies often is linked with the production
of prototype parts or small batch production. Die materials used
in former times for the production of sheet metal prototypes were
Cerrotru (BiSn alloy) and Zamak (Zn, Al, Mg and Cu alloy), both in
the 1930s. Polymeric materials were introduced in the prototype
production about 1950 initially with epoxy resins [1]. The epoxy
matrix was often lled with steel powder or sand to increase wear
resistance and mechanical properties. The use of polyurethane for
such purposes started in the 1970s. Various types and amounts
of ller compositions are used to improve mechanical and tri-
bological properties. The best polymeric materials commercially
available nowadays consist of three or four component ller sys-
tems, aimingat improvedwear resistance, mechanical strengthand
self-lubrication properties. An example of the evolution of poly-
mers for sheet metal forming dies can be seen in Fig. 1.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +49 179 9151465; fax: +49 6858 3839.
E-mail address: joao.desouza@ifu.uni-stuttgart.de (J.H.C. de Souza).
Youngs Modulus is used as a benchmark property due to its
direct inuence on tool stiffness and parts dimensional accuracy.
The curve shows that the continuous improvement of mechanical
properties of polymeric materials extends possibilities of its use
in sheet metal forming, as occurs in other technologic branches as
well. If in the beginning the use was restricted to very few sheet
parts, nowadays it is possible to carry out small batch produc-
tions using soft sheet materials and prototype parts using high
strength sheet materials [2,57]. This evolution, followed by vari-
ous advantages of the application of polymeric materials in sheet
metal forming leads to a new production technology, which will
play an increasing role in the production of sheet metal parts in the
next years.
Furthermore, the automotive industry increasingly shifts its
focus on customised production [3]. Especially in case of luxury
vehicles a high demand for medium and small batch produc-
tion become obvious, the cost-effective manufacturability of sheet
metal forming dies linkedwithextreme lowinvestment comes into
the foreground. Also demand on exibility, time- and cost-saving
alternatives in product development requires continuous develop-
ment of new technologies for making sheet metal parts [4]. Today,
lled polymers offer possibilities to full such requirements. How-
ever, compared to conventional die materials like steel or cast iron,
uncertainties still exist withregardtochoice of polymeric materials
for sheet metal forming.
0043-1648/$ see front matter 2009 Published by Elsevier B.V.
doi:10.1016/j.wear.2009.07.017
242 J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald / Wear 268 (2010) 241248
Fig. 1. Evolution of polymers used in sheet forming.
This paper presents investigations dealing with tribological and
tool design aspects of the use of polymeric materials in sheet metal
forming.
2. Friction and wear characterisation
The surface interactions between sheet and die surfaces play an
important role in sheet forming processes. The high ratio of surface
to volume present in sheet metal materials justies the analysis of
tribologic phenomena as a major inuence factor to be considered
in die design or process optimisation. The tribological behaviour of
polymeric die materials exposed to sheet metal forming conditions
presents some peculiarities when compared to steel. One advan-
tage of the use of polymers when compared to steel dies is its low
interfacial adhesionenergy, whichleads to lowfrictioncoefcients.
However, polymers dohavelower Hertziancontact pressures, lead-
ing toviscoelastic andsometimes plastic deformations whichoccur
at relatively lowloads, causing a strong loaddependency of the fric-
tioncoefcient [8,9]. Twomainprocesses impact wear of polymers:
cohesive wear (mainly abrasion) and interfacial wear (especially
adhesion) [10,11]. Theproportions of adhesionandabrasionintotal
wear are strongly inuencedby the roughness of the metal contact-
ing surface [12,13]. In lled polymers for sheet metal forming dies,
mainly abrasion processes cause friction and wear.
The Bending-Under-Tension (BUT) test traditionally is used for
investigations of friction and wear between sheet metal and die
material under conditions existing in stamping processes [1416].
Practical and theoretical investigations on estimating friction and
wear of polymers for sheet metal forming using the BUT test have
been well documented [7,1720]. In the BUT test a strip of sheet
metal is bent around a specimen made of the die material to be
tested (Fig. 2(a)).
Using a coil and an automatic feeder, it is possible to conduct
wear investigations by measuring the variations on the specimens
dimensions after a certain number of cycles. Load sensors allow
the calculation of the total friction force. Such proposed system is
Fig. 3. Scheme of the Strip Drawing Test at the IFU-Stuttgart.
Table 1
Sheet material properties used for tribological tests.
Sheet material DX56D+ZF TRIP700 DC04
Tensile strength [MPa] 310 750 315
Yield strength [MPa] 204 450 210
Ultimate strain [%] 43 28 40
suitable for comparison of different die materials behaviour under
same test conditions. A drawback of the BUT test is the effect of
the strip edges in the pulling direction, which amplify the wear on
the specimen thus distorting the results [21]. Furthermore, due to
the test apparatus design, it is not possible to carry out friction or
wear investigations using different specic values of surface con-
tact pressure since the contact load is not constantly distributed
along specimen radius. Since both friction and wear of polymers
depend upon load [22], this limits the application of the BUT test
in broader investigations of the tribological phenomena in sheet
metal forming.
While in the BUT test the contact pressure remains as not
adjustable, the Strip Drawing Test allows the variation of normal
loads over the specimen [23,24,14]. In this test a plane specimen
of the tool material is pressed against a strip of sheet, which is
drawn simultaneously (Fig. 2(b)). The drawing force and the nor-
mal load are measured as well as the friction coefcient according
to Coulombs law calculated along the entire drawn path. The tri-
bological behaviour of polymeric materials for sheet metal forming
purposes was investigated at IFU-Stuttgart using the Strip Drawing
Test device, and a new test procedure for wear investigations on
polymeric materials developed.
Fig. 2. (a) Bending-Under-Tension (BUT) test. (b) Strip Drawing Test. F
bh
blank holder force, F
d
draw force, FN normal force.
J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald / Wear 268 (2010) 241248 243
Fig. 4. Microscopical photographs of the sheet surfaces showing different topologies (IFU-Stuttgart).
Table 2
Polymers investigated with Strip Drawing Test.
Polymeric material PUR1 PUR2
Base material Polyurethane Polyurethane
Filler type Al hydroxide
amongst others
Al powder amongst
others
Density [g/cm
3
] 1.90 1.76
Compressive strength [MPa] 110 100
Youngs modulus [MPa] 13,000 7800
Hardness [Shore D] 95 90
2.1. Setup of Strip Drawing Test
Fig. 3 schematically shows the Strip Drawing Test device at IFU-
Stuttgart.
Three sheet materials and two polymers were investigated in
this paper. Table 1 lists the mechanical properties of tested sheet
materials DX56+ZF (denomination 1.0322) according to DIN EN
10327 - 2004, TRIP700 (denomination HC400T) according to DIN
EN 10338 - 2007 and DC04 (denomination 1.0338) according to
DIN EN 10139 - 1997.
The sheet strips exhibit respectively a stochastic galvannealed
surface, an EBT (Electro Beam Texture)ed surface and a stochastic
mill nished surface, as shown in Fig. 4.
Table 2 reveals a choice of properties of the investigated poly-
mer composites. Bothare commercially available andhighstrength
polymers used in rapid tooling and rapid prototyping in techniques
for sheet metal forming. The exact compositions of the polymers
today are not published, since they are regarded as corporate
secrets.
Test setup parameters are listed in detail in Table 3. Such
parameters have been chosen in reference to regular conditions
Table 3
Setup of the Strip Drawing Test.
Parameter Value
Drawing speed [mm/s] 100
Drawing stroke [mm] 400
Surface pressure [MPa] 5, 15, 35
Lubricant type M200
Lubricant amount [g/m
2
] 2
Strip rolling direction [

] 0
found in sheet metal stamping. The lubricant used is a mineral oil
without any additives (viscosity of approximately 210
4
m
2
/s,
200cSt). Practical values of surface pressure of the blank holder
range between 4 and 10MPa. Higher values of surface pressure can
be found alongside the draw radii during deep drawing process,
depending on the overall process loads.
2.2. Friction investigations
The results of surface pressure and friction force were plotted
in diagrams as shown in Figs. 57. The surface pressure was calcu-
latedusingthespecimencontact surfaceincontext withthenormal
force. The strips made of DX56+ZF and DC04 show a nonlinear
behaviour of the friction force (Figs. 5 and 7). The friction coef-
cient decreases signicantly with increasing surface pressure. The
reason for that might be found in the behaviour of the real con-
tact surface area A
w
, which increases nonlinearly with increasing
surface pressure P
N
, not up to the apparent contact area A
N
, but
to a certain highest value less than the apparent contact surface
area A
N
[25]. This effect is observed already at lowvalues of surface
pressure P
N
.
Sheet metal strips of TRIP700 present a fairly linear increase
of the friction force (Fig. 6). This can be explained by the struc-
tured surface of the TRIP700 sheet used. The annular cavities (see
Fig. 4(b)) capture lubricant, dispensing it steadily during the test. It
Fig. 5. Variation of the friction coefcient against surface pressure PN.
244 J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald / Wear 268 (2010) 241248
Fig. 6. Variation of the friction coefcient against surface pressure PN.
Fig. 7. Variation of the friction coefcient against surface pressure PN.
induces a plastic cushion effect between contacting surfaces which
reduces the nonlinear behaviour of the friction coefcient.
2.3. Wear investigations
In order to overcome the difculties inherent to the use of BUT
tests in wear investigations of polymer composites (see above), a
newtesting method based on a Strip Drawing Test has been devel-
oped. The test is based on the measurement of mass reduction W
m
of the specimen using a standard precision balance with 0.1mg
resolution, which allows the measurement of mass reduction W
m
of the polymer specimen after a certain number of strip draw tests
withsufcient accuracy. The mass reductionW
m
after just one Strip
Drawing Test is too small to be measured with satisfactory pre-
cision. Hence, the measurement was carried out after three Strip
Drawing Test runs. A new sheet strip was used for each new test.
Table 4 reveals results of wear measurement.
It can be seen in Table 4, that values for mass reduction W
m
obtained from 12 sheet strip test runs show a good repeatability.
Enhanced investigations using various types of sheets and poly-
meric specimens as well conrmed such repeatability. Afterwards
it was possible to reduce the number of strips needed down to six.
Major advantages of this test procedure are in particular:

Wear can be measured with much higher accuracy in compar-

ison to BUT test because it changes in only one direction (tool
specimen thickness).

Measurement of mass reduction under different conditions (slid-

ing speed, lubricant) and various amounts of surface pressure.

High repeatability of estimating mass reduction.

A drawback of this test procedure in fact is lack of taking into
consideration surface changes which occur during forming (e.g. by
bending the sheet over the die radius).
Table 4
Table of results after wear measurement.
Strip Sliding distance L [mm] Mass of
specimen m [g]
Mass reduction
Wm [mg]
0 46.1671 0
1 441.63
2 438.82
3 439.06 46.1657 1.4
4 438.82
5 438.82
6 438.70 46.1643 1.4
7 438.57
8 438.21
9 438.82 46.1629 1.4
10 438.57
11 439.18
12 438.82 46.1616 1.3
l 5268.02 5.5
Typical values of W
m
per drawn strip are between 0.7 and 20mg
per cycle, depending on the sheet roughness, surface topology,
amount of lubricant and surface pressure. Fig. 8 presents results of
wear measurements using the same sheet and polymer materials
(Tables 1 and 2) and same test parameters (Table 3).
The mass reduction per sliding length W
m/s
can be calculated by
dividing the mass reduction W
m
by the sliding length s, i.e.
W
m/s
=
W
m
s
(1)
However, since polymers do have different densities, only the
measurement of W
m
is not adequate to conduct comparative inves-
tigations of wear behaviour of different polymers. In order to allow
comparative investigations, the density of the polymers also must
be considered
W
V/s
=
W
V
s
=
W
m
s
(2)
Fig. 8. Results of the wear measurement of three different kinds of sheet metal and
two polymers.
J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald / Wear 268 (2010) 241248 245
Fig. 9. Evaluation of the wear on the die radius using the linear wear amount WL.
where W
V/s
indicates the volume reduction W
V
per sliding length
s. W
V/s
in this case stands for a material independent value, which
can be used as a comparative parameter. However, its application
for the evaluation of wear of local zones of sheet metal forming
dies does not seem to be easily practicable due to difculties in
nding an accurate technique for the measurement of volumetric
differences. A more useful parameter can be calculated as
W
L/s
=
W
V/s
/
s
=
W
L
s
(3)
where A
s
is the specimen nominal contact area and W
L/s
is nomi-
nated as the linear weardistance relation. W
L/s
can be more easily
measured in critical regions of the drawing die as the difference
between original die radius prole and the prole after wear, as
shown in Fig. 9.
The real value of W
L/s
, as the linear wear amount measured
on the die radius W
L/s,Die
, can be calculated by dividing the value of
W
L
measured on the die radius by the total wear distance, which
corresponds tothe part drawing depthZ
t
, multipliedbythe number
of strokes, H.
W
L/s,Die
=
W
L
Z
t
H
(4)
The results of wear measurements shown in Fig. 8 have been
represented in terms of linear wear amount W
L/s
using Eq. (3).
Figs. 10 and 11 show the results of the wear measurements using
PUR1 and PUR2. DC04 (mill nish surface) shows higher values
of W
L/s
, followed by DX56+ZF (galvannealed surface). Lower wear
values were obtained by using TRIP700 (EBT surface).
The polymer PUR1 shows higher wear values probably due to its
ller composition and its higher hardness, since abrasion processes
lead to more wear debris for harder polymers [26].
Fig. 10. Wear test results using specimens of PUR1 material.
Fig. 11. Wear test results using specimen of PUR2 material.
The lowest wear amount was found when using the TRIP700
sheet. This shows an important effect of the structured EBT surface
on the wear behaviour of polymers. The use of structured sheet
metal textures do reduce wear signicantly.
3. Theoretical analysis of the tribological behaviour
The tribological behaviour of polymers cannot be sufciently
described using the same models used, e.g. for metal/metal con-
tact couples. Models based on Archards theory fail in describing
polymer wear [17]. It justies the search effort for newapproaches
which consider the peculiarities of polymeric materials. Based on
theresults obtainedfromthetribological tests carriedout inSection
2, a newtheoretical model has been developed. The purpose of the
model is to describe and to quantify the tribological behaviour of
advanced polymers for sheet metal forming dies under conditions
similar to those encountered in the real process.
As a premise the new theoretical approach takes friction and
wear as consequence of shearing of the polymeric material caused
by the asperities present on the sheet metal counterface. The
sheared area A

corresponds to the total of lateral sheared areas of

all asperities of the weaker contact body, in this case the polymer
surface, as shown in Fig. 12.
For a surface containingnshearedasperities, A

canbe described
as
/
z
=
n

i=1
/
i
z
(5)
Furthermore, the real sheared area A

only corresponds to a
fraction of the nominal contact surface A
N
, i.e.
/
z
= /
N
(6)
Africtional shear stress T
R
, caused by interactions between both
surfaces during the relative movement, is dened as the friction
force F
R
divided by the nominal contact surface A
N
:
1
R
=
F
R
/
N
(7)
S
R
as the ratio betweenreal shearedarea A

andnominal contact
surfaceA
N
, whichequals therelationbetweenfrictional shear stress
T
R
and the maximal shear strength of the soft material z
P
, i.e.
/
z
/
N
=
1
R
z
P
= S
R
(8)
The relation S
R
between real sheared area A

and nominal con-

tact surface A
N
does not increase constantly when surface pressure
P
N
increases, but moves asymptotically to a maximal value S
R,Max
as shown in Fig. 13.
246 J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald / Wear 268 (2010) 241248
Fig. 12. Scheme of two contact surfaces in relative movement showing the sheared areas of the asperities.
Fig. 13. Behaviour of SR with increasing surface pressure PN.
This behaviour has been investigated experimentally by
Bartenev and Lavrentev [25]. The curve can be described using the
term:
S
R
= S
R,Max
(1 e
P
N
) (9)
Which corresponds to a nonlinear relation between P
N
and S
R
as shown in Fig. 13. Fig. 14 shows the comparison between exper-
imental and theoretical values obtained from Eq. (9).
The values of S
R,Max
andwere encounteredbytting the values
obtained from the experiments into Eq. (9). The parameter S
R,Max
value (see Fig. 13) can also be understood as the maximal frac-
tion of the nominal surface contact involved in the friction process.
Substituting Eq. (6) in Eq. (8) it follows that
S
R,Max
= (10)
Fig. 15. Effect of increasing from 0 to 1.
The parameter is related to the contact area stiffness
behaviour. Higher values of parameters result into a more rapid
convergence of S
R
as to the value S
R,Max
, while lower values retard
it as shown in Fig. 15.
This effect of in the contact might include following process
conditions:

Youngs modulus of the polymeric matrix;

lubricant;

topology of the contact surfaces;

characteristics of the polymeric ller and how it interacts with

the polymer matrix.
Fig. 14. Fitting of the curve from Eq. (9) on experimental data.
J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald / Wear 268 (2010) 241248 247
3.1. Friction model
Using the approachpresentedabove it is possible todescribe the
friction coefcient as a function of S
R,Max
, and P
N
. Substituting
Eq. (7) in the classical denition of friction coefcient,
=
F
R
F
N
=
1
R
P
N
(11)
Now substituting the shear stress T
R
from Eq. (8) in Eq. (11) the
friction coefcient can be described as
=
S
R,Max
z
P
(1 e
P
N
)
P
N
(12)
Eq. (12) enables the description of the development of the fric-
tion coefcient dependent on S
R,Max
, and P
N
.
3.2. Wear model
In the theoretical modelling of wear behaviour, the volumet-
ric wear quantity W
V
is rstly dened as the real sheared area A

multiplied by a parameter , which represents the wear depth, i.e.

W
V
= /
z
(13)
The real sheared area A

is given by Eq. (8), leading to

W
V
= /
N
S
R
(14)
Nowusing Eq. (9) instead of relationS
R
, the volumetric wear can
be written as
W
V
= /
N
S
R,Max
(1 e
P
N
) (15)
Aiming to allow a better practical applicability, the volumet-
ric wear quantity W
V
can be rewritten as a linear wear quantity
per sliding length W
L/s
. Using nominal contact surface A
N
and the
sliding length s the linear wear quantity W
L/s
is
W
L/s
=
W
V
/
N
s
(16)
So, wear can be described using , S
R,Max
, with the equation
W
L/s
=
S
R,Max
(1 e
P
N
)
s
(17)
3.3. Validation of the theoretical model
Figs. 1618 showthe comparison between experimental results
of wear measurement carriedout inSection2 andvalues calculated
using Eq. (17).
The theoretical curves were tted on the experimental results
using the parameter . Parameters S
R,Max
und previously were
obtained from Eq. (9) as shown in Fig. 14. This procedure shows
Fig. 16. Comparison of experimental and theoretical wear values for the sheet
DX56D.
Fig. 17. Comparisonof experimental andtheoretical wear values for the sheet DC04.
Fig. 18. Comparison of experimental and theoretical wear values for the sheet
TRIP700.
a strong relationship between friction and wear in the theoretical
model. Friction and wear, as shown in Eqs. (7) and (12), do have a
factor j in common:
j = S
R,Max
(1 e
P
N
) (18)
Isolating j from Eq. (18) in the Eqs. (7) and (12) it follows
j =
W
L/s
s

=
P
N
z
P
(19)
In this theoretical model, friction and wear are related to each
other by the parameter j, which carries ultimately information
about the contact stiffness and its behaviour as a function of the
surface pressure.
4. Conclusions
A new testing method conceived for the evaluation of wear on
polymers for sheet metal forming dies using the Strip Drawing Test
facility has been presented and evaluated. The method allows a
rapid and robust evaluation of wear and friction characteristics of
polymer composites onsheet metal counterfaces, being suitable for
comparative investigations between different kinds of polymers or
for investigations onthe effect of sheet surface onfrictionandwear.
Furthermore, a method to predict lifetime of polymeric stamping
dies using the linear weardistance relation W
l/s
measured from
the new testing method was proposed.
A new theoretical model for abrasive friction and wear of poly-
mer/metal pairs has been developed, based on the results obtained
in the measurement of friction and wear. The empirical model
allows the description of tribological behaviour using the param-
eters , S
R
and . The equation proposed describes the nonlinear
behaviour of polymer friction. Values obtained with the theoreti-
cal model have shown good congruence with measurements. The
248 J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald / Wear 268 (2010) 241248
theoretical model allows the implementation of friction and wear
prediction in nite element simulation analysis codes.
References
[1] B. Haller, Optimierung von Prozessketten fr die Herstellung von Prototyp-
Blechumformwerkzeugen, PhDThesis, Institut fr Umformtechnik, Universitt
Stuttgart, ISBN 3-88355-312-3, 2002.
[2] J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald, Applicability of polymeric materials for rapid tool-
ing in sheet metal forming, in: IDDRG International Conference, 2007, pp.
445452.
[3] D. Hortig, Vom Design zum Blechbauteil Prototypteile fr Fahrzeugkar-
rosserie, In 8, Umformtechnisches Kolloquium Darmstadt, 195201, 2003.
[4] J.H.C. de Souza, M. Liewald, New design concept for deep drawing prototype
tools, in: Euro-uRapid 2006, Frankfurt, 2006.
[5] J. Mller, H. Sladojevic, Rapid tooling approaches for small lot production of
sheet-metal parts, Journal of Materials Processing and Technology 115 (2001)
97103.
[6] J.S. Colton, Y. Park, Sheet metal forming using polymer composite rapid pro-
totype tooling, Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology 125 (2003)
247255.
[7] G. Deiler, UntersuchungenzumEignungsprol polymerer Werkzeugwerkstoffe
fr das Tiefziehen von Feinblechen, PhD Thesis, Universitt Hannover, ISBN
3-936888-83-3, 2005.
[8] H. Czichos, et al., Advances in tribology: the materials point of view, Wear 190
(1995) 155161.
[9] A. Mimaroglu, H. Unal, T. Arda, Friction and wear performance of pure and glass
bre reinforced poly-ether-imide on polymer and steel counterface materials,
Wear 262 (2007) 14071413.
[10] E. Briscoe, Wear of polymers: anessay onfundamental aspects, Tribology Inter-
national (1981) 231243.
[11] B. Briscoe, S. Sinha, Wearmaterials, mechanism and practice, in: Tribology of
polymeric solids and their composites, John Willey & Sons, 2005, ISBN 978-0-
470-01628-2, Chapter 10.
[12] K.-H. Zum Gahr, Microstructure and Wear of Materials, Elsevier Science Pub-
lishers, Amsterdam, 1987, ISBN 0-444-42754-6.
[13] D.G. Bellow, S. Viswanath, Case studyan analysis of wear of polymers, Wear
162164 (1993) 10481053.
[14] N. Bay, Lubricant test methods for sheet metal forming, in: Proceedings
NORDTRIB2006 Conference, 2006, ISBN 87-90416-19-8.
[15] K.-P. Witthser, Untersuchung von Prfverfahren zur Beurteilung der Rei-
bungsverhltnisse beim Tiefziehen, PhD Thesis, Universitt Hannover, 1980.
[16] R. Woska, Einu ausgewhlter Oberchenschichten auf das Reib- und
Verschleiverhalten beim Tiefziehen, PhD Thesis, Technischen Hochschule
Darmstadt, 1982.
[17] B.-A. Behrens, F. Schfer, Verschleiberechnung bei Tiefziehwerkzeugen aus
Kunststoff, 10, Jubilums-WorkshopSimulationinder Umformtechnik, 2007.
[18] C. Frank, Kunststoff als Werkzeugwerkstoff fr das Tiefziehen von Feinblech,
PhD Thesis, Universitt Hannover, 1999.
[19] G. Grautoff, Tiefziehwerkzeuge aus Kunststoff fr Kleine und mittlere
Blechteilserienaus Aluminium, PhDThesis, Technisches Universitt Darmstadt,
ISBN 3-8265-8989-0, 2001.
[20] M.M. Alaoui, Tiefziehwerkzeuge aus Kunststoff: Standzeiterhhung durch
Beimengung von speziellen Mikro- und Nanofllstoffen, PhD Thesis, Technis-
che Universitt Clausthal, ISBN 3-925658-99-8, 2005.
[21] S. Schulte, S.H. Schulz-Marner, Verschleiprfstand fr die Blechumformung,
Bnder Bleche Rohre 9 (1997).
[22] G.M. Bartenev, V.V. Lavtrentev, Friction and Wear of Polymers, Elsevier, Ams-
terdam, 1981, ISBN 0-444-42000-2.
[23] S. Wagner, 3D-Beschreibung der OberchenstrukturenvonFeinblechen, PhD-
Thesis, Universitt Stuttgart, 1996.
[24] S. Wagner, Optimizing friction between die and sheet metal, in: Second Global
Symposium on Innovations in Materials Process & Manufacturing, TMS, New
Orleans, February 1215, 2001.
[25] G.M. Bartenev, et al., The actual contact area and friction properties of elas-
tomers under frictional contact with solid surfaces, Wear 18 (1970) 439447.
[26] S.K. Sinha, et al., Scratching of polymersmodelling abrasive wear, Wear 262
(2007) 10381047.