Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 6770

Design of a cruciform biaxial tensile specimen

for limit strain analysis by FEM
Yong Yu*, Min Wan, Xiang-Dong Wu, Xian-Bin Zhou
School of Mechanical Engineering and Automation, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics,
P.O. Box 703, 37 Xueyuan Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100083, PR China
Received 26 February 2001

Abstract

This paper is focused on a study of the sheet forming limit under complex strain loading paths. A cruciform biaxial tensile specimen with a
chamfer on the arms and the central region is optimized by FEM simulation in order to realize the complex loading and the limit-strain states
of sheet metals in the cruciform biaxial tensile test. An optimal shape of specimen is obtained under the following conditions: the stress
distribution in the central region is uniform and large deformation is obtained easily during the stretching of the specimen. Different strain
paths in the central region can be realized by adjusting the velocity boundary conditions. # 2002 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.

Keywords: Biaxial tensile specimen; Complex strain path; Finite elements; Optimal design

1. Introduction (ii) The control of the manner of biaxial tensile loading and
the plane-strain process to realize the complex loading.
The forming limit diagram (FLD) is an important criterion (iii) The determination of the stress and strain in the
which reects the deformation capability of a sheet. It plays central region.
an important role in the eld of sheet forming. The tradi-
The design of cruciform specimen is the main difculty
tional FLD is applied only to the judgement of the forming
that restricts application for the cruciform biaxial tensile
limit under linear loading paths. However, because of the
test. The common cruciform specimen cannot be used for
limit of the geometry boundary and the friction condition,
the restriction on geometry. Thus many kinds of specimen
the actual strain path during sheet part forming always
shapes have been designed such as narrow slots on arms,
deviates from the linear loading path. This is more pro-
slots in the central region, improvement at blending radii,
nounced in a complex forming process such as reversal
and their combinations [25].
deep-drawing and multi-step forming, etc. Thus the FLD
In order to study the forming limit, a cruciform biaxial
obtained from linear strain paths cannot predict accurately
tensile specimen with a chamfer on the arms and the central
the situation when rupture occurs. Therefore, a cruciform
region is designed. The cruciform biaxial tensile specimen is
biaxial tensile test, which can realize complex loading paths,
optimized by FEM simulation. This specimen can provide
should be researched. This paper is focused on nding how
the basis for the study on the sheet forming limit under
different strain paths affect the forming limits.
complex strain loading paths.
Realizing complex loading by use of a cruciform biaxial
tensile test was proposed in the 1960s, but there are still
some pivotal problems to be solved [1]:
2. The optimization of the cruciform specimen
(i) The design and preparation of the cruciform biaxial
tensile specimen to solve the problems of the non- 2.1. Design scheme
uniform stress distribution in the central region and
small deformation, etc. The stress state in the central region of the conventional
cruciform specimen is very complex. When a strip blank
*
Corresponding author. Fax: 86-10-82316100.
with a round corner transition and unequal width is under
E-mail addresses: yuyong59@sohu.com, yuyong59@hotmail.com, uniaxial tension, shearing stress occurs on the imaginary
yuyong59@china.com, yuyong59@263.net (Y. Yu). sides, which results in stress concentration. It is the same for

0924-0136/02/$ see front matter # 2002 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.

PII: S 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 0 6 2 - 6
68 Y. Yu et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 6770

the cruciform specimen under uniaxial tension. Shearing

stress and non-uniform stress exist in the central region of
the cruciform biaxial tensile specimen. The arms of the
specimen are under the uniaxial tension state and the central
region of specimen is under the biaxial tension state.
Because the deformation capacity of sheet under uniaxial
tension is far smaller than that under biaxial tension, rupture
always occurs on the arms of the specimen. Thus the purpose
of optimizing is to determine an appropriate specimen
shape, which can make rupture transfer to the central
region of the specimen, to realize different strain paths by Fig. 2. Finite element simulated model.
adjusting the velocity boundary conditions and to attain
large deformation.
The central region of the cruciform specimen has a small Table 1
The geometrical dimensions of the specimens (mm)
cruciform slot along the arms, the slot being symmetrical
over along the thickness. The load-bearing capacity in the Specimen L1 L2 L3 R0 R1 R2 R3
region of the small slot is far smaller than that in other
a 175 45 45 10 20 10 15
regions, so the deformation of the arms will transfer to this b 175 50 50 10 20 10 15
small slot, either partly or wholly. Thus the occurrence of the c 175 45 45 10 15 10 15
rupture in the central region of specimen can be realized. d 175 45 60 10 20 15 15
According to this idea, the design scheme shown in Fig. 1 is e 175 45 54 10 20 15 15
presented. The load-bearing capacity in the central region is
still very strong after simulation and optimization, i.e. there
are some difculties to ensure that capture occurs in the the small slot on the arms; and of 0.7 mm thickness in the
central region. Therefore the central region of the cruciform central region. The conventional FLD is attained by measur-
specimen is chamfered symmetrically over the thickness, in ing the deformation of the ellipses near to the aw but not
order that the limit deformation concentrates in the central including the region of necking. Thus, the more close are the
region of the specimen. strains of the elements lying in the central region, the more
According to the symmetry of the specimen, a quarter of uniform is the stress distribution in the central region. Then
the specimen is simulated here in consideration of simula- the controllable range of the strains in the central region is
tion efciency. The model of the specimen is created by larger and the forming limit attained by this method is closer
software IDEAS and the FEM calculation model shown in to the real forming limit of the material. Additionally, the
Fig. 2 is attained by GENERIS, which is the pre-generation experimental results should cover a large deformable range.
module of PAM-STAMP. A four nodes quadrangular ele- In order to obtain a optimal shape of the specimen, the
ment is adopted during the simulation. dimensions of the specimen are altered, ve elements near
the central region, shown in Fig. 3, being selected so as to be
2.2. Optimizing the specimen able to compare and analyze the deformation under the
uniaxial-tension and the equal biaxial-tension condition.
Some specimen which satisfy the basic requirement are
designed, and their parameters being shown in Table 1. 2.2.1. Equal biaxial tension
The parameters of the specimen are the following: low The variation of strains and their ratios with the central
carbon steel sheet of 3 mm thickness; of 1 mm thickness in element distributions are shown in Fig. 4 for equal biaxial
tension.
According to the previous analysis and comparison, speci-
men (d) is optimal whilst specimen (a) is secondary. The
strain states of all the elements and the strain path of element
1 are shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 1. Preliminary design of the specimen. Fig. 3. Numbers of center elements.

 Y. Yu et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 6770 69

Fig. 4. The variation of strains with the element distributions.

From Fig. 5, the ratios of the main strains remain invari-

able, the value being almost equal to 1. Thus this state is
assumed as the equal biaxial-tension state.

2.2.2. Uniaxial tension Fig. 6. The variation of strains with the element distributions.
The variation of strains and their ratios with the central
element distributions are shown in Fig. 6 for uniaxial ten-
sion, where the deformation value in the central region is
15.556 mm.
From Fig. 6, specimen (d) is optimal whilst specimen
(b) is secondary. The strain states of all the elements and
the strain path of element 1 are shown in Fig. 7. From this
gure, the ratios of the strains retain linearity, the value
being almost equal to 0.5, thus the uniaxial-tension state can
be realized.

Fig. 7. The strain states of all elements and the strain path of element 1.

Generally, no matter whether under the uniaxial-tension

condition or the equal biaxial-tension condition, specimen
(d) is the optimal shape.

3. Strain paths under the complex loading conditions

The strain paths of the central element shown in Fig. 8

Fig. 5. The strain states of all elements and the strain path of element 1. are obtained by changing the loading manners under the
70 Y. Yu et al. / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 123 (2002) 6770
Fig. 8. The strain paths of the center element: (a) uniaxial tensionbiaxial
tension; (b) biaxial tensionuniaxial tension; (c) uniaxial tensionplane
strainbiaxial tension.
following three loading conditions: (i) uniaxial tension
biaxial tension; (ii) biaxial tensionuniaxial tension;
(iii) uniaxial tensionplane strainbiaxial tension.
From Fig. 8, under three loading conditions, there is an
approximate correspondence between the strain paths of
the central element 1 and the velocity loading conditions.
The strain paths of the central element can be controlled
by adjusting the velocity loading ratios of the arms. Thus
complex strain paths can be realized by adjusting the
velocity loading conditions of the specimen arms.
4. Relationship between the strain ratio
and the velocity ratio
The stretching process is controlled by adjusting the
velocity loading conditions during the simulation. The
Fig. 9. Relationship between the strain ratio and the velocity ratio.
relationship between the strain ratio and the velocity ratio
is shown in Fig. 9. From this gure, there is an approximate
correspondence between the strain paths of the central
element and the velocity loading conditions, which can
guide the variation of the strain paths in the actual test.
5. Conclusions
1. An optimal cruciform biaxial tensile specimen with a
chamfer on the arms and the central region is obtained
by FEM simulation. The deformation of the central
region during stretching can reach limit states.
2. The strain ratios can be controlled by adjusting the
velocity loading ratios, enabling complex strain paths
to be realized, which provides the basis for further
research.
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (Item No. 59975006) and the National
Key Laboratory of Metal Forming Simulation and
Die Technology at Huazhong University of Science and
Technology (Item No. 99-2). The authors would like to take
this opportunity to express their appreciation.
References
[1] M. Wan, X.B. Zhou, Research progress on the yielding, hardening and
forming limit of sheet metals under complex loading paths, J.
Plasticity Eng. 7 (2) (2000) 3539 (in Chinese).
[2] S. Demmerle, J.P. Boehler, Optimal design of biaxial tensile cruciform
specimens, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 41 (1) (1993) 143181.
[3] W. Muller, K. Pohrandt, New experiment for determining yield loci of
sheet metal, J. Mater. Process. Tech. 60 (1996) 643648.
[4] W. Szczepinski, Experimental Methods in Mechanics of Solids,
Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1990.
[5] T. Kuwabara, I. Susuki, S. Ikeda, Identification of a yield locus of
aluminum alloy sheet A5182-O by biaxial tensile tests using cruciform
specimens, J. JSTP 39 (444) (1998) 5661.