Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
PAPER INFO A B S T R A C T
Paper history: In most of sheet forming processes, production of the final parts with minimum thickness variation and
Received 17 November 2015
Received in revised form 05 January 2016
low required force is important. In this research, minimization of the sheet thinning and forming force
Accepted 26 January 2016 in the hydraulic deep drawing process was studied. Firstly, the process was simulated using the finite
element method (FEM) and the simulation model was verified compared to experimental results. Then
the sheet thinning ratio and punch force were modeled as objective functions using the response
Keywords: surface methodology (RSM). In this model, process parameters including punch nose radius, die
Thinning entrance radius and maximum fluid pressure were the input variables. Required experiments for the
Optimization RSM were designed using the central composite design (CCD) method and performed by FEM.
Finite Element Finally, optimum point of the parameters was obtained by multi-objective optimization of the objective
Response Surface Methodology functions using the desirability function method based on response surface model and then evaluated.
Hydraulic Deep Drawing
In addition, optimum ranges of the parameters were determined using overlying contour plots. Results
showed that the response surface models had good adequacy. According to this model, increasing of
the punch nose radius and die entrance radius lead to decreasing of thinning ratio and increasing the
maximum punch force. Also the maximum punch force increases by increasing the maximum fluid
pressure. Optimization results represent reduction of the thinning ratio almost 10% compared with
conventional results.
doi: 10.5829/idosi.ije.2016.29.02b.16
Please cite this article as: V. Alimirzaloo and V. Modanloo, Minimization of the Sheet Thinning in Hydraulic Deep Drawing Process Using
Response Surface Methodology and Finite Element Method, International Journal of Engineering (IJE), TRANSACTIONS B: Applications Vol.
29, No. 2, (February 2016) 264-273
265 V. Alimirzaloo and V. Modanloo / TRANSACTIONS B: Applications Vol. 29, No. 2, (February 2016) 264-273
responses, respectively, the coefficients of β are as TABLE 1. Input variable parameters with their levels
follows: Level
Parameter Designation
( ) (3) Minimum Maximum
Punch nose radius (mm) A 4 8
The Minitab software was used to analyze the data. Die entrance radius (mm) B 3 7
Each of the variables considered in two levels of Maximum fluid pressure
minimum and maximum as input parameters that are C 28 36
(MPa)
shown in Table 1.
where; t0 is the initial thickness of the blank and tf is the 4. MULTI-OBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION
final thickness of the cup.
4. 1. Desirability Function The purpose of
(8) optimization is to find one or several acceptable
Thinning ratio was obtained 55% for the copper sheet solutions to the critical values of one or more of the
that this amount will be used in the optimization of objective functions. Optimization methods are important
thinning ratio. It was also observed that the minimum in practice, especially in engineering design,
thickness of cup occurs in the corner radius of the punch experimental test and trading decisions [14]. When a
that is shown in Figure 4. problem involves more than one objective function,
finding process of the optimal response is called multi-
objective optimization. Desirability function is one of
TABLE 3. Experiments design using CCD with outputs the multi-objective optimization methods that is used in
Run Thinning Maximum punch this study. To optimize by using desirability function,
A B C firstly the individual desirability degree for each
no. ratio (%) force (kN)
1 6 5 32 20.4 225.5
response should be calculated. If the aim is to minimize
a response, the individual desirability is calculated using
2 6 5 32 20.4 225.5 Equation (9). Also, Equation (10) is used for
3 4 3 28 90.0 100.9 maximizing the response.
4 6 5 32 20.4 225.5
( )
5 8 3 36 21.6 242.3 { [( )
] (9)
6 6 5 25.27 21.6 207.2
7 6 1.63 32 90.0 131.1
8 4 3 36 90.0 155.2
( )
[ ] (10)
9 6 5 32 20.4 225.5 ( )
10 9.36 5 32 18.4 220.3 {
11 8 7 28 17.2 233.2 In Equations (9) and (10), di is the individual
12 2.63 5 32 90.0 96.3 desirability degree, yi represents the predicted value, Ti
is the target value, Ui denotes the maximum acceptable
13 6 5 32 20.4 225.5
value, Li is the minimum acceptable value and ri
14 6 5 32 20.4 225.5 represents the weight of desirability function for the ith
15 4 7 28 20.8 239.8 response. In this research, both response thinning ratio
16 6 5 38.72 20.4 249.7
and maximum punch force should be minimum,
therefore Equation (9) is used.
17 8 7 36 18.0 261.4 After calculating the individual desirability degree for
18 6 8.36 32 18.8 248.0 each function, in order to use them to combine all the
19 4 7 36 20.8 272.3
answers and finding overall proper conditions, the
composite desirability is obtained using Equation (11)
20 8 3 28 24.0 190.8 in which D is the composite desirability degree, wi
represents the importance of ith response and W is the
overall weight.
(∏( )) (11)
Since the ultimate goal of this research is to achieve the
less thinning ratio meanwhile decreasing maximum
forming force, the importance for both objective
function is considered one. Likewise the desirability
function weight for each response is considered one.
This is the default weight and is called linear
desirability function [15]. Figure 5 shows the
desirability function (minimizing case) with a weight of
one.
Figure 4. Minimum thickness in final part 4. 2. Overlying Contour Plots In the optimization
process, in addition to the optimal point, the appropriate
V. Alimirzaloo and V. Modanloo / TRANSACTIONS B: Applications Vol. 29, No. 2, (February 2016) 264-273 268
range for the parameters is also important. To find the TABLE 4. ANOVA table for thinning ratio
optimum range of the parameters, contour plots method Source Degree of Sum of Mean F P
is used. In this way, by using the contour plots for all freedom squares square
functions and putting them together, the desired values Regression 9 15391.4 1710.15 79.47 0.000
of input variables for optimal range of objective Linear 3 10277.8 3425.94 159.20 0.000
functions is determined. A 1 4996.3 4996.3 232.17 0.000
B 1 5280.5 5280.5 245.38 0.000
C 1 1.00 1.00 0.04 0.837
5. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Square 3 3063.9 1021.31 47.46 0.000
5. 1. Modeling of the Thinning Ratio Response A×A 1 1594.5 1594.5 74.10 0.000
Function Normal probability plot for the thinning B×B 1 1616.0 1616.0 75.10 0.000
ratio is shown in Figure 6. Distribution points around C×C 1 21.4 21.4 1.00 0.342
the diagonal line represents that the distribution of data Interaction 3 2049.6 683.20 31.75 0.000
is normal. This model also indicates a good quality of A×B 1 2048.0 2048.0 95.17 0.000
the model. By using RSM, final model for thinning ratio
A×C 1 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.905
according to the input parameters punch nose radius
B×C 1 1.30 1.30 0.06 0.812
(A), die entrance radius (B) and maximum fluid
pressure (C) will be expressed as Equation (12): Residual
10 215.2 21.52
error
Thinning ratio = – 60.3197 A – 61.9054 B + 4.71079 Total 19 15606.6 1710.15
C + 2.62968 A2 + 2.64736 B2 – 0.0762034 C2 + 4 (12)
A×B – 0.025 A×C + 0.05 B×C
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) has been used in order Figure 7 shows response surface of thinning ratio
to examine the effect of the parameters in the fitted according to the punch nose radius and die entrance
regression model. The results of ANOVA for thinning radius. In Figure 8 response surface of thinning ratio
ratio is presented in Table 4. The P values less than according to the punch nose radius and maximum fluid
0.05, indicates that the desired parameters are effective. pressure is shown. Also Figure 9 shows the response
It was observed that the terms linear, square and surface of thinning ratio according to the die entrance
interaction are effective in the regression model. radius and maximum fluid pressure.
The goodness of the response surface model (R2) According to Figures 7 to 9, it is clear that with
can be determined as follow: increasing punch nose radius, thinning ratio is reduced.
∑( ) Simultaneously by moving down the punch and
(13)
∑( ) applying the fluid pressure onto the bottom surface of
where yi is the objective function value from the model, the sheet, the bending radius of the sheet will increase
by increasing the punch nose radius. As a result, the
is the real value and y is the average value. This value
thickness reduction at this zone is low. In the other
for thinning ratio was obtained as 98.62% that is
words, by reduction of the tension in the sheet due
desirable.
increasing the bending and unbending in the corner
radius of the punch, the thinning in this area will be
reduced.
maximum punch force indicated that the maximum 6. Gorji, A., Alavi-Hashemi, H., Bakhshi-Jooybari, M., Nourouzi,
S. and Hosseinipour, S.J., "Investigation of hydrodynamic deep
punch force increases by increasing all of the three input
drawing for conical–cylindrical cups", The International
variables. The results of the modeling showed that the Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 56,
response surface model investigates the effect of the No. 9-12, (2011), 915-927.
input parameters on the response functions with a 7. Salahshoor, M., Gorji, A. and Bakhshi-Jooybari, M., "The study
proper precision. The optimization results using the of forming concave-bottom cylindrical parts in hydroforming
desirability function showed that thinning ratio reduced process", The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 79, No. 5-8, (2015), 1139-
almost 10% compared to normal mode. Finally, optimal 1151.
range of the input parameters were determined by 8. Azodi, H., Naeini, H.M., Parsa, M. and Liaghat, G., "Analysis of
putting together the contour plots for the desired amount rupture instability in the hydromechanical deep drawing of
of response functions using optimal point. cylindrical cups", The International Journal of Advanced
Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 39, No. 7-8, (2008), 734-743.
9. Lin, J., Zhao, S., Zhang, Z. and Wang, Z., "Deep drawing using
a novel hydromechanical tooling", International Journal of
Machine Tools and Manufacture, Vol. 49, No. 1, (2009), 73-
7. REFERENCES 80.
10. Myers, W.R. and Montgomery, D.C., "Response surface
1. Merklein, M. and Rösel, S., "Characterization of a methodology", Encycl Biopharm Stat, Vol. 1, (2003), 858-869.
magnetorheological fluid with respect to its suitability for 11. Alimirzaloo, V., Sadeghi, M. and Biglari, F., "Optimization of
hydroforming", International Journal of Material Forming, the forging of aerofoil blade using the finite element method and
Vol. 3, No. 1, (2010), 283-286. fuzzy-pareto based genetic algorithm", Journal of mechanical
2. Koc, M., "Hydroforming for advanced manufacturing, Elsevier, science and technology, Vol. 26, No. 6, (2012), 1801-1810.
(2008). 12. Modanloo, V., Gorji, A. and Bakhshi-Jooybari, M.,
3. Zhang, S., Wang, Z., Xu, Y., Wang, Z. and Zhou, L., "Recent "Experimental and numerical investigation of the forming of
developments in sheet hydroforming technology", Journal of copper sheet using fluid pressure", in development of civil,
Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 151, No. 1, (2004), architecture, electricity and mechanical engineering, Gorgan,
237-241. Iran., (2014).
4. Salahshoor, M., Gorji, A. and Bakhshi-Jooybari, M., 13. Aue-U-Lan, Y., Ngaile, G. and Altan, T., "Optimizing tube
"Investigation of the effects of pressure path and tool parameters hydroforming using process simulation and experimental
in hydrodynamic deep drawing", International Journal of verification", Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
Engineering-Transactions A: Basics, Vol. 27, No. 7, (2014), Vol. 146, No. 1, (2004), 137-143.
1155-1166. 14. Deb, K., "Multi-objective optimization using evolutionary
5. Pourboghrat, F., Venkatesan, S. and Carsley, J.E., "Ldr and algorithms, John Wiley & Sons, Vol. 16, (2001).340- 352
hydroforming limit for deep drawing of aa5754 aluminum 15. Candioti, L.V., De Zan, M.M., Camara, M.S. and Goicoechea,
sheet", Journal of Manufacturing Processes, Vol. 15, No. 4, H.C., "Experimental design and multiple response optimization.
(2013), 600-615. Using the desirability function in analytical methods
development", Talanta, Vol. 124, (2014), 123-138.
273 V. Alimirzaloo and V. Modanloo / TRANSACTIONS B: Applications Vol. 29, No. 2, (February 2016) 264-273
Paper history:
Received 17 November 2015 در بیشتر فرآیندهای شکلدهی ورقی ،تولید قطعات نهایی با کمترین تغییر ضخامت و نیروی مورد نیاز کم ضروری می-
Received in revised form 05 January 2016
Accepted 26 January 2016 باشد .در این تحقیق ،کمینهسازی نازک شدگی ورق و نیروی الزم در فرآیند کشش عمیق هیدرولیکی مورد مطالعه قرار
گرفته است .در ابتدا فرآیند با روش اجزای محدود تحلیل شده و با مقایسه نتایج شبیهسازی با نتایج تجربی ،صحت شبیه-
Keywords: سازی تایید شده است .سپس با روش رویه پاسخ ،نسبت نازکشدگی ورق و نیروی سنبه به عنوان توابع پاسخ مدلسازی
Thinning
Optimization شده اند .در این مدل ،پارامترهای فرآیند شامل شعاع گوشه سنبه ،شعاع گوشه ماتریس و فشار بیشینه سیال متغیرهای
Finite Element
Response Surface Methodology ورودی هستند .بدین منظور با روش طرح ترکیب مرکزی ،آزمایشهای الزم طراحی و با روش اجزای محدود تحلیل شده-
Hydraulic Deep Drawing
اند .در پایان با انجام بهینه سازی چند هدفه با استفاده از روش تابع مطلوبیت بر اساس مدل رویه پاسخ ،نقطه بهینه پارامترها
بدست آمده و سپس مورد ارزیابی قرار گرفته است .همچنین محدوده بهینه پارامترها نیز با استفاده از روش روی هم قرار
دادن نمودارهای کانتوری تعیین شده است .نتایج نشان میدهد که رویههای پاسخ از کفایت خوبی برخوردار میباشند .طبق
این مدل افزایش شعاع گوشه سنبه و شعاع گوشه ماتریس باعث کاهش نسبت نازکشدگی و افزایش بیشینه نیروی سنبه
میشود .همچنین افزایش فشار بیشینه سیال ،باعث افزایش بیشینه نیروی سنبه میشود .نتایج بهینهسازی بیانگر کاهش
نسبت نازکشدگی به میزان %01نسبت به حالت معمولی میباشد.
doi: 10.5829/idosi.ije.2016.29.02b.16