07 Numisheet2008 Proceedings Chapter7

Chapter 7
Springback Simulation
Numisheet 2008 September 1 - 5, 2008 – Interlaken, Switzerland
FORMABILITY AND SPRINGBACK OF TWIP AUTOMOTIVE

SHEETS
Kanghwan Ahn1, Donghoon Yoo1, Kyung-Hwan Chung1, Min-Hong Seo2,

Sung-Ho Park2 and Kwansoo Chung1,*
1
Department of Materials Science and Engineering,
Intelligent Textile System Research Center, Seoul National University, Korea
2
POSCO Technical Research Laboratories, Korea
ABSTRACT: As a way to resolve the recent environmental and high energy cost issues, automotive
companies are exerting major efforts to reduce the weight of vehicles by replacing conventional steel parts
with light weight alloys and/or with advanced high strength steels (AHSS) such as dual-phase (DP),
twinning induced plasticity (TWIP) and transformation induced plasticity (TRIP) steels. The main objective
of this work is to experimentally and numerically evaluate the macro-performance of the automotive TWIP
sheet in conjunction with formability and spring-back. In order to characterize the mechanical properties, the
simple tension and tension-compression tests were performed for anisotropic properties as well as the
Bauschinger, transient and permanent softening behaviors during reverse loading. Formability verification
was performed for the simple tension and hemispherical dome stretching tests, while the 2D draw bending
test was carried out for springback verification. For numerical simulations, the anisotropic yield function
Yld2000-2d was utilized along with the combined isotropic-kinematic hardening law based on the modified
Chaboche model.
KEYWORDS: TWIP Steel, Springback, Formability.
1 INTRODUCTION high manganese content. Unlike other high strength

steels, its deformation mechanism is twinning and
In order to resolve concerns associated with high its simple tension test behavior has high strength (>
oil price and environmental pollution issues, the 800MPa) and high elongation (> 60%) with a high
automobile industry exerts major efforts nowadays n value, close to 0.7 based on Swift’s hardening
to reduce the weight of vehicles by introducing law.
lighter materials including aluminum and As for the material characterization in this work,
magnesium alloys as well as advanced high simple tension and simple compression tests were
strength steels such as dual-phase (DP), twinning performed for the hardening behavior including
induced plasticity (TWIP) and transformation strain rate sensitivity and anisotropy, while
induced plasticity (TRIP) steels. However, these tension-compression tests were carried out to
new materials have their own drawbacks to evaluate the Bauschinger, transient and permanent
overcome such as inferior ductility and/or large softening behavior during reverse loading. Also,
springback. Therefore, proper evaluations of their the forming limit diagram (FLD) was measured
mechanical properties and forming performance, using the hemispherical dome test, while the V-
particularly based on numerical analysis, are shape notch test was performed to evaluate its
important such that those numerical simulations sensitivity of ductility with respect to the surface
can be utilized to optimize their forming processes condition.
in the design stage. For the finite element analysis, the non-quadratic
Among these new materials, the TWIP steel was anisotropic yield function, Yld2000-2d [1], was
studied in this work based on numerical analysis used. As for hardening, the combined isotropic-
for its mechanical properties and forming kinematic hardening law based on the modified
performance related to formability and springback. Chaboche model [2] was utilized. For the
The TWIP steel is an austenite steel containing numerical verification, the simple tension and
____________________
* Corresponding author: Present address: Department of Material Science and Engineering, Seoul National University,
56-1, Shinlim-dong, Kwanak-gu, Seoul 151-742, South Korea. Tel.: +82-2-880-7189; Fax: +82-2-885-1748.
E-mail address: kchung@snu.ac.kr (K. Chung).
467
hemispherical dome tests as well as the 2D-draw Table 1: Yield stress and R-value
bending test were simulated utilizing the ABAQUS Dir. YS (MPa) R-value
Standard/Explicit codes along with their user RD 457 0.816
subroutines. 45D 465 1.188
TD 481 1.339
2 MATERIAL
CHARACTERIZATION 2.2 SIMPLE COMPRESSION TEST
Simple compression test was conducted with an
2.1 SIMPLE TENSION TEST
anti-buckling device. The result is compared with
Simple tension tests were carried out based on the tensile curve in Fig.3. Due to buckling, the
ASTM E8M with specimens prepared by the measured compressive strain range is limited but
milling process. Tensile speed was 0.05mm/s with the data shows that the compression curve
specimen thickness, 1.4mm. As shown in Fig.1, the converges to the tensile curve rapidly, confirming
maximum elongation is larger than 60% and the almost the same hardening behavior in the tensile
ultimate tensile strength (UTS) is close to and compressive hardening:
1,000Mpa, while the initial yielding is as low as
that of DP600 steel with around 400Mpa. The
earlier failure of the specimen prepared by water- 800
jet cutting (therefore, its surface is rougher than
that prepared with milling) confirms the ductility 600
True Stress (MPa)

sensitivity to the surface condition. The fitting
curve based on Swift’s hardening law shows the 400
high n value, 0.68, in Fig.2. Yield stresses and R- Tension

values along the RD, 45D and TD directions are 200 Compression
listed in Table 1.
0
1200 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
1000 True Strain

Figure 3: Tension and compression curves of
800 TWIP steel
Eng. Stress (MPa)
600
2.3 STRAIN RATE SENSITIVITY
400
Strain rate sensitivity was measured using the
200
Milling
simple tension test at four tensile speeds: 0.05, 0.5,
0
Water-jet 5, 50 mm/s. With 50mm gauge length, these
DP steel
correspond to (approximate) strain rates 0.001,
-0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
0.01, 0.1 and 1.0/s, respectively. Based on the
Eng. Strain
measured hardening curves shown in Fig. 4, the
Figure 1: Simple tension curves of TWIP steel strain rate sensitivity (m value) was calculated, as
shown in Fig. 5, from
1800 ln(V i / V 0 )
m (1)
1600
Exp.
ln(Hi / H0 )
Effective Stress (MPa)
1400 Fitting
1200 where Hi and H0 (with 0.001/s) denote strain rate
1000 and the reference strain rate, respectively. Unlike
800
V tot 2362 (H 0.078) 0.68 other materials, the TWIP steel has the m value
600 varying from positive to negative as strain
400 increases, while its average m value is negative
200 with -0.007.
0
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 2.4 NOTCH TEST
Effective Plastic Strain In order to investigate the sensitivity of ductility to
Figure 2: Fitting curves for hardening surface condition, the V-shape notch test was
carried out based on ASTM E338-03 [3]. Here, the
V-shape notch is considered as an isolated
exaggerated surface defect in the rough surface that
468
2.5 YIELD FUNCTION

1200
2.5.1 Plane stress yield function: Yld2000-2d
1000 The yield stress function for the plane stress
condition, Yld2000–2d, is defined by two linear
Eng. Stress (MPa)
800
transformations; i.e.,
600
1
400 1
) ½M
200
0.05mm/s f M
® ¾ V (2)
0.5mm/s
5mm/s ¯2¿
50mm/s
0
where V is the effective stress and
-0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Eng. Strain M M M
) SIc SIIc 2 SIIcc SIcc 2 SIcc SIIcc (3)
Figure 4: Hardening curves with different
strain rates
In Eq. (3), Skc and Skcc ( k I , II ) are the principal
0.02 values of the modified deviatoric stress tensor s
0.05 vs 0.5 mm/s ( s c or s cc ), in which
0.05 vs 5 mm/s
0.01 0.05 vs 50 mm/s
Average
s c Cc s Cc T ı Lc ı ,
0.00 (4)
m value
s cc Ccc s Ccc T ı Lcc ı ,

-0.01
Here, Cc and Ccc (therefore, Lc and Lcc ) contain

-0.02
anisotropic coefficients and T transforms the
Cauchy stress tensor ı to its deviator s . The two
-0.03
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 associated linear transformations are
Strain
Figure 5: m value variation with strain and strain ª c11c c12c 0º
Cc « c21c 0»
Rates
c22c (5)
« »
may lead to early failure. Specimens were prepared ¬« 0 0 c66c ¼»
by the milling process to have smooth surfaces. For
comparative study, the test was also conducted for
and
the DP600 steel with 1.5mm thickness. The initial
yield and ultimate tensile stresses of both materials
are shown in Table 2. The notch tests were ª c11cc c12cc 0º
repeated 5 times for each material and the average Ccc « c21cc c22cc 0» (6)
results are shown in Table 3. Without notch, UTS « »
of the TWIP steel (960Mpa) was much larger than «¬ 0 0 c66cc »¼
that of DP600 steel (620MPa), but with notch the
maximum stresses were almost the same for both. Note that there are ten anisotropic coefficients in
Therefore, the maximum stress (with notch) Eqs. (5) and (6), but only three are independent in
divided by UTS was much smaller for the TWIP Eq. (5) (so that only eight are independent as a
steel, as shown in Table 3, which confirms that the whole). To have eight independent coefficients,
TWIP steel may have more sensitivity to notch or
one choice is to set c12c c21c 0 .
surface roughness than DP600.
Table 2: Yield stress and ultimate tensile stress 2.5.2 Formulation of yield functions
YS (MPa) UTS (MPa) Based on the simple tension test results
TWIP 440 960 summarized in Table 1, anisotropic coefficients
DP600 358 620 were calculated for the yield functions: Yld2000-
2d, Hill’s 1948 [4] (using threee R-values) and
Table 3: Results of V-shape notch test Mises. As for Yld2000-2d, yielding under the
Max. stress (Mpa) Max. stress/UTS balanced biaxial condition was assumed to be the
TWIP DP TWIP DP same as that of the simple tension yielding in the
602.6 554.5 0.62 0.92 rolling direction. Also, the assumption, L12cc L21
cc ,
was imposed as well [1]. The anisotropy
coefficients of Yld2000-2d was obtained by the
469
Newton-Raphson procedure and the exponent, M 2.6 CHARACTERIZATION OF THE

=8, considering the FCC structure of the TWIP COMBINED HARDENING
steel. In Fig.6, the normalized yield functions of In order to characterize the isotropic-kinematic
Yld2000-2d, Hill’s 48 and Mises are compared for hardening parameters, the tension-compression test
vanised shear stress. Variations of the R-value and was conducted with various pre-strains as shown in
the yield stress (normalized with respect to the Fig.9. Based on the curves shown in Fig.9, the
yiled stress along the rolling direction) are shown isotropic and the kinematic hardening curves as
in Figs.7 and 8, respectively, along with the well as the total hardening curve were obtained as
experiemental data. shown in Fig.10 using the following formulation:
1.5 V total V comp

V iso (7)
2 H Hi
1.0
Nomalized Stress at TD
D V total V iso (8)

0.5
where V iso and D represent the effective isotropic

0.0
yield stress and back stress, respectively. The
-0.5
fitting equations for each hardening curve are
V tot 2362 ( H 0.078)

0.68
-1.0 (9)
Yld2000
Mises
V iso 1515 (H 0.148)
0.8
Hill'48 (10)
-1.5
-1.5 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5
D 774.3 H
0.5114
(11)
Nomalized Stress at RD
Figure 6: Comparison of yield functions
(Yld2000-2d, Hill’s 48 and Mises) Based on Fig.9, the kinematic hardening
parameters of the modified Chaboche model, h1
and h2, were also obtained (details are referred to
1.14 [2]) as
1.12 Yld2000
49269 (H 0.1)
0.2
1.10 Hill'48 h1 (12)
Mises
Yield Ratio
1.08 Exp. 11.99 H
1.06
h2 83 223 e (13)
1.04
1.02 whose integration leads
1.00
H H
D1 (H ) ³ h1 d H ³ 49269 (H 0.1) d H
0.2
0.98 (14)
0 20 40 60 80 100 0 0
H H
Angle from RD (Degree)
³ ³
11.99 H
D 2 (H ) h2 d H 83 223 e dH (15)
Figure 7: Normalized yield stress variation 0 0
1.4 1000
Yld2000 800
1.3
Hill'48 600
Mises
True Stress (MPa)
1.2
Exp. 400
R-value
1.1 200
1.0 0
-200
0.9
-400
0.8 -600
0.7 -800
0 20 40 60 80 100 -0.02 0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18
Angle from RD (Degree) True Strain
Figure 8: R-value variation Figure 9: Tension-Compression curves with

various pre-strains
470
The experimental failure point of the water-jet

1800
specimen appeared much earlier than the predicted
1600
value and before reaching UTS, which confirms
1400
that the shear fracture associated with its rough
Trus Stress (MPa)
1200 V
1000
tot
surface condition was not so well predicted
V
800
iso
utilizing the FLD measured based on milled
600 D samples.
400
200 Exp.
0 Fitting
1200
0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 1000

Equivalent Plastic Strain
Figure 10: Isotropic and Kinematic hardening 800
Eng. Stress (MPa)

data and their fitting curves 600 Fine mesh
Coarse mesh
In order to evaluate the permanent softening during 400
reverse loading, the lower part of Fig.9 was moved 200 Exp. (Milling)
up to the upper part by rotating 180°, as shown in Exp. (Water-jet)
Fig.11. Since the reverse loading curves do not 0 FEM
Failure point (FLD)
converge to the original hardening curve (without
pre-strain), permanent softening is observed in 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
Fig.11 for the TWIP steel during reverse loading. Eng. Strain
Figure 12: Comparison of FEM and experimental
results for simple tension test
800
600 3.1.2 Hemispherical dome test
400 The dome test was conducted both experimentally
True Stress (MPa)
200 and numerically. The size of the milled specimen

was 200mm×125mm and the diameter of the punch
0
was 100mm. No lubricant was applied. As shown
-200
in Fig.13, experiment and simulation curves for the
-400 punch force agreed well and the failure point
-600 predicted numerically based on the measured FLD
-800 also agreed well with the experimental failure point.
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 Fig.13 suggests that failure occurs much earlier
True Strain than the maximum force point and therefore before
Figure 11: Permanent softening during strain is localized.
reverse loading after pre-strain
3 VERIFICATION 500
3.1 FORMABILITY Experiment
FEM
400
3.1.1 Simple tension test Failure with FLD
Failure without FLD
Punch load (kN)
Based on the combined hardening model, the

simple tension test was numerically simulated. The 300
forming limit diagram (FLD) measured utilizing
specimens surface-treated by milling was 200
incorporated into the simulation program so that
failure as well as hardening were numerically 100
predicted for verification. Shell elements with two
mesh sizes, 1.0mm× 1.0mm and 0.2mm × 0.2mm, 0
were applied for comparison. As shown in Fig.12, 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
failure points as well as hardening behavior Height (mm)
predicted by simulation agreed well with Figure 13: Comparison of FEM and experimental
experiments measured with milled specimens, results for hemispherical dome test
especially when fine meshes were used. The failure
point predicted by finer meshes appeared a little 3.2 SPRINGBACK
earlier than that predicted by coarser meshes and The 2D draw bending test was conducted to
the effect of mesh size is more apparent after evaluate springback after forming. In this work, the
failure points. ABAQUS/Explicit was used to simulate forming,
471
while the ABAQUS/Implicit was used to simulate 4 CONCLUSIONS

springback.
Shell elements with 9 integration points across the In order to experimentally and numerically
cross section was utilized. WD-40 oil was used as a evaluate the macro-performance of the automotive
lubricant and the friction coefficient between the TWIP sheet in conjunction with formability and
tools and the blank was assumed to be constant spring-back, its mechanical properties were
with 0.08. In order to account for the permanent characterized. For numerical simulations, the
softening observed in Fig. 11, numercal anisotropic yield function Yld2000-2d was applied
simulations were conducted with the permanent along with the combined isotropic-kinematic
softening factor, D (H *) , which is a pre-strain hardening law based on the modified Chaboche
model. Verification was performed for formability
( H * ) dependent function. The hardening behavior and springback. The TWIP steel exhibited the
with the softening factor is sensitivity of ductility to the surface roughness
condition and the strain rate sensitivity varying
s
h1 D (H *) h1 (0 D (H *) 1) (16) from the positive to negative values as strain
increases. Compression hardening was similar to
where h1 is the hardening parameter in Eq. (12) tension. TWIP also showed the permanent
(details are referred to [5]). With this softening softening during reverse loading, which is
factor, the permanent softening is properly important for springback. Simulations agreed well
accounted for as shown in Fig.14. Simulation and with experiments in general except the failure
experiment results after springback in the 2D draw prediction for the specimen with a rough surface.
bending test are shown in Fig.15. As shown, the
simulation result considering the permanent 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
softening agreed well with the experiment. The This work was supported by POSCO and the Korea
results without considering the permanent Science and Engineering Foundation (KOSEF)
softening or just based on the full isotropic through the SRC/ERC Program of MOST/KOSER
hardening did not agree well with the experimental (R11-2005-065), for which the authors would like
result. to thank.
Exp.
FEM (without softening)
6 REFERENCES
800 FEM (with softening)
600
[1] F. Barlat, J. C. Brem, J. W. Yoon, K. Chung,
R. E. Dic, S-H. Choi. F. Pourbograt, E. Chu
400
and D. J. Lege: Plane Stress Yield Function
True Stress (MPa)
200 for Aluminum Alloy Sheets – Part 1: Theory.

0 International Journal of Plasticity, Vol. 19, pp.
-200 1297~1319, 2003.
-400 [2] K. Chung, M. Lee, D. Kim, C. Kim, M. L.
-600
Wenner and F. Barlat: Spring-back
Evaluation of Automotive Sheets Based on
-800
Isotropic-Kinematic Hardening Laws and
-1000 Non-Quadratic Anisotropic Yield Functions,
0.00 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
Part I: Theory and Formulation. International
True Strain
Journal of Plasticity, Vol. 21, No. 5, pp. 861-
Figure 14: Tension-compression curves 882, 2005.
with/without a permanent softening factor.
[3] ASTM international: Standard test method of
70
sharp-notch tension testing of high-strength
sheet materials. ASTM E 338-03, 2003.
60
[4] R. Hill: The Mathematical Theory of
50
Plasticity. Clarendon, Oxford, 1950.
40 [5] W. Lee, J. Kim, H. Ryou, D. Kim, C. Kim, M.
Y Coord.
iso-kine
30 L. Wenner and K. Chung: Numerical sheet
iso
20 forming simulation of friction stir welded
10 Exp.
TWB automotive sheets. GM Final Report,
FEM (without softening) 2006
0
FEM (with softening)
-10
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
X Coord.
Figure 15: Shapes after springback in the 2D draw
bending test
472
SprINGBaCK preDICtION BY YOShIDa-UeMOrI MODeL

aND COMpeNSatION OF tOOL SUrFaCe USING JStaMp
Ninshu Ma1*, Yasuyoshi Umezu1, Yuko Watanabe1, takaki Ogawa1

1
Engineering Technology Division, JRI Solutions Limited, Japan
aBStraCt: Authors programmed a subroutine of Yoshida-Uemori model to commercial software LS-

DYNA considering Young’s modulus change with plastic strain, and then carried out a springback
simulation for two stamping parts using solid element and shell element respectively. To make a designed
shape and size of a stamping part, a new function for springback reason research and an algorithm for tool
surface compensation were proposed and programmed to simulation system JSTAMP. Lastly, a research for
springback reason and a compensation for tool surface of underbody cross member panel were performed
using JSTAMP.
KeYWOrDS: Springback, Tool compensation, Kinematic hardening model, Solid, Shell.
1 INtrODUCtION 2 LS-DYNa USer SUBrOUtINe

It was well known that cracks, wrinkles and OF YOShIDa-UeMOrI MODeL
springback are the main issues for stamping parts. 2.1 YIeLD FUNCtION
Compared with the accuracy of prediction for crack
In our developed user subroutine of LS-DYNA,
and wrinkle, the simulation accuracy for
Hill’s 1948 anisotropic yield function Eq.(1) is
springback of stamping parts is still a big problem
adopted,
need to be solved [1]. These 10 years, many people
F (V y V z ) 2 G (V z V x ) 2 H (V x V y ) 2 2 LV yz2 2MV zx2 2 NV xy2
focused their research on springback simulation
V 0 Y (H p ) (1)
approaching from material model [2,3], finite
element formulation [4] and software application where, material constants H, G, F, N can be
technology [5]. As a result, the accuracy of calculated by anisotropic parameter R0, R45, R90
springback prediction has been significantly in 0o direction, 45o direction and 90o direction with
improved. the rolling direction.
R0 H 1 H R0
In this paper, authors are using a newly proposed H 㧘G , F
1 R0 R0 1 R0 R90 (1 R0 ) R90
kinematical hardening material model (Yoshida-
(1 2 R45 )( R0 R90 )
Uemori model or Y-U model) programmed as a N ( R45 1 / 2)( F G )
2(1 R0 ) R90
user subroutine of LS-DYNA for springback
L 1.5, M 1 .5
simulation [6]. To verify the simulation accuracy,
two stamping parts, S-rail [5,7] and underbody V 0Y (H p ) Yield stress in rolling direction
cross member [8], are taken as examples using
solid element and shell element respectively. 2.2 YOUNG’S MODULUS ChaNGe WIth
After the springback is predicted with high pLaStIC StraIN
accuracy, authors investigated the reasons of
springback deformation by dividing forming Young’s modulus used in Yoshida-Uemori model
stresses into membrane stress V T , bending stress varies with plastic strain which can be described by
Eq.(2) or Fig.1 [2,5].
V M , out of plane stress V C and compensated the
tool surface using simulation system JSTAMP E (H p ) E0 ( E0 Ea )[1 exp( [H p )] ( 2)
[9,10], in which LS-DYNA is packaged as one of
FEM solvers.
____________________
*Corresponding author: 3-10-19 Minami-semba, Chuo-ku, Osaka, 542-0081, Japan, phone +81 6 6243 5001, fax +81 6
6243 4870, ma.ninshu@jri-sol.co.jp
473
measured cyclic stress-strain relation must be
Young㵭s modulus
correctly re-produced by Y-U model programmed
in LS-DYNA. Fig.3 shows an example of the
stress-strain cycles for the comparison between
experiment and Y-U model, and a good accuracy
is achieved.
Figure 1: Young’s modulus change with plastic

strain
2.3 YOShIDa-UeMOrI MODeL[2]

Yoshida-Uemori kinematic hardening model (Y-U
model) is schematically shown in Fig.2, which is
expressed by yield surface f with back stress
D and boundary surface F with back stress E.
The centre of yield surface f is just moving with Figure3: Stress-strain cycles measured by
the back stress D . The boundary F is expanding experiment and reproduced by Y-U model program
due to the hardening of plastic strain which is in LS-DYNA
expressed by (B+R).
3 SprINGBaCK OF S-raIL BY
F I (V ' E ' ) ( B R ) 0 SOLID eLeMeNt
f I (V 'D ' ) Y 0 3.1 S-raIL MODeL
Y
D Fig.4(a) shows a S-rail stamping part in tryout and
D B+R
torsional springback measured when HS780 high
E strength steel with thickness 1mm is used [7].
O
Fig.4(b) shows FEM model for stamping
D ED simulation, in which the upper die is not displayed
in order to view the inside of model. Fig.4(c)
shows a zoomed area of a simulated S-rail part
Figure 2: Schematic showing of Y-U model when 3 solid elements with 6 integration points in
thickness direction of blank are used [5].
The back stress D consists of two components
E and D , which are defined by following
*
equations.
D E D* (3a)
2
E m( bH p E H p ) (3b)
3
B R Y a p (a) S-rail part [7]
D * C[ (V D )H p D * H ] (3c)
Y D*
The expanding rate of boundary surface F is
defined by Eq.(3d)
pad S-rail
R m( Rsat R)H p (3d )
Where, Y , C , B, m, b, Rsat are material parameters
punch
holder
of Y-U model. Besides these 6 parameters, another
parameter h is used to express hardening (b) Stamping tools
stagnation [2].
2.4 eXperIMeNt aND VerIFICatION OF

YOShIDa-UeMOrI MODeL
Before using Y-U model for springback simulation,
material anisotropic parameters R0, R45, R90,
Young’s modulus E with the change of plastic
strain and parameters Y , C , B, m, b, Rsat , h must (c) Solid mesh of blank
be measured by three types of experiment. The
Figure 4: Experimental and FEM model of S-rail
474
4 SprINGBaCK OF UNDer BODY

Stamping conditions (stroke, blank holding force, CrOSS MeMBer
pad-force, friction coefficient, motion velocity,
mesh size) and material parameters used in 4.1 CrOSS MeMBer MODeL
simulation are shown in Table 1 and Table 2 Fig.7 shows underbody cross member model used
respectively. in this paper, which was a benchmark model for
NUMISHEET2005 [8]. The simulation processes
Table 1: Stamping conditions in simulation consist of three stages which are drawing,
Stroke BHF pad-F fric. Vel. mesh size
trimming and springback. The stamping conditions
(mm) (KN) (KN) P (m/s) (mm)
and shell element size for blank used in simulation
40.0 200 50 0.12 5.0 1.25×1.25×0.33
are shown in Table 3. The other conditions such as
draw beads and trimming lines are detail described
Table 2: HS780 steel parameter for Y-U model in reference [8].
In springback analysis, boundary conditions to
eliminate rigid body motion are applied at A and B
points shown in Fig.7.
The blank material in simulation is DP600 and
3.2 SIMULatION reSULtS
1.62mm thick. The material parameters for Y-U
Generally, shell element is used for stamping model are shown in Table 4 [2].
simulation. However, the normal stress in shell
element is not considered and it affects the
simulation accuracy sometimes especially when
bending radius is less than 3 times of blank
thickness [4]. If the solid element is used, 6 stress
components can be fully considered.
Fig.5 shows z-stress component at the maximum
punch stroke. A large compressive z-stress due to
contact pressure can be observed on the area A of
flange, which can not be simulated by shell
element.
Fig.6 shows computed z-displacement of
(a) Drawing simulation model
springback deformation. The computed torsional
angle between two edge sections is well agreed
with measured value. The accuracy and the
effectiveness of Y-U model programmed in LS-
DYNA are verified.
(b) Boundary condition for springback
Figure 7: Cross member model for simulation [8]
Table 3: Stamping conditions in simulation

Stroke BHF draw- fric. Vel. mesh
Figure 5: z-stress before springback
(mm) (KN) beads P (m/s) (mm)
100 1068 ref.[8] 0.10 2.0 2.52.5
Table 4: Material parameters for Y-U model of

DP600 steel (t1.62) used in simulation ref.[2]
Y:Mp B:Mp rsat:Mp b:Mp C m h
360 435 255 66 200 26 0.4
Young’s modulus eo=206Gpa, ea=152Gpa, x=61
4.2 SIMULateD DraWING reSULtS

Fig.8 shows a draw-in displacement at 6 points of 3
transverse sections measured [8] and computed by
Figure 6: Computed springback deformation LS-DYNA using Y-U model and shell element. A
475
good agreement is obtained between measurement VT ^Vˆ ,Vˆ ,0,Wˆ ,0,0`

x y xy
T
(4c)
and computation.
VC ^0, 0, V , 0,W ,W `
z yz zx
T (4d)
t/2 t/2 t/2
1 1 1
W xy dz (4e)
t t³/ 2 t t³/ 2 t t³/ 2
ᵖᵎ
ᵕᵎ
ᵣᶖᶎᵌ Vˆ x V x dz ,Vˆ y V y dz ,Wˆxy
ᵷᶍᶑᶆᶇᶂᵿᵋᵳᶃᶋᶍᶐᶇᴾᶋᶍᶂᶃᶊ
ᵔᵎ
Where, V M ,V T ,V C are called as bending stress,

ᵠᶊᵿᶌᶉᴾᶂᶐᵿᶕᵋᶇᶌᴾᵹᶋᶋᵻ
ᵓᵎ
ᵒᵎ d1 d4 membrane stress and out of plane stress,

ᵑᵎ
d2 d5 respectively. By giving parameters D , E , J of
ᵐᵎ
ᵏᵎ
d3 d6 equation (4a) some values such as 0, 1 or -1,
ᵎ
springback reasons can be easily analyzed by
ᵏ ᵐ ᵑ
ᵮᶍᶑᶇᶒᶇᶍᶌᴾᶌᶓᶋᶀᶃᶐ
ᵒ ᵓ ᵔ simulation system JSTAMP. It is called as
springback research function in JSTAMP.
Figure 8: Draw-in displacement at 6 points
measured and computed
5.2 SprINGBaCK DUe tO BeNDING
4.3 SprINGBaCK reSULtS StreSS aND MeMBraNe StreSS
After the draw-in results are verified, springback is Figs.10 (a) and (b) shows springback displacement
computed by releasing drawing stresses. The when bending stress V M and membrane stress V T
profiles of section-I before and after springback are are released separately. Springback due to bending
shown in Fig.9 by lines ̆and ---, respectively. stress V M has a larger deformation at left side as
The experimental result is also plotted in this figure shown in Fig.10 (a). However, the springback
by line ̆. Springback deformation, especially the
displacement due to membrane stress V T is larger
deformation on the wall of the right side, is exactly
predicted by Y-U model. at the right side as shown in Fig.10 (b).
12
11
10
9.0
8.0
7.0
I ICompensated part 6.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Figure 10: Springback displacement due to

Figure 9: Profiles of section-I before and after
springback computed by Y-U model.
bending stress V M and membrane stress V T
5 SprINGBaCK reSearCh 6 COMpeNSatION OF tOOL

SUrFaCe
5.1 eFFeCt OF StreSS COMpONeNtS
ON SprINGBaCK
The stamping stress consists of 6 stress 6.1 SIMULatION FLOW tO MaKe a
DeSIGNeD StaMpING part
components ( V x , V y ,V z ,W xy ,W yz ,W zx ). If the
To make designed shape and size of a stamping
contribution or the effect of each stress component part, simulation flow shown in Fig.11 is generally
onto springback deformation can be simulated, die adopted in JSTAMP. When the shape deviations of
designers and stamping engineers will get very a stamping part after springback are larger than
important information. Furthermore, they can dimensional tolerance of the designed part,
investigate the reasons of springback and know springback reason research described in Chapter 5
how to reduce or control springback by modifying is recommended firstly. According the results of
stamping conditions, surface shape of stamping springback research simulation, engineers can
tools. adjust process conditions such as draw bead, blank
Stamping stress can also be divided into following holding force, pad force and others to control
three types of stress vector shown in Eq. (4) for springback, or compensate tool surface until the
practical researches. shape deviations are smaller than the tolerance
V research DV M EV T JV C (4a) value.
VM ^V x Vˆ x , V y Vˆ y , 0, W xy Wˆxy , 0, 0`
T
(4b)
476
Initial Tools (CAD) 6.3 eXaMpLe OF tOOL COMpeNSatION

Fig.13 shows an example of tool compensation for
underbody cross member. In this figure, the shape
Drawing and area of both initial die face and compensated
part are displayed.
Springback Fig.14 shows the die face displacement contour
computed by elastic FEM analysis. The modified
Conditions shape and its area can be observed.
Shape -Drawbead
Tool Y deviations -BHF
Making < tolerance -Pad-force
? -::::::::::::::
N
Springback
Reason Research
Tool compensation (FEM)

Figure 13: Initial die face and compensated part
Figure 11: Simulation flow to make a designed
stamping part considering springback in JSTAMP
After compensation Initial die face
6.2 tOOL COMpeNSatION prOCeDUreS 10.0
7.50
The following three operations need to be 5.00
2.50
performed in order to compensate tool surface 0.00
considering springback when JSTAMP is used. -2.50
-5.00
1) To predict springback by applying parameters -7.50
D 1, E 1, J 1 in Eq. (4a). The -10.0
-12.5
predicted springback shape is just a reference -15.0
-17.5
shape to be compensated. -20.0
2) To add undercut boundary to determine the -22.5
-25.0
maximum scale factor of springback -27.5
displacement and get the compensated part -30.0
shape. Figure 14: Modified die face after compensation
3) To map the shape of compensated part to the
initial die using nodal displacement of FEM.
4) To compensate die face by performing elastic 6.4 Shape DeVIatION USING
FEM analysis and then to smooth tool surface. COMpeNSateD tOOL
5) Repeat 1)-4) until the stamped part meets Fig.15 (a) and Fig.15 (b) show the distributions of
designed shape and size. a shape deviations at all nodes of FEM model of
To understand the compensated algorithm easily, a underbody cross member, when original tools and
section profile of initial die, designed part, tools compensated are used, respectively. The
undercut boundary, compensated part and maximum displacement deviation is 8.60mm when
compensated die face is schematically shown by the initial tools are used. The maximum
Fig.12. displacement is reduced to 3.38mm when the
Compensated die face
compensation for tools is performed just one time.
Compensated part
If deviation values are divided into three levels
Designed part (Level-A: 0.00-0.50mm, Level-B: 0.50-1.00mm,
Initial die
Level-C: 1.00-more), the deviation percentage
Undercut before and after tool compensation is shown by
boundary Fig.16. The percentage of deviation Level-A is
increased from 29% to 54.6% due to tool
compensation. The percentage of deviation Level-
Figure 12: a schematic showing of compensated C is decreased from 45.3% to 8.9% due to tool
section profile compensation.
477
10.0 Automotive Stamping, Proc. of

5.00 NUMISHEET2005, Part-A, 345-350, 2005.
4.00 [2] Fusahito Yoshida, Takashi Uemori: A model
3.00
1.00 of large-strain cyclic plasticity describing the
0.00 bauschinger effect and wrokdhardening
-1.00 stagnation, International Journal of Plasticity,
-2.00
3.38 18, 661-686, 2002
-3.00
-4.00 [3] Danielle Zeng and Z. Cedric Xia: An
-5.00 Anisotropic Hardening Model for Springback
-10.0 Prediction, Proc. of NUMISHETT2005, Part-
(a) Before compensation (b) after compensation A, 241-246, 2005
Figure 15: shape deviation distributions [4] N. Iwata, H. Tsutamori, M. Niihara,
H.Ishikura, Y.Umezu, A.Murata, Y. Yogo :
Numerical Prediction of Springback Shape of
Severely Bent Sheet Metal, Proc. of
NUMIFORM’07, Part-B, 799-804, 2007
[5] R. H. Wagoner and M Li: Advances in
Springback, Proc. of NUMISHETT2005,
Part-A, 209-214, 2005
[6] N. Ma, Y. Umezu, T.Hamada, Y. Watanabe:
Development of Various Kinematic
Hardening Material Subroutine for LS-DYNA
and Its Applications, Proc. of JSTP Joint
Conference, 175-176, Nov. 2005
Figure 16: Evaluation of shape deviations before [7] Shigeki Abe, Ryutaro Hino and Fusahito
and after tool compensation Yoshida: Optimum Draw-beads setting for
Suppessing Torsional Springback of S-rail,
7 CONCLUSIONS Journal of JSTP, vol.48. no.562, 68-72, 2007
(1) Yoshida-Uemori model and Young’s modulus [8] Jin Wu and Dajun Zhou: Specification for
change with plastic strain combined with Hill BM2 Underbody Cross Member Panel, Proc.
1948 fully anisotropic yield function are NUMISHEET2005, Part-B, 1150-1156, 2005
programmed into LS-DYNA user subroutine [9] T. Ogawa, N. Ma, Y. Umezu, Y. Watanabe:
by authors Simulation of springabck and Tool Surface
(2) The accuracy and effectiveness of Yoshida- compensation for Stamping, Proc. of JSTP
Uemori model programmed in LS-DYNA for Joint Conference, 521-522, Oct. 2007
springback simulation are verified by two [10] http://www.jstamp.jp/
stamping examples using solid element and [11] K. Roll, T.Lemke, K, Wiegand: Possibilities
shell element. Respectively... and Strategies for Simulations and
(3) Springback reason research function is Compensation for Springback, Proc. of
proposed by authors and was developed in NUMISHEET2005, Part-A, 295-302, 2005
simulation system JSTAMP for efficient [12] A. Tang, W, Lee, J, He, J, Xu, K, Liu and
application to industries. C.C.Chen: Die face Engineering Based on
(4) Tool compensation algorithm is proposed and Springback Compensation Strategy and
packaged in JSTAMP. Its effectiveness was Implemention, Proc. of NUMISHEET2005,
verified by underbody cross member panel. Part-A, 314-321, 2005
[13] S. Ohnimus, M. Petzoldt, B. Rietman, J.
Weiher: Compensating Springback in
8 aCKNOWLeDGeMeNt Autommotive Practice using MASHAL, Proc.
The authors would like to acknowledge Prof. of NUMISHEET2005, Part-A, 322-327, 2005
F.Yoshida and Dr. T.Uemori for the detail [14] G.Shen, P.Hu, X.Zhang, X.Chen and X.Li:
explanation about Yoshida-Umemori model. The Springback Simulation and Tool Surface
authors appreciate S.Abe for providing of mesh Compensation Algorithm for Sheet Metal
data and experimental conditions of the S-rail Forming, Proc. of NUMISHEET2005, Part-A,
stamping part. 334-339, 2005
9 reFereNCeS
[1] Singuang Xu, Kunmin Zhao, Terry Lanker,
Jimmy Zhang and C.T.Wang: springback
Prediction, Compensation and Correlation for
478
ADVANCED MODELING OF REVERSE LOADING EFFECTS FOR

SHEET METAL FORMING PROCESSES
Waldemar Kubli 1, Andriy Krasovskyy1*, Matthias Sester1

1
AutoForm Engineering GmbH, Technoparkstrasse 1, 8005 Zurich, Switzerland
ABSTRACT: As has been frequently reported the Bauschinger effect is an important phenomenon which
should be considered in the simulation of sheet metal forming processes, in particular for springback
prediction. The majority of material models in commercial codes is restricted to describe this effect by
classical kinematic hardening. The physical nature of this phenomenon, namely dislocation dynamics, leads
to more complex behavior including early re-plastification and work hardening stagnation during reverse
loading. This paper investigates reverse loading phenomena for several typical sheet metal alloys used in the
automotive industry, and presents a new approach to model such effects. In addition to an accurate modeling
of the observed behavior, special emphasis is placed on the applicability of the model: the required material
parameters should be as few as possible, should be independent of each other, should have a well defined
physical meaning and should be universal for a certain material group, so that expensive material tests to
measure the parameters can be reduced to a minimum. Finally, springback simulations are presented and
compared to experimental data.
KEYWORDS: Bauschinger effect, Kinematic hardening, Sheet metal forming, Springback
1 INTRODUCTION for sheet metals is complex. Sheet metal tends to

buckle during compression loading. This makes the
In a typical sheet metal forming process, a measurement delicate, especially for large strains.
considerable number of material points undergo Several techniques to perform such tests have been
cyclic plastification, for example during passing developed in the last years [1][2][3]. Based on
over a tool radius or through a draw bead. There- these investigations one can dismember the Bau-
fore, the accurate characterization of material schinger effect into three partial effects (Fig. 1):
behavior during reverse loading at large strain is an early re-plastification, transient softening and
important requirement for reliable simulations of hardening stagnation leading to reduced yielding.
sheet metal forming processes. Since the hardening
process for metals differs between forward and
reverse loading (Bauschinger effect), the stress
state in the simulation will depend directly on the
ability of the material model to describe this
phenomenon. Especially for springback prediction
an accurate description of the material behavior
during cyclic loading is essential: On the one hand
it is important to know the exact stress distribution
at the end of the forming before unloading starts,
on the other hand it is necessary to model
unloading with the proper stress-strain response. In
the last years numerous research groups investi-
gated the phenomenon of Bauschinger effect for
sheet metal forming and developed according
models. However, their industrial application is not
widespread, primarily because of the expensive
procedure to identify the many material parameters
usually required by such models. The experimental
procedure to get cyclic tension-compression curves Figure 1: Schematic of tension-compression curve
____________________
* Corresponding author: phone: +41 43 4446166, fax: +41 43 4446162, email: andriy.krasovskyy@autoform.ch
479
From physical point of view dislocation dynamics early re-plastification and transient softening is the
is responsible for plasticity and hardening of metals immediate motion of less stable dislocation struc-
during forward and reverse loading. The classical tures, such as pile-ups. Other factors which contri-
phenomenological assumption of the existence of bute to such material behavior on the macroscopic
an elastic domain with linear stress-strain response level could be change of the crystallographic
is only a simplification. In fact, during unloading texture during plastic deformation, stress induced
and reverse loading a superposition of elastic phase transformation or porosity evolution [2].
lattice deformation and reorganization of dis-
location structures takes place. Already at the very 3 CONCEPT OF THE MODEL
beginning of unloading, motion of less stable
dislocation structures such as pile-ups occur. This A novel approach to model reverse loading effects
leads macroscopically to early re-plastification and has been developed and implemented in the
transient softening [2][4]. Finally the work harde- commercial code AutoForm. To account for the
ning stagnation is attributed to the dissolution of industrial environment in which this code is typi-
dislocation cell-block boundaries [4]. cally used, special emphasis is placed on the
For an accurate stress prediction in the forming applicability of the model: it should be able to
simulation it is important to model not only tran- accurately describe the aforementioned phenome-
sient softening and hardening stagnation but also na, should be compatible to any of the imple-
early re-plastification, so that strain release during mented yield functions and hardening laws, should
unloading and springback can be accurately pre- not significantly increase computation time, and
dicted. should require as few as possible additional
The aim of the present work was to develop a material parameters. These should be independent
phenomenological model for reverse (and non- of each other, should have a well defined physical
proportional) loading of metal sheets, primarily to meaning and should be universal for a certain
improve springback simulation. Experimental re- material group, so that expensive material tests can
sults of tension-compression tests and hat-profiles be reduced to a minimum.
are taken from the EFB/AIF project [5], performed The detailed constitutive equations of the model
at the Fraunhofer Institute of Mechanics of are undisclosed research; in the following, the
Materials (IWM) at Freiburg, Germany. In the basic concepts of the model are presented.
paper at hand, results are presented for four steels
H220, DP600, TRIP700 and CPW800. 3.1 EARLY RE-PLASTIFICATION AND
TRANSIENT SOFTENING
2 EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS The main idea of the model is to use the same
developing equation to describe the two partial
Fig. 7 shows measured tension and tension-com- effects early re-plastification and transient softe-
pression curves, with the reverse loading curves in ning resulting in a smooth stress function for the
mirrored stress-strain representation. The afore- entire unloading and reverse loading path, inclu-
mentioned three partial effects during load reversal ding the area which is treated as elastic in con-
have been observed for each material. Fig. 5 ventional models. The function consists of a linear
presents according tangent moduli for the reverse and a non-linear part representing an initial tangent
dσ r modulus after the load reversal and its further
loading. The tangent modulus is defined as
dε r
(see Fig. 1) and is computed from the raw experi-
mental data by means of numerical differentiation.
One can clearly see the non-linear evolution of the
tangent modulus from the beginning of reverse
loading. Moreover, its initial value at the beginning
of reversal ( σ r = 0 ) is lower than the typical
value of Young’s modulus for steel.
According to the investigations in [1][2][3][6] the
tangent modulus at unloading even measured at
small reversal strains (e.g. vibrometrically) reduces
with increasing pre-strain. In the present paper, the
term elastic modulus, which is a physical material
constant, is not used, on purpose, because obvi-
ously a combination of elastic and plastic effects
takes place. As mentioned before a plausible
explanation for the reduction of initial tangent
modulus at the start of unloading as well as for Figure 2: Model concept
480
reduction. The model is formulated for the general reversal stress curve σ r (see Fig. 4). Typical
plane-stress condition, and is presented here sche- values range between 0.002 for materials with a
matically for the uniaxial case: small Bauschinger effect and 0.02 for a large
εr = εrl + εrn (1) effect.
2
where ε r is the reverse strain and ε rl and ε rn are 1.8
its linear and non-linear components (see Fig. 2). 1.6
K
[-]
The linear part, predominantly describing early re- 1.4
plastification, is defined by the initial tangent
Normalized stress
1.2
modulus El : 1
σ r 0.8
εrl = (2) 0.6

El 0.4
In [1] and [6] it has been shown that the initial 0.2
tangent modulus El typically reduced exponenti- 0

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18 0.2
ally with accumulated equivalent plastic strain p : Strain ε r [-]
El = E0 (1 − γ (1 − e − χp )) (3)
200
where E0 is the tangent modulus at p = 0 (equi-
valent to the Young’s modulus). γ is a material
[GPa]
parameter representing the maximal amount of 150
reduction of E0 , typically ranging between 0.1 and

0.2. χ is the saturation constant with values Tangent modulus
100
between 20 and 60. The influence of El on the

evolution of reversal stress and tangent modulus is
50 K
shown exemplarily in Fig. 3.
2
1.8 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
1.6
σr
Normalized stress [-]
[-]
σh
1.4
Figure 4: Influence of the parameter K on the

Normalized stress
1.2
1 evolution of reversal stress and tangent modulus

0.8
0.6
With this concept, the evolution of the tangent
0.4
modulus for the investigated materials can be well
0.2
described (see Fig. 5).
0 To incorporate this concept into the framework of
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03
Strain ε r [-]
classical elasto-plasticity we abandon non-linearity
within the yield surface of the size a and use an
200
average secant modulus E s (see Fig. 2) instead:
a
Es = (5)
[GPa]
150
a
+ ε rn (a,σ h ( p), K )
El
Tangent modulus
100
Consequently, the tangent modulus for the elastic
part will be smaller than E 0 even if γ = 0 . This
50
is an important difference compared to other mo-
dels treating the load reversal by independent
0 elastic and plastic characteristics: The elastic
0 0.5 1 σr 1.5 2
Normalized stress
σh
[-] modulus here does not independently develop with
pre-strain as it does in other models. This reflects
Figure 3: Influence of the parameter El on the the aforementioned observation that dislocation
evolution of reversal stress and tangent modulus effects start at the very beginning of unloading and
cause a smooth stress curve over the entire un-
The non-linear part which is mostly responsible for
loading and reverse loading path. Consequently,
the transient softening is defined as:
the whole area of early re-plastification and transi-
εrn = εrn (σ r , σ h ( p ), K ) (4) ent softening including its evolution with pre-strain
where σ h ( p ) is the (isotropic) hardening stress can be described very accurately by just three
and K is a material parameter representing a physically well-defined material parameters ( γ , χ
typical strain distance affecting the steepness of the and K ).
481
200 hardening at the same accumulated strain. In [7],

(a) this is called “permanent softening” and modeled
[GPa]
150 as separate effect, with its own parameters. Here,

by contrast, the stress reduction is treated as pure
consequence of the work hardening delay. As a
Tangent modulus
100
experiment (small pre-strain) result, the stagnation including the stress reduction
50
experiment (large pre-strain) can be accurately described by just one additional
model (small pre-strain) material parameter.
model (large pre-strain)
0
In order to model delayed work hardening, p is
0 0.5 1 σ r 1.5 2 replaced by a new hardening parameter pd which
Normalized reversal stress [-]
σh behaves as follows: pd is identical with the
200 equivalent plastic strain p during proportional
(b) forward deformation and develops slower than p
[GPa]
150 during reverse or non-proportional deformation. To

determine if a deformation is reverse or non-
proportional, a storage surface in strain space is
Tangent modulus
100
experiment (small pre-strain) introduced, similar to the concept described in [8]

50 experiment (large pre-strain) and also used in modified form in [7]. During
model (small pre-strain)
forward deformation, the progression of plastic
0
strain extends the storage surface. During reverse
0 0.5 1 σr 1.5 2 deformation the plastic strain traverses the surface;
σh during the time it is inside, the surface keeps its
200 current size and pd develops slower than p . This
(c) behavior is controlled by a material parameter ξ
[GPa]
150 which characterizes the fraction of forward strain

that can be reversed without work hardening taking
Tangent modulus
100 place, and ranges between 0 and 1. The influence

experiment (small pre-strain) of parameter ξ on the work hardening during
experiment (large pre-strain)
50 reverse loading is shown in Fig. 6.
4
0 3
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
σr 2
[-]

σh
1
Normalized stress
200
0
(d)
[GPa]
-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
150 -1
-2
ξ =1
Tangent modulus
100 ξ = 0.5 -3
experiment (small pre-strain) ξ =0

-4
experiment (large pre-strain) Strain [-]
50
0
Figure 6: Influence of material parameter ξ on the
0 0.5 1 σr 1.5 2 work hardening during reverse loading
σh
Figure 5: Measured and calculated tangent moduli 4 MODEL EVALUATION

after strain reversal at different stress points
(a) H220; (b) DP600; (c) TRIP700; (d) CPW800 4.1 TENSION-COMPRESSION TESTS
With the model described above one can reproduce
the measured tension-compression curves presen-
3.2 WORK HARDENING STAGNATION ted in Fig. 7 and 5 to a high degree of accuracy. On
For each of the materials studied in [5] work harde- the mirrored stress-strain representation the work
ning stagnation has been observed, presumably hardening stagnation is clearly visible (Fig. 7).
caused by the dissolution of dislocation cell-block Also the initial value of the tangent modulus and
boundaries. During stagnation, plastic flow is its evolution during load reversal are described
partly achieved by reversal of dislocation structures well (Fig. 5).
and not by generating new dislocations, so that Additionally tension-compression curves for two
work hardening is delayed. This results in a stress steels from [7] were digitized and approximated by
reduction at the end of the stagnation phase the present model (Fig. 8). The parameters for
compared to the stress achieved under isotropic early re-plastification γ and χ were taken from
482
3 500
[-]
2.5 (a)
(a) 400
Effective normalized stress 2
Stress [MPa]
300
1.5
experiment experiment
model 200
1 AutoForm
Yoshida-Uemori
0.5 100
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0
Effective strain ε [-] 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
Effective strain ε [-]
2.5
[-]
1000
2
(b)
(b)
Effective normalized stress
800
1.5
Stress [MPa]
600
1 experiment
model
experiment
400
0.5 AutoForm
Yoshida-Uemori
200
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
2.5 Effective strain ε [-]
[-]
2 (c) Figure 8: Measured and modeled tension-

compression curves from [7]. (a) SPCC; (b) SPFC

1.5
1
to describe the reverse loading plasticity effects.
experiment
model
For the elasto-plastic effects during early re-plasti-
0.5 fication, it requires two material parameters γ and
0
χ , similar to the Yoshida-Uemori model.
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 Hardening curves were used in tabular form based
on measured data and its extrapolation by Hockett-
1.5
Sherby hardening law.
Table 1: Material parameters
(d)
[-]
1.25
K, ξ, γ , χ, E0 ,
1
Material [-] [-] [-] [-]
0.75 [GPa]
0.5
experiment
model
H220 0.004 0.62 0.245 30. 200.
DP600 0.011 1. 0.13 30. 200.
0.25
TRIP700 0.009 0.29 0.175 30. 200.
0 CPW800 0.005 0.52 0.1 30. 200.
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1
Effective strain ε [-] SPCC 0.003 0.44 0.248 31. 206.
Figure 7: Measured and calculated tension- SPFC 0.013 0.83 0.117 61. 206.
compression curves.
(a) H220; (b) DP600; (c) TRIP700; (d) CPW800 4.2 SPRINGBACK SIMULATION
Using the presented material model fitted to
the data for the average Young’s modulus provided
tension-compression tests hat profiles with a sheet
in [1] for the range 0.75σ 0 ≤ σ ≤ 0.95σ 0 . Fig.
thickness of 1.5 mm and with two different die
8 shows also the curves obtained from Yoshida-
radii (5 mm and 2 mm) were simulated (for the
Uemori model taken from [7]. experimental set-up see [5]). The simulations were
Also here, one can see a very good agreement of run with AutoForm using shell elements with 11
the present model with the experiments. The model integration points over the thickness and a uniform
delivers similar results as the Yoshida-Uemori mesh with an element size of 1.3 mm for the large
model [7]. However, note that the present model die radius and with an element size of 0.6 mm for
uses standard hardening curves even in tabular the small die radius. These settings were
form, widely available in industry and which does determined with help of mesh convergence studies.
not need to be adapted, and only requires two A friction coefficient of 0.12 was used for all
additional material parameters K and ξ in order materials.
483
(a) • Only four additional, physically comprehen-

sible material parameters are required, which
can be determined from tension-compression
tests. They seem to be constant per material
class (needs to be further investigated); as
consequence, material tests may be avoided
once the according knowledge is built up.
• The model can be used with any of the im-
plemented yield criteria and hardening curve
(b) descriptions even in tabular form. Except for
specifying the four additional parameters, no
changes are required to the material data used
for simulations with isotropic hardening,
widely available in industry.
• As shown for hat profiles, the new model im-
proves springback prediction considerably.
(c) • The increase of computational cost is below
5% for most examples.
6 REFERENCES
[1] F. Yoshida, T. Uemori, K. Fujiwara: Elastic-
plastic behavior of steel sheets under in-plane
(d) cyclic tension-compression at large strain.
Int. J. Plasticity 18: 633-659, 2002.
[2] A. Krasovskyy: Verbesserte Vorhersage der
Rückfederung bei der Blechumformung durch
weiterentwickelte Werkstoffmodelle. Thesis
Fakultät für Maschinenbau der Universität
Karlsruhe, Germany, 2005.
[3] R.M. Cleveland, A.K. Ghosh: Inelastic effects
Figure 9: Measured and predicted springback for on springback in metals. Int. J. Plasticity 18:
hat-profile 769-785, 2002.
(a) H220; (b) DP600; (c) TRIP700; (d) CPW800 [4] B. Peeters, S.R. Kalidindi, C. Teodosiu, P.
In all cases the new model leads to an essential Van Houtte, E. Aernoudt: A theoretical
improvement of springback simulation results, in investigation of the influence of dislocation
particular for the wall curl prediction. For the small sheets on evolution of yield surfaces in single-
die radius, isotropic hardening always leads to curl- phase B.C.C. polycrystals. J. Mech. Phys.
in; the curl-out which is observed in reality can Solids, 50: 783-807, 2002.
only be achieved with kinematic hardening. [5] Beurteilung der Leistungsfähigkeit von
Materialmodellen zur
Blechumformsimulation. EFB/AIF-project
5 CONCLUSIONS
(AiF 13530 BG) report Nr. 244, 2005.
For an accurate springback simulation of sheet [6] S. Thibaud, N. Boudeau, J.C. Gelin: On the
metal forming processes it is important to model influence of the Young modulus evolution on
the material behavior during reverse loading the dynamic behaviour and springback of a
accurately. This involves not only the transient sheet metal forming component. In:
softening effect, but also work hardening stag- NUMISHEET, Vol.1: 149-154, 2002.
nation and early re-plastification effects in order to [7] F. Yoshida, T. Uemori: A model of large-
obtain an appropriate stress state during the strain cyclic plasticity describing the
forming simulation and to model unloading with Bauschinger effect and work hardening
the proper stress-strain response. A new material stagnation. Int. J. Plasticity 18: 661-686,
model has been presented (and implemented in the 2002.
code AutoForm) with the following advantages: [8] N. Ohno: A constitutive model of cyclic
• It can accurately describe tension-compression plasticity with a nonhardening strain region.
curves of different material classes, including Journal of Applied Mechanics 49: 721-727,
early re-plastification, transient softening, 1982.
work hardening stagnation and reduction of
tangent (“elastic” secant) modulus with pre-
strain.
484
THE EFFECT OF HARDENING MODEL ON SPRINGBACK

PREDICTION FOR A CHANNEL DRAW PROCESS
A. Ghaei 1*, A. Taherizadeh 1, D. E. Green 1

1
Department of Mechanical, Automotive and Materials Engineering, University of
Windsor, Canada
ABSTRACT: The main purpose of this work is to predict the springback of Numisheet’05 Benchmark#3
using different material models. This Benchmark was carried out with different sheet materials (AKDQ-
HDG, HSLA-HDG, DP600-HDG and AA-6022-T43) and with drawbead penetrations that varied from 25%
to 100%. Simulations were performed using Hill's 1948 anisotropic yield function and two types of
hardening models: isotropic hardening and combined isotropic-nonlinear kinematic hardening. The work
hardening behaviour of the aluminium was described with the Voce model and that of the steel with
Hollomon’s power law. Kinematic hardening was modelled using the Armstrong-Fredrick nonlinear
kinematic hardening model which considers cyclic deformation phenomena such as the Bauschinger effect
and yield stress saturation. Comparisons between simulation results and experimental data show that none of
these models can individually predict the springback of sheet metal parts.
KEYWORDS: Springback, Drawbead, Isotropic Hardening, Kinematic Hardening.
1 INTRODUCTION In this paper, both forming and subsequent

springback stages of Numisheet’05 Benchmark#3
Springback is defined as the geometrical change of were simulated for different drawbead penetrations
a part after forming, when the forces from forming using a nonlinear FEA code ABAQUS. Four
tools are removed. Since springback affects the different sheet materials (AKDQ-HDG, HSLA-
final shape of the product, it can lead to significant HDG, DP600-HDG and AA-6022-T43) were used
problems in the assembly line if it isn’t well to evaluate the ability of material models to predict
controlled. Therefore, it is an important issue in the springback in the drawn channel sections. This
sheet metal forming and consequently has received benchmark considers four different drawbead
attention by many researchers [1-4]. Springback penetrations: 25, 50, 75 and 100%, but for the sake
must be predicted quantitatively and can be of brevity, we only present results for the deepest
compensated by die design techniques such as and shallowest penetrations, i.e. 25 & 75% for
over-crowning, under-crowning, over-bending, or DP600 and 25 & 100% for the other materials [10-
under-bending. The accuracy of sheet metal 13]. Hill’s 1948 yield function was used with two
forming and springback simulation depends not different hardening models, i.e. isotropic hardening
only on the forming conditions (friction, tool and and a combined isotropic-nonlinear kinematic
binder geometry etc.), but also on the choice of the hardening, to model the material behaviour.
material constitutive model and its numerical Further details of the numerical models are
implementation into finite element programs. described in the next section, and followed by a
Among these factors, the material constitutive law presentation and discussion of the numerical
plays an important role in describing the results.
mechanical behaviour of sheet metals, because it is
essential to obtain an accurate stress distribution in
2 FINITE ELEMENT MODEL
a formed part if springback is to be correctly
predicted. Thus, a great deal of research has been There are several critical factors in the simulation
dedicated to develop new constitutive models of springback phenomenon in sheet metal forming.
aiming at better simulation springback [5-9]. A detailed study of numerical issues associated
with springback prediction was carried out by Li et
____________________
* Corresponding author: 224a, Essex Hall, Mechanical Eng. Dept., University of Windsor, 401 Sunset Ave., Windsor,
Ontario, Canada. Tel: 1-519-2533000-Ext 4854. Email: ghaei@uwindsor.ca
485
al [1]. After careful study of element type (shell, was used to develop a user-defined subroutine
solid), mesh size and integration scheme, the material model based on Hill and NKH for both
present authors found that the following conditions ABAQUS-Explicit (VUMAT) and ABAQUS-
yielded the best results: Standard (UMAT). Cyclic tension-compression
• Solid plane-strain elements (denoted by tests were carried out on the specimens made by
CPE4R in ABAQUS) DP600, AKDQ and HSLA. The stress-strain curve
• A mesh consisting of 4 elements through the presented in reference [18] was used to evaluate
sheet thickness and 1000 elements along the the mechanical properties of AA-6022. The least-
length (only one half of the channel section squares method was used to fit curves to the
was modeled due to symmetry) experimental data and Table 1 shows the
• An explicit-implicit scheme for forming and mechanical properties and hardening parameters
springback stages, respectively used in the simulation. It should be noted that the
transverse direction of the sheet was taken as the
For processes in which the sheet metal is subjected reference direction for defining the hardening
to relatively linear loading paths (such as constants (C, , Q, b) as the part was drawn in this
hemispherical punch stretching and cup-drawing direction during the forming stage.
tests), the simple assumption of isotropic hardening
may provide good springback predictions.
However, the results of simulations for processes Upper Die
Drawbead
in which sheet metal undergoes cyclic loading
(such as alternative tension-compression or
bending-unbending stresses in bending-drawing
tests or deep drawing tests including drawbeads),
this assumption should be relaxed to account for Binder Punch
the kinematic hardening effects associated with
stress reversal. Especially for springback analysis,
modeling of the Bauschinger effect and cyclic
hardening characteristics of materials is of vital
importance (it is well-known that high strength
steel and aluminium sheets exhibit more Figure 1: Sketch of the A/SP channel draw die with
springback than ordinary mild steel sheets) [14]. In location of drawbead inserts (side-view)[11]
an experimental study, Gau and Kinzel investigated
the influence of the Bauschinger effect on
springback predictions [9].
In the present study, Hill’s quadratic yield function
(1948) was used as the yield criterion and two
basic hardening models were employed to define
the evolution of yield surface: isotropic hardening
and a combined isotropic-nonlinear kinematic
model (NKH) proposed by Fredrick and Armstrong Figure 2: A channel formed in the A/SP channel
[15]. In this model, the evolution for the location draw die after springback
and size of the yield surface is defined respectively
as:
3 RESULTS
2
dα = Cdε p − γαdp
3 (1) A series of 16 simulations were carried out: 8 with
isotropic hardening and 8 with nonlinear kinematic
dr = b.(Q − r ).dp
(2) hardening (NKH). Simulation and experimental
where  denotes the backstress, C and  are results are compared in this section. It is observed,
material constants associated with nonlinear both experimentally and numerically, that the
kinematic hardening and Q and b are material springback decreases when the drawbead
constants associated with isotropic hardening. The penetration depth increases. That is, as the plastic
forming stage was first analysed using ABAQUS- deformation in the drawbeads increases,
Explicit and then the results were imported to springback reduces. In the deeper drawbead
ABAQUS-Standard to simulate the springback penetrations, the restraining force is higher
stage and obtain the final configuration of the part such that the sheet metal is stretched to a greater
at equilibrium. Unfortunately, ABAQUS-Standard extent of tension in the sidewall region after
still does not support the combined use of Hill and passing over the die shoulder. The higher tensile
NKH models in its library of material models. stresses help to decrease the residual stress gradient
Therefore, the so-called return mapping algorithm through the sheet thickness.
486
Table 1: Summary of mechanical properties of the materials

Material Orientation Thickness, 0.2 % Yield R-Value C  Q b
mm Stress, MPa
L 1.00 136.0 1.029
AA6022 T 1.00 127.6 0.728 7019 118.6 140 7
D 1.00 131.2 0.532
Mean 1.00 131.6 0.705
L 1.00 158.3 1.546
AKDQ T 1.00 166.0 1.942 197 0.6 140 19.4
D 1.00 164.7 1.508
Mean 1.00 163.0 1.626
L 0.80 394.3 0.581
HSLA50 T 0.80 427.7 1.013 4185 51.7 112 0.38
D 0.80 395.3 1.166
Mean 0.80 405.8 0.981
L 0.98 420.0 0.821
DP600 T 0.98 425.7 0.969 13000 52.7 600 0.8
D 0.98 427.7 0.915
Mean 0.98 424.4 0.905
In order to measure the curvature in the channel is shown in Figures 5 and 6. Neither the isotropic
sidewalls (i.e. after springback), 3 or 5 channel or the NKH models are capable of predicting
sections for each prestrain condition were scanned springback accurately. Although it would be
using IRDI’s Virtek LaserQC™ 2D laser scanner. expected that the isotropic hardening should
Each channel section was placed on its edge on the overestimate the springback, it was found to
glass surface of the LaserQC™ very slowly in underestimate it. This may be due to the fact that a
order to avoid applying any constraints to the possible decrease in elastic modulus during
channel and thereby distorting its natural shape. unloading was not accounted for in this work.
The glass surface was also sufficiently slippery that Some researchers have recently indicated that the
the part would find its natural equilibrium. Channel elastic unloading modulus decreases with plastic
sections were positioned in such a way that the deformation [7, 16, 17]. The effect of this
laser could scan the edge of the RHS sidewall in phenomenon is taken into account only for DP in
contact with the glass without being obstructed. the next section.
The scanning accuracy of the LaserQC™ is up to AKDQ-25%-Iso AKDQ-25%-NKH Exp 25%
0.05 mm. The interested reader is referred to ref. 250
[11] for more details on the experimental 200

measurement of the profile.
Figures 3 and 4 show a comparison between the 150
Y, mm
experimental profiles of the AKDQ channel 100

sidewalls after springback with those predicted
with isotropic and NKH hardening at different 50
drawbead penetrations. It is apparent from these 0

figures that NKH predicts the sidewall profile 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
better than isotropic hardening, especially at 25% X, mm
penetration where the range of cyclic strain is Figure 3: Profile of the sidewall for AKDQ at 25%
smaller than for 100% penetration. NKH divides penetration
the work hardening of the material into expansion
and translation of the yield surface in stress space. Figures 7 and 8 show profiles of the HSLA channel
However, the isotropic hardening assumes only an sidewall at 25 and 100% penetrations. Again, the
expansion of the yield surface due to global work isotropic hardening assumption underestimates the
hardening of the material. Consequently, it does springback. Neither the isotropic nor the NKH
not take the Bauschinger effect into account and is models are capable of predicting springback
expected to overestimate springback. accurately, although the general shape of sidewall
A comparison between the experimental profiles profile is correctly predicted with NKH. The
with those obtained by simulation at different decrease in elastic modulus may be required to
drawbead penetrations for DP600 channel sections obtain a better fit with the experimental profile.
However, due to a lack of experimental data this
phenomenon was not considered here.
487
3.1 DECREASE OF UNLOADING ELASTIC

AKDQ-100%-Iso AKDQ-100%-NKH Exp-AKDQ 100%
250 MODULUS
200
According to Levy [16], the unloading elastic
modulus decreases as a function of plastic
150
according to the following equation:
Y, mm
100 Eu = E − 43(1 − e −160 p ) (3)

50 where E=206 GPa is the elastic modulus during
loading and p is the effective plastic strain. Fig. 11
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 shows the effective plastic strain distribution
X, mm through the thickness. The effective plastic strain at
the end of the forming step in the sidewall is larger
Figure 4: Profile of the sidewall for AKDQ at 100%
penetration
than 7.5% at all nodes for drawbead penetration of
25%. Eq. (3) shows that the decrease in unloading
modulus saturates to 163 GPa after 5% prestrain.
DP-25%-Iso DP-25%-NKH Exp-DP 25%
So, it is reasonable to assume that the unloading
250
modulus at all material points is 163 GPa. So, we
200 changed the elastic modulus to 163 GPa during
150
importing the results from ABAQUS-Explicit to
Y, mm
ABAQUS-Standard for springback simulation.

100
HSLA-25%-Iso HSLA-25%-NKH Exp-HSLA 25%
50 250
0 200
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
X, mm 150
Y, mm
Figure 5: Profile of the sidewall for DP at 25% 100
penetration 50
DP-75%-Iso DP-75%-NKH Exp-DP 75% 0

250 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
X, mm
200
150
Figure 7: Profile of the sidewall for HSLA at 25%
drawbead penetration
Y, mm
100
HSLA-100%-Iso HSLA-100%-NKH Exp-HSLA 100%
250
50
200
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
150
X, mm
Y, mm
Figure 6: Profile of the sidewall for DP at 75% 100
penetration
50
The profile of the sidewall after springback is 0

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
shown for AA-6022-T43 at 25% and 100% X, mm
penetration is shown in Figures 9 and 10,
respectively. Although the possible decrease in Figure 8: Profile of the sidewall for HSLA at 100%
elastic modulus was not taken into account for the drawbead penetration
aluminium sheets, surprisingly, the simulation AL-25%-Iso AL-25%-NKH Exp-Al 25%
results are in very good agreement with experiment 250
for 100%. It should also be noted that Barlat's yield 200

function is needed for a better description of the
aluminium yield surface. Therefore, this good 150
Y, mm
correspondence may be due to compensating 100
errors. This speculation may be confirmed by

50
looking at Figure 9 where the numerical results
underestimate the results. 0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
X, mm
Figure 9: Profile of the sidewall for AL at 25%

drawbead penetration
488
Figures 12 and 13 show the profile of channel DP-75%-Iso DP-75%-NKH Exp-DP 75%
sidewall after springback for DP considering the 250
decrease of unloading elastic modulus. The

isotropic hardening model has overestimated the 200
springback for this material. It is also apparent that

this model has not been able to predict the radius of 150
Y, mm
the curve accurately at 25%. However, the NKH is
100
more capable of predicting springback compared to
isotropic hardening. This model has predicted the
50
radius of sidewall curl more accurately at 25%
penetration and the sidewall angle more precisely 0
75% penetration. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
X, mm
AL-100%-NKH AL-100%-Iso Exp-Al 100%
250 Figure 13: Profile of the sidewall for DP at 75%
200
penetration considering decrease of unloading
elastic modulus
150
Y, mm
100 4 CONCLUSIONS
50 Numisheet’05 Benchmark#3 was simulated using
0
nonlinear FEA code ABAQUS. The channel draw
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 die tests were conducted with four different sheet
X, mm
materials (3 grades of steel and an aluminium
Figure 10: Profile of the sidewall for AL at 100% alloy). Two different drawbead penetrations were
drawbead penetration also applied in these simulations for each material.
Simulations were carried out using two hardening
models (isotropic and combined isotropic-
Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Section 4
0.26
nonlinear kinematic). For both cases, Hill’s 1948
0.24 anisotropic yield function was used. A comparison
0.22
0.20
between predicted and experimental sidewall
Equivalent plastic strain
0.18 profiles for all cases was presented. Numerical

0.16
0.14
results were rather consistent with experimental
0.12 ones but for almost all cases the numerical results
0.10
0.08
underestimate the experimental data. However, for
0.06 the AKDQ channels the numerical results were
0.04
0.02
quite close to the experiments for both material
0.00 models. In summary, it can be concluded that
0.00 0.20 0.40 0.60 0.80 1.00
neither isotropic nor nonlinear kinematic hardening
Thickness (mm)
can individually predict the springback of sheet
Figure 11: The plastic strain distribution at four metal parts properly, especially for the cases which
different sections in the sidewall at the end of the the sheet is subjected to higher cyclic loading. It
forming stage for 25% drawbead penetration appears therefore that, accounting for a decrease in
elastic modulus with plastic deformation and using
more advanced constitutive models are required for
DP-25%-Is o DP-25%-NKH Exp-DP 25% a more accurate prediction of springback.
250
200
5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Professor R. H. Wagoner and Dr. P. Raghupathy
150 from Ohio State University are gratefully
Y, mm
acknowledged for carrying out the experimental

100
cyclic tension-compression tests.
50
6 REFERENCES
0
[1] Li K.P., Carden W.P., Wagoner R.H.,
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
X, mm Simulation of springback, International
Journal of Mechanical Sciences 44 (2002)
Figure 12: Profile of the sidewall for DP at 25% 103–122.
penetration considering decrease of unloading
elastic modulus
489
[2] Song N., Qian D., Cao J., Liu W. K., Li Proceedings IDDRG’06, edited by Santos,
S., Effective Models for Prediction of A.D., and Barata da Rocha, A., INEGI,
Springback In Flanging, ASME Journal Porto, 2006, pp.559-566.
of Engineering Materials and Technology [13] Shi M.F., Huang M., Specification for
123:456–461,2001. Benchmark Materials, Proceedings of
[3] Gan W., Wagoner R.H., Die design Numisheet 2005, edited by J. Cao, M. F.
method for sheet springback, International Shi, T. B. Stoughton, C.-T. Wang, and L.
Journal of Mechanical Sciences 46:1097– Zhang, American Institute of Physics,
1113,2004. CP778 Volume B, pp. 1173-1178, 2005.
[4] Carden W.D., Geng L.M., Matlock D.K., [14] Moreira L.P., Ferron G., Influence of the
Wagoner R.H., Measurement of plasticity model in sheet metal forming
springback, International Journal of simulations, Journal of Materials
Mechanical Sciences 44:79–101,2002. Processing Technology, 156:1596–1603,
[5] Chung K., Lee M., Kim D., Kim C., 2004.
Wenner M.L., Barlat F., Springback [15] Armstrong P.J, Frederick C.O, A
evaluation of automotive sheets based on mathematical representation of the
isotropic-kinematic hardening laws and multiaxial Bauschinger effect, Technical
non-quadratic anisotropic yield functions Report RD/B/N 731, Central Electricity
Part I: theory and formulation, Generating Board, 1966.
International Journal of Plasticity 21:861– [16] Levy B.S., Van Tyne C.J., Moon Y.H.,
882,2005. Mikalsen C., The Effective Unloading
[6] Choi Y., Han C., Lee J.K., Wagoner R.H., Modulus for Automotive Sheet Steels, In:
Modeling multi-axial deformation of Proceeding of SAE 2006 World Congress
planar anisotropic elasto-plastic & Exhibition, April 2006, Detroit, MI,
materials, part I: Theory, International USA.
Journal of Plasticity 22:1745–1764,2006. [17] Yang M., Akiyama Y., Sasaki T.,
[7] Yoshida F., Uemori T., A model of large- Evaluation of change in material
strain cyclic plasticity describing the properties due to plastic deformation,
Bauschinger effect and workhardening Journal of Materials Processing
stagnation, International Journal of Technology 151:232–236,2004.
Plasticity 18:661–686,2002. [18] Zhao K. and Lee J.K., Generation of
[8] Chun B.K., Kim H.Y., Lee J.K., Modeling Cyclic Stress-Strain Curves for Sheet
the Bauschinger effect for sheet metals, Metals, ASME Journal of Engineering
part I: theory, International Journal of Materials and Technology, 123, 2001,
Plasticity 18:571–595,2002. pp.391-397
[9] Gau J., Kinzel G.L., A new model for
springback prediction in which the
Bauschinger effect is considered,
International Journal of Mechanical
Sciences 43:1813–1832,2001.
[10] Stoughton T.B., Green D.E., Iadicola M.,
Specification for BM3: Two-stage
Channel/Cup Draw, In: Proceedings of
Numisheet 2005, edited by J. Cao, M. F.
Shi, T. B. Stoughton, C.-T. Wang, and L.
Zhang, American Institute of Physics,
CP778 Volume B, pp. 1157-1172, 2005.
[11] Green D.E., Description of Numisheet
2005 Benchmark #3 Stage-1: Channel
Draw with 75% Drawbead Penetration,
In: Proceedings of Numisheet 2005,
edited by J. Cao, M. F. Shi, T. B.
Stoughton, C.-T. Wang, and L. Zhang,
American Institute of Physics, CP778
Volume B, pp. 894-904.
[12] Green D.E., Stoughton T.B., Gnaeupel-
Herold T., Iadicola M.A., Foecke T.,
Influence of drawbeads in deep drawing
of plane-strain channel sections, In:
490
eXperIMeNtaL aND NUMerICaL StUDY OF SprINGBaCK IN

aLUMINUM aLLOYS BaSeD ON a SpLIt-rING teSt
r. Grèze1∗, h. Laurent1,2 , p. Y. Manach1
Laboratoire d’Ingénierie des MATériaux de Bretagne (LIMATB) - EG2M,

1
Université de Bretagne-Sud, France

2
CEMUC, Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Coimbra, Polo II
Coimbra 3030 788, Portugal
aBStraCt: The origin of springback lies in the elastic recovery of materials after forming operations
and this phenomenon is still a serious problem in sheet metal forming. Springback modifies the final shape of
the part and increases manufacturing costs. This study deals with experimental and numerical evaluation of
springback in an AA5754-O aluminum alloy performed with a split-ring test at several temperatures. A ring is
cut from the wall of a drawn cup. Residual stresses induced in the cup during manufacturing are then allowed
to relax by the ring splitting and create the opening of the ring. Experimental results are compared to predicted
springback simulations using the finite element code Abaqus. The whole deep drawing process of a semi-blank
is simulated and numerical splitting of the ring is performed. 3D solid elements with reduced integration are
used for the calculations. Several material models are analyzed, all model using isotropic and kinematic
hardening and any of the following plasticity criteria : Von Mises, Hill’48 and Barlat’91 yield criterion which
has been implemented in Abaqus using a UMAT subroutine. Main observed data are force-displacement
curves during forming, cup thickness according to material orientations and ring gap after splitting. Influence
of temperature during forming on springback is also studied.
KeYWOrDS: sheet metal forming, springback prediction, material modeling, aluminum alloy, influence
of temperature.
1 INtrODUCtION the tool process procedure. Several studies [3], [4]

conclude that springback simulation results depend
When removed from tools after deep drawing oper- upon the yield criterion used.
ations, the metal sheet tends to get back to its orig-
inal shape because of residual stresses induced in
parts during forming. Such phenomenon is called
An experimental study similar to the Demeri split-
springback and is a function of both material prop- ring test has been performed with an AA5754-O
erties and tools configuration. Among all tests that aluminum alloy. The whole deep drawing process
have been developed to characterize springback one of a semi-blank and the ring splitting have been
consists in measuring the residual circumferential simulated with Abaqus using different constitutive
stresses at the surface of drawn cups by cutting a laws. All models use isotropic hardening of Hocket-
ring specimen from the wall of the part and split the Sherby type and non-linear kinematic hardening.
ring longitudinally along any radial plane. This test The plasticity yield criteria are Von Mises, Hill 48
presents the advantage of a large springback which and Barlat 91. The aim of this paper is to show the
increases measurement accuracy and reduces exper- relevance of constitutive law in the springback pre-
imental errors [1]. Following the same procedure, diction. As the effect of temperature is considered,
R. Echempati et al. [2] studied the influence of pro- a viscoplastic approach is retained for constitutive
cess parameters such as the blank-holder pressure laws.
or the ring position along the cup wall on spring-
back. Echempati performed also numerical simula-
tions and tested parameters such as element size or
In a first part, the experimental procedure is detailed.
∗ Corresponding
Then, the numerical simulations are described and
author: LIMATB - EG2M, Université de
results are finally compared to experimental data. In
Bretagne-Sud, Rue de Saint-Maudé - BP 92116 - 56321 Lo-
rient cedex, France. phone : +33.(0)2.97.87.45.39, fax : a third part, influence of temperature on springback
+33.(0)2.97.87.45.72, email address : renaud.greze@univ-ubs.fr experimental results are presented.
491
2 eXperIMeNtaL the strain rate is proposed :

2.1 MaterIaL CharaCterIZatION E(εvp ) = E0 − (E∞ − E0 )(1 − exp − β(εvp )q
� �
Uniaxial tensile tests, monotonic and cyclic shear (1)

tests [5] with rectangular shaped samples were per- where E0 , E∞ , β and q are material parameters.
formed. Both tensile and shear samples were pre- 80000
pared from the aluminum metal sheet at 0◦ , 45◦ and
90◦ (transversal direction, TD) from the rolling di- experimental data
identification
rection (RD) of the sheet. The tensile samples were 75000
20 × 180 × 1 mm3 with a 140 mm-long tensile zone
Elastic modulus (MPa)

and tests were performed at 10−3 s−1 strain rate.
The shear samples were 18 × 50 × 1 mm3 with a
70000
4.5mm-wide sheared zone. Shear tests were per-
formed at 2.10−3 s−1 shear strain rate. Fig.1 shows
the stress-strain behavior of Al5754-O for tensile
(UT) and shear (MS : monotonic shear and CS : 65000
cyclic shear) tests at 0◦ , 45◦ and 90◦ to the RD.

(a)
300 60000
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14
Strain
UT − 00 exp
UT − 45 exp
UT − 90 exp
200 MS − 00 exp Figure 2: Evolution of the elastic modulus vs. the
CS − 10 exp
CS − 20 exp strain rate of AA5754-O
CS − 30 exp
Stress (MPa)
100
Due to the Portevin Le Chatelier (PLC) effect which
decreases measurement accuracy, the elastic modu-
0 lus is measured as the average value during loading
and unloading. However, the elastic modulus varia-
−100
tion has not yet been applied to the model proposed
below.
−200
−0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
2.1.1 Isotropic and kinematic hardening
Strain The isotropic hardening part of the model depends
(b)
300 on the viscoplastic deformation εvp and its evolution
is given by the Hocket-Sherby equation :
250 UT − 00 exp
UT − 00 sim
MS − 00 exp
200 R = B − (B − A) exp − C(εvp )n (2)
� �
MS − 00 sim
CS − 10 exp
150 CS − 10 sim
CS − 20 exp
CS − 20 sim where (B − A) is the isotropic hardening range, and
Stress (MPa)
100 CS − 30 exp
CS − 30 sim C is the saturation speed. A = σy is the yield stress.
50
The non-linear kinematic hardening is described by
0 the Armstrong-Frederick law with a linear Prager
−50 type contribution :
−100
3�
Cp α + Hp εvp where α̇ = ε̇vp − γ ṗα
�
−150 X =
2
−200 (3)
−0.4 −0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Strain Cp represents the kinematic hardening range, γ is
the saturation speed and Hp is the linear kinematic
Figure 1: Stress-strain database of AA5754-O : hardening modulus. ṗ is defined by :
tensile (UT), monotonic (MS) and cyclic shear (CS)
tests. (a) Experimental, (b) Identification for Barlat 91
�
2 vp vp
yield criterion ṗ = ε̇ : ε̇ (4)
3
The identification of material parameters was per- 2.1.2 Yield criterion
formed from the tensile and simple shear tests using Three plasticity yield criteria are considered : one
SiDoLo software [6]. isotropic of Von Mises [7] and two anisotropic crite-
The elastic modulus variation has also been obtained ria of Hill 48 and Barlat 91.
by performing cyclic loading-unloading tensile tests Young modulus and Poisson’s ratio are fixed to
(see Fig.2). An equation expressing the modulus vs. E0 = 74620 M P a and ν = 0.33 respectively.
492
The Hill 48 yield function used is given by [8]:

f (σ, X , R) = (5)
�
3� � ��
σ − X : H : σ � − X − R − σy
2
where H is the Hill 48 tensor, depending on six pa-
rameters : Fh , Gh , Hh , Lh , Mh and Nh . We assume
that Hh verifies Gh + Hh = 1 and that Lh and Mh
are both fixed to 1.5 for a metal sheet.
The Barlat 91 yield function [9] is described by the
equation:
f (σ, X , R) = 2σ mb = (6)
�S1 − S2 � + �S2 − S3 �mb + �S3 − S1 �mb
� �mb � � � �
This criterion depends on seven parameters : Ab ,

Bb , Cb , Fb , Gb , Hb and mb . It is assumed that Figure 3: Deep drawing device
Fb = Gb = 1 and mb = 8.
Table 1: Identified parameters both side at the beginning of the process (Yushrio
Former FD-1500) and cups are drawn up to a depth
isotropic hardening of 60 mm. Experimental data consist of force-
A = 55.48 M P a B = 209.9 M P a displacement curves of the punch and thickness dis-
C = 10.96 n = 0.99 tribution in the cup wall at 0◦ , 45◦ and 90◦ from
kinematic hardening the RD that are obtained using a three-dimensional
Cp = 9348.2 M P a Hp = 86.67 M P a measuring machine.
γ = 141.7
hill 48 Table 2: Drawing tools geometry (in mm)
Fh = 0.965 Gh = 0.590
Nh = 1.67 Die opening diameter 104.5
Barlat 91 Die radius 8
Ab = 1.28 Bb = 1.10 Punch diameter 100
Cb = 0.89 Hb = 0.99 Punch radius 5.5
Blank-holder opening diameter 100
Identified parameters of all behavior laws and crite- Rings are cut 15 mm from the bottom of the cup us-
rion parameters are presented in table 1. Simulated ing machine tool. The rings are 20 mm high and
curves show good agreement on anisotropy for ten- had an internal diameter of 100 mm before split-
sile and shear test simulations and the Bauschinger ting. Experimental springback data consist of rings
effect is well described by the Barlat 91 yield crite- gap measurement along straight lines connecting the
rion (see Fig.1 (b)). two ends of the split rings. 8 springback tests have
been performed. Opening gap after splitting is about
2.2 eXperIMeNtaL DeVICe 64 mm-wide (± 3 mm) at room temperature.
The experimental device has been developed in or-
der to perform reverse re-drawing of cylinder cups
[10]. However, only the device designed for the first
stage is used in this study (see Fig.3). Tool geometry
is given in table 2. Blanks are 170 mm in diameter
and 1 mm in thickness.
A blank-holder adjusted on the punch diameter and Figure 4: Experimental drawn cup, cut ring and
allowing the force control is maintained by 8 screws springback after splitting
with Belleville washers stacked in both parallel and
series. Force washers are used to control the blank- It is interesting to note that the shape of the ring af-
holder pressure at the beginning and during all the ter splitting is slightly conical due to the variation of
drawing stage. thickness and the non-symmetric stress distribution
Experiments were carried out on a classical tensile in the wall of the ring.
test machine of 500 kN maximum load capacity.
Blank-holder force is imposed at 24 kN and draw-
ing speed is 0.5 mm.s−1 . Blanks are lubricated on
493
3 NUMerICaL SIMULatIONS (a)

60
3.1 NUMerICaL prOCeDUre
50
Numerical simulations of the split-ring test are per-
Punch force (kN)

formed to predict material deformation during form- 40
ing, ring trimming and springback after splitting.
Abaqus (commercial) code is used to simulate the 30
springback test.
Drawing tools are meshed using rigid solid ele- 20 exp
Von Mises
ments. 3D hexaedral deformable elements with re- Hill 48
10 Barlat 91
duced integration (C3D8R) are used to mesh a semi-
blank. The blank is partitioned into three parts at the
0
beginning of the numerical process to allow ring cut- 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
ting. 6510 elements are used with three layers in the Punch displacement (mm)
thickness and 2170 elements in the plane. (b)
1.35
The blank-holder force is maintained constant at
12 kN during the drawing stage and the blank is 1.3
drawn up to 60 mm. The friction coefficient is fixed 1.25 initial thickness
exp
at 0.18. After removal of drawing tools, ring cut-
Thickness (mm)
1.2 Von Mises
ting is performed by removing useless parts using Hill 48
1.15 Barlat 91
the *model change option in Abaqus. The ring is fi-
nally splitted by removing a boundary condition of 1.1
symmetry at one end of the ring and then springback 1.05
is calculated by letting the part relax (see Fig.5). 1
0.95
0.9
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Z−position (mm)
Figure 6: (a) Force-displacement curves of the

punch during drawing and (b) thickness distribution
in the cup wall in the RD after forming for several
material models
Force-displacement curves of the punch show that

numerical results are in good agreement with exper-
imental data for each material models. Predicted
thickness distribution using the Hill 48 yield crite-
rion is slightly higher than experimental thickness
distribution and than those obtained with the two
other constitutive models. Nevertheless, Von Mises
Figure 5: Numerical drawn cup and springback after predictions present quite a good estimation of the
splitting - Barlat 91 yield criteria thickness evolution in those directions.
Fig.7 shows the stress evolution along the cup cir-
conference in the mid section of the cup wall, before
trimming and splitting operations. Hoop and axial
3.2 reSULtS aND DISCUSSION
stresses at both the internal and the external surface
Fig.6 compares the experimental force-displacement are plotted.
curves and the thickness evolution along cup wall The non-symmetrical distribution of hoop stresses
after the drawing stage with the numerical values. between the wall surfaces induces springback and
Experimental curves show the average values out the opening of the ring. Concerning the axial
of eight tests made. Numerical curves obtained stresses, the same phenomenom appears and induces
for constitutive models using an isotropic harden- that the shape of the ring after splitting is conical.
ing are not presented here : only numerical curves Table 3 presents experimental and numerical results
using mixed hardening (isotropic and kinematic) are for springback. Numerical results are presented for
shown. Nevertheless, results are slightly similar and all behaviour models and for different hardening
tendencies are the same as these presented here. laws, i.e. mixed hardening or isotropic hardening.
Numerical simulations present satisfaying results re-
garding the drawing process prediction (see Fig.6).
494
100 300
25°C
100°C
150°C
50 250 200°C
0 200
Stress (MPa)
Stress (MPa)
hoop stress − internal wall

−50 hoop stress − external wall 150
axial stress − internal wall
axial stress − external wall
−100 100
−150 50
−200 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.12 0.14 0.16 0.18
Angle from Rolling Direction (°) Strain
Figure 7: Hoop and axial stress evolution in the mid Figure 8: Tensile stress-strain curves of AA5754-O
section of the cup wall for several positions from RD for several temperatures at 2.10−3 s−1
- Barlat 91 yield criteria
perfomed in a heating furnace, for a temperature
Table 3: Springback values (in mm) for several ma-
range from 25◦ C to 200◦C. Tools dimensions are
terial models
the same as those given in table 2, except for the
blank-holder opening which is 104.5 mm in diame-
Experimental 64 ± 3 mm ter due to thermal dilatation of tools. Temperature
Hardening isotropic mixed is the same for all tools and is maintained constant
Von Mises 85 74 during all the forming process. Force-displacement
Hill 48 61.5 49 curves are proposed on Fig.9.
Barlat 91 95 85
60
Springback predictions are significantly different

50
from experimental values which confirms that
springback predictions in aluminum alloys present
hardly good results ([1], [3], [11]). However, simu- 40
Punch force (kN)
lation results show that material models have an in-

fluence on springback estimation. Using isotropic 30
and kinematic hardening simultaneously tends to
make springback estimation decrease whereas using 20 25°C
100°C
isotropic hardening gives higher values. Consider- 150°C
200°C
ing the yield functions, Hill 48 gives the best predic- 10
tion for ring opening while the others are quite far
from experimental data. It is interesting to note that
0
simulations using the Barlat 91 yield function gives 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Punch displacement (mm)
the worst results.
Figure 9: Force-displacement curves of the punch
4 INFLUeNCe OF teMperatUre during drawing for several temperatures
In this part, an experimental approach to charac-

terize the influence of temperature during forming
over springback is presented. Uniaxial tensile tests Cutting and splitting operations were made at room
with rectangular shaped samples were performed in temperature and were performed as described in
a heating chamber at different temperatures. Ten- part 2.2.
sile curves are presented on Fig.8. Temperature
control was made using a thermocouple during the Temperature during the forming process have a di-
whole test. Thermocouple was fixed on tensile rect impact over material and drawing data as shown
tools. An Instron dynamic extensometer (accuracy : on Fig.8 and Fig.9. The higher the temperature is,
± 0.15 %) was used to measure the strain in heat- the lower tensile stresses and drawing punch force
ing chamber. Strain rate was maintained constant at are. Concerning specially tensile tests, stresses seem
2.10−3 s−1 . not to decrease rapidly until the temperature reaches
Isothermal deep drawing processes have also been about 100◦C. In fact, at a fixed strain rate, stresses
495
stay constant until the PLC effect disappears with reFereNCeS

the increase of temperature from about 70◦ C to
[1] M. Y. Demeri, M. Lou, and M. J. Saran. A
100◦C. Then stresses decrease rapidly. The same
benchmark test for springback simulation in
effect can be observed on the punch displacement
sheet metal forming. Society of Automotive
curves, as the 70◦ C and the 100◦ C curves are su-
Engineers, Inc., 2000.
perposed with the room temperature-curve. Max-
[2] R. Echempati and V. M. S. Sathya Dev. Spring
imum punch-force decreases from about 56 kN at
back studies in aluminum alloys. In Society of
room temperature to 32 kN at 200◦ C.
Automotive Engineers, Inc. Demeri et al. [1].
Concerning springback, the influence of temperature [3] X. Li, Y. Yang, Y. Wang, J. Bao, and S. Li.
is shown on Fig.10. The opening gap is slightly con- Effect of the material-hardening mode on the
stant at a value of 64 mm from room temperature up springback simulation accuracy of v-free
to about 100◦ C, but then decreases to about 6 mm at bending. Journal of Materials Processing
200◦C. Technology, 123:209–211, April 2002.
[4] L. Geng and R. H. Wagoner. Role of plastic
anisotropy and its evolution on springback.
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,
44:123–148, January 2002.
[5] P.-Y. Manach and S. Thuillier. Caractérisation
d’un alliage d’aluminium al5754. Rapport de
contrat, 2004.
[6] G. Cailletaud and P. Pilvin. Identification and
inverse problems : a modular approach.
Material Parameter Estimation for Modern
Constitutive Equations, ASME, 43:33–45,
1988.
Figure 10: Springback after forming at several tem- [7] R. Von Mises. Mechanics of solids in plastic
peratures - drawing temperature range from 25◦ C states. GNMPK, 1:582, 1913.
to 200◦ C, trimming and splitting operations at room [8] S. Gallée. Caractérisation expérimentale et
temperature simulation numérique des procédés
d’emboutissage profond : application aux
aciers inoxydables austénitiques. PhD thesis,
Université de Bretagne-Sud, 2005.
[9] F. Barlat, D. J. Lege, and J. C. Brem. A
5 CONCLUSIONS
six-component yield function for anisotropic
materials. International Journal of Plasticity,
In this paper, an experimental and numerical study 7:693–712, 91.
of springback for AA5754-O is proposed. The [10] S. Thuillier, P.-Y. Manach, L. F. Menezes, and
whole process of the split-ring test is described. Nu- M. C. Oliveira. Experimental and numerical
merical results provide good agreement with exper- study of reverse re-drawing of anisotropic
imental forming process and show that the consti- sheet metals. Journal of Materials Processing
tutive model has a minor influence on drawing op- Technology, 125-126:764–771, 2002.
erations. However the springback can hardly be es- [11] A.J. Baptista, B.M. Chaparro, J.M. Antunes,
timated properly and depend heavily upon harden- D.M. Rodrigues, and L.F. Menezes.
ing contribution. Elastic modulus variation is actu- Numerical and experimental study on the
ally bound to be taken into account in our numerical splitting ring test for springback prediction.
models and has to be tested. International Deep Drawing Research Group,
Temperature during forming has also a great influ- 2005.
ence on experimental springback. Numerical simu-
lations using the material parameters identified from
tensile tests performed at several temperatures are
expected to confirm the residual stress states in the
cups as well as the opening of the rings.
6 aCKNOWLeDGeMeNt
The authors thank the Région Bretagne and the Eu-

ropean Union for their financial support.
496















            
               
             
  

             
             
             





        
       
       
             
        
 
               
            
            
        
        
      
         
      
        
       
 
        
           
           
       
       
      
      
             
             
 
                



497

     

      
        

 
  
 

      
     
       
        
         

      
          
        
         
  
  
  
 = −µ ⋅      
π   
   

 
σ =  + ε   
           
          
               
        
 =    
                
          
           
        

     
      
             
                 
        
  =(+)      
      
         
      
       

       
        

        









µ  
 = 
  

           
        
        
 
        
   ∆  
         
         


        
 


 


498

   


 ×       
      
       
 
         

 
        
        
 
      
  
 θ


 

       


ρ
     
θ
        
        


           
 

 




 
 




 
    
 


 

   

   
   
∆   


  
    ∆  ∆ ∆
  
          
          
          
          
          

        
        
      
       
             
499

              
         
         
                  
       
 
         
 


  ∆  ∆  ∆ 

       
       
       
       
       

  



       
 
          

  


        


        



      


 




  ∆  ∆  ∆

      
      
      

      

  
       
        
      




         

 


   
 
       

        
 
       


500

      

    
 

     

    

 
  
     
 
  
     
      
      
 
       
 
     
     
       
              
          
     
         
             
              
     
      
        
      
    
  
      

501
NUMERICAL SPRINGBACK EVALUATION FOR MODERN HIGH

STRENGTH STEELS USING ADVANCED MATERIAL MODELS
Alexander Faust1*, Karl Roll2

1
Daimler AG, PWT/VAS, 71059 Sindelfingen, alexander.faust@daimler.com
2
Daimler AG, PWT/VAS, 71059 Sindelfingen, karl.roll@daimler.com
ABSTRACT: Nowadays, springback prediction for mild steels is an established technique which is
successfully applied in the automotive industry. The rising importance of light weight constructions in car
body design lead to the development of advanced high strength steels such as dual phase, TRIP or TWIP
steels. The application of these steels in automotive products leads to the demand of predicting springback of
such steel grades with the same accuracy as of mild deep drawing grades, which still is a challenging task.
This article deals with the current approaches and proceedings in the field of springback prediction of
advanced high strength steels. The springback is investigated using a principle deep drawing part. The part is
drawn, the final geometry is digitalized. The deep drawing process is then modeled in the dynamic explicit
part of the FEM-code LS-DYNA, following an implicit springback analysis. The predicted part geometry is
compared to the experimentally gathered geometry and the differences are evaluated. Special attention is
spent here to the influence of different hardening models and the used yield loci. Investigated are
conventional isotropic hardening, isotropic kinematic hardening and anisotropic or directional hardening.
These hardening models are each combined with yield loci models of different complexity, starting with the
simple von Mises yield locus leading to complex models like actual Barlat yield loci.
KEYWORDS: springback, anisotropic hardening, kinematic hardening, high strength steel
1 INTRODUCTION 1989 (further referred as Yld89) [2]. Originally

designed for the simulation of aluminum alloys, it
The simulation of deep drawing processes has to has become a useful model in steel forming
fulfill three different criteria. The failure prediction simulations too. Unlike the Hill model, Yld89
of the material, the effects of planar anisotropy on takes into account shear stresses and belongs to the
the strain distribution and finally the elastic Hosford family of yield loci. The Barlat 2000 yield
springback behavior all have to be described in the locus (further referred as Yld2k) [3] is the most
correct manner. advanced yield locus in terms of describing the in
Since for a given formed part, the elastic plane anisotropy implemented in LS DYNA. It is
springback is nearly only a function of the stress an improvement of the Yld89 and very similar to
distribution within the part it is vital to get an the recent yield loci of Banabic [4]. The most
accurate calculation of the stresses within the simple yield locus is the one of von Mises [5] and
material during the forming process. Crucial for the is here treated as a reference.
calculation of stresses are primary the yield locus The most usual way to describe the work hardening
and the hardening rule. For that reason, the current in the framework of the FEM is the isotropic
article is dealing with the influences of different hardening model. In the case of isotropic
combinations of yield loci and hardening models hardening, the yield surface is simply expanded
on the springback prediction of a deep drawing depending on the equivalent plastic strain without a
part. change of its shape. The correlation of the
The most widespread yield locus is the on of Hill expansion of the yield surface and the equivalent
from 1948 [1] (further referred as Hill48). Due to plastic strain is established by a single hardening
its simplicity this model provides very fast curve which is usually derived from a uniaxial
computing times and satisfactory results and is tensile test. For many materials, this kind of
therefore very common, especially in industrial hardening description leads to satisfying results,
use. Also often used is Barlat’s yield locus from
____________________
* Corresponding author: Daimler AG, 71059 Sindelfingen, HPC 050-B512, +49 7031 90 79551, +49 7031 90 41656,
alexander.faust@daimler.com
503
but some effects, especially in modern high A more complex model for the Bauschinger effect
strength steels, are not covered by this hardening is provided by the user material model MF GenYld
model. These steels, especially those with of the company MATFEM. It’s so called Isokin
microstructural changes during forming, can model is very similar to the Chaboche model and
exhibit a severe anisotropy in hardening depending defines the back stress through the following
on the stress state. To take this effect into account, equation [8]:
the shape of the yield surface has to be depending
on the amount of strain and the nature of the
applied stress. The consequences of anisotropic Xx =
C1
γ1
(
⋅ 1− e
−γ 1⋅ε eq
) + Cγ ⋅ (1 − e
2 −γ 2 ⋅ε eq
) (1)
hardening on the strain distribution of deep drawn 2
parts were evaluated earlier by the authors [6]. The
Bauschinger effect is another hardening Xx is the experimental back stress in uniaxial
phenomenon, which is not covered by a simple reversal and C1, C2, γ1 and γ2 are material
isotropic hardening model. The Bauschinger effect parameters which have to be determined. As shown
occurs when the direction of an applied load in figure 1, this model allows a more accurate
changes and is modeled by a transition of the yield description of the material behavior in the case of a
locus during forming which is usually called load reversal. A drawback are the long calculation
kinematic hardening. times which are not primarily due to the hardening
Since the aim of this paper is to evaluate model, but rather because this is a user material
commercial models that are available in model and though not as fast as a native LS-DYNA
commercial FEM codes and so applicable in material model.
industrial use, only yield loci and hardening
models which are available in LS-DYNA are 2 EXPERIMENTAL AND
focused. In LS-DYNA, different kinematic NUMERICAL SETUP
hardening laws are implemented but they are
usually combined with a v. Mises yield locus what 2.1 EXPERIMENTAL
makes them inadequate for the simulation of For this article, three different steel grades were
anisotropic sheet metals. There are two practical chosen. As a reference, a low alloyed H340LAD, a
options which overcome this limitation. The dual phase steel DP600 and to represent materials
implementation of the Barlat 2000 yield locus with strain induced phase transitions a TRIP
features a very simple model that accounts for assisted high strength steel TRIP700.
kinematic hardening. A parameter β is created, To evaluate the springback behavior
which defines the drop of the current yield stress in experimentally deep drawing experiments were
the case of a load reversal (see figure 1). performed using a cruciform punch as it was used
in [9] before. The shape of the blank was chosen in
GenYld_Yld2k DYNA_Yld2k, BETA 0.1 a way that the final part is not a closed cross but
0.8 forms a u-shaped profile (see figure 2).
0.7
effective stress / GPa
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
tension compression
0.1
load reversal
0
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
effective plastic strain / -
Figure 2: drawn part and location of the section cut
Figure 1: comparison of different kinematic
for springback determination
hardening models
This shape was chosen to reduce the stiffness of the
The main advantage of this model is it’s simplicity
final part and increase the springback. A cruciform
since it comes along with only one parameter and
punch instead of straight u-shaped profile was used
provides short calculation times. The parameter β
to get more complex stress states within the final
is very similar to the back stress component in the
part. The produced specimens have been
Chaboche model [7]. But in contrast to the
digitalized without further cutting operations. In
Chaboche model, the parameter β is constant and this way, the experimental achieved final geometry
not a function of the plastic strain. This is a severe was available in a digital form as STL-data and so
simplification of the real material behavior. This could be treated in the post processing in the same
simple model also can’t deal with effects like early way than the numerical results.
replastification or work hardening stagnation.
504
2.2 NUMERICAL the results several section cuts were investigated.

According to the experimental boundary conditions In addition to this, the mean deviation of the whole
like blank holder force and drawing depth, the part from the measured geometry was calculated.
corresponding simulations were carried out using For reasons of clarity in the following chapters
LS-DYNA version 971. For the deep drawing only the results of a representative section cut
simulations, the dynamic explicit solver was used, which proceeds through the areas with the highest
while the springback calculations were done with displacements (see figure 2) are showed
the implicit solver. A static mesh with an initial
mesh size of 1 mm came into operation. No 3.1 H340LAD
adaptive mesh refinement was employed during the 1
MISES Hill48 iso Yld89 iso Yld2k iso
forming simulation and no coarsening or other 0.9
mesh operations were applied between forming 0.8
simulation and springback analysis. This is to 0.7
total deviation / mm
minimize the influence of numerical effects to the 0.6
springback results and to maximize the 0.5
comparability between the results. 0.4
At the time the simulations were done, LS-DYNA 0.3
did not support free springback without nodal 0.2
constraints, so a set of boundary conditions under 0.1
utilization of symmetry conditions was chosen 0
which matches a free springback as close as 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
treated length / mm
possible (figure 3).
Figure 4: comparison of different yield loci in
combination with isotropic hardening for H340LAD
1
Yld2k BETA0 Yld2k BETA 0.055
0.9 Yld2k BETA 0.075 Yld2k BETA 0.095
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Figure 3: Boundary conditions for springback. The treated length / mm
characters denote the constrained translational

Figure 5: effect of parameter β of LS-DYNA
degree of freedom. Material 133 for H340LAD
The exact combinations of yield loci and hardening 1

Hill48 iso Hill48 aniso Hill48 iso-kin
rules is shown in table 1 0.9 Yld2k iso Yld2k iso-kin
0.8
Table 1: used yield loci and hardening rules 0.7

0.6
von Mises Hill 48 Barlat 89 Barlat 2000
isotropic x x x x 0.5
anisotropic 0.4
x x
(MF GenYld) 0.3
simple kinematic 0.2
x
(MAT 133)
0.1
Isokin
x x 0
(MF GenYld)
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
treated length / mm
3 RESULTS Figure 6: comparison of isotropic hardening and

For the evaluation of the calculated results, the the Isokin model combined with Hill48 and Barlat
2000 yield loci for H340LAD
simulated and the measured geometries were
compared. The measured variable is the distance It points out, that the best result is achieved with
between the calculated mesh and the digitalized the Isokin hardening model in combination with
shape measured in normal direction from the mesh. the Barlat 2000 yield locus. The same hardening
To get a differentiated picture about the quality of
505
model gives the biggest deviation from the sophisticated yield loci leads to a substantial
measurement in combination with the Hill 48 yield improvement of the predicted springback. The best
locus, while the results for this yield surface in result is gained using the classical combination of a
combination with simple isotropic hardening are Hill 48 yield surface and an isotropic hardening
comparable to that of the Yld2k-Isokin rule and again the simple kinematic model
combination. The effect of the simple kinematic implemented in MAT 133 has no significant effect.
hardening model of Material type 133 is very small
and does not lead to an improvement of the result. 3.3 TRIP700
3.2 DP600 2 MISES Hill48 iso Yld89 iso Yld2k iso
1.4 1.8
MISES Hill48 iso Yld89 iso Yld2k iso
1.6
1.2
1.4
1
1.2
0.8 1
0.6 0.8
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
treated length / mm
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Figure 10: comparison of different yield loci in
treated length / mm
combination with isotropic hardening for TRIP700
Figure 7: comparison of different yield loci in
combination with isotropic hardening for DP600 1.8
Yld2k BETA 0.00 Yld2k BETA 0.10
1.6
1.2
Yld2k BETA 0.116 Ylad2k BETA 0.138 1.4
1
1.2
0.8
0.6 0.8
0.4 0.6
0.4
0.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
treated length / mm
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Figure 11: effect of parameter β of LS-DYNA
treated length / mm
Material 133 for TRIP700
Figure 8: effect of parameter β of LS-DYNA
Material 133 for DP600 2
Hill48 iso Hill48 aniso Hill48 iso-kin
1.8 Yld2k iso Yld2k iso-kin
2
Hill48 iso Hill48 aniso Hill48 iso-kin 1.6
1.8 Yld2k iso Yld2k iso-kin
1.4
1.6
1.2
1.4
1
1.2
0.8
1
0.8 0.6
0.6 0.4
0.4 0.2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
0.2
treated length / mm
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 Figure 12: comparison of isotropic hardening and
treated length / mm
the Isokin model combined with Hill48 and Barlat
Figure 9: comparison of isotropic hardening and 2000 yield loci for TRIP700
the Isokin model combined with Hill48 and Barlat
2000 yield loci for DP600 The results for the TRIP700 steel grade are in
principal very similar to the ones from the
For the DP600 steel, neither the use of the H340LAD, but a higher overall level of deviation
kinematic hardening models, nor of the between measurement and simulation. Again the
506
Isokin hardening model combined with the Barlat more competitive when using fully austenitic
2000 yield surface gives the best results and again stainless steels or TWIP-steels, since these types of
the combination of the Hill 48 yield locus with the materials are showing a strong dependency of their
kinematic model is not accompanied by an hardening behavior from the current stress state.
improvement of the result while this yield function The final conclusion is that against the background
in combination with isotropic hardening leads to of the here presented results there is no general
satisfying results. recommendation for the use of kinematic
hardening models. The user has to decide based on
4 CONCLUSIONS the used material, the geometry of the formed part
and the requirements regarding the accuracy of the
As expected the accuracy of the spring back springback prediction whether the cost of the
prediction decreases with increasing strength of the kinematic hardening model is justified or not. The
material and the complexity of the microstructure. employment of a Hill 48 yield locus and an
It points out, that for none of the investigated steel isotropic hardening rule leads to results which
grades the use of kinematic hardening model can satisfy the needs of most industrial applications.
be recommended in general. The first conclusion is
that to take into account the kinematic hardening
5 REFERENCES
one has to use a model of adequate complexity.
The simple dropdown of the current yield stress by [1] Hill, R.: A theory of the yielding and plastic
the parameter β, which is done by the LS-DYNA flow of anisotropic metals. Proc. Roy. Soc.
Material 133 is useless to counterproductive. The A193, 281-297, 1948.
investigations showed that in this case it is better to [2] Barlat, F., Lian, J.: Plastic behavior and
use a simple yield locus with a simple isotropic stretchability of sheet metals. Part I: A yield
hardening, since this combination leads to better function for orthotropic sheets under plane
results than an inadequate description of the stress conditions. International Journal of
kinematic hardening. In contrast to this, the Plasticity 5, 51-66, 1989.
application of the Isokin model available in MF [3] Barlat, F., Brem, J. C., Yoon, J. W., Chung,
GenYld combined with the very flexible Barlat K., Dick, R. E., Lege, D. J., Pourboghrat, F.,
2000 yield function generates a real improvement Choi, S.-H., Chu E.: Plane stress yield
of spring back prediction, expect for the DP600 function for aluminium alloy sheets – part 1:
steel. But at this point the user has to deliberate theory. International Journal of Plasticity, 19,
about costs and benefits. The prediction of the final 1297-1319, 2003.
geometry of the H340LAD part is even with the [4] Banabic, D., Aretz, H., Comsa, D. S.,
simple isotropic Hill 48 model quite good and in Paraianu, L.: An improved analytical
industrial applications the use of more cost description of orthotropy in metallic sheets.
intensive model is not justifiable. The situation International Journal of Plasticity 21, 493-
changes when one uses TRIP steels. For these steel 512, 2005.
grades the predicted shape of the final part is not as [5] von Mises, R.: Mechanik der plastischen
close to the reality as it should be, so there is a real Formänderung von Kristallen. Z. angew.
need for improved modeling. The consideration of Math. Mech. 8, 161, 1928
the kinematic hardening is here an adequate way to [6] Faust, A., Roll, K., Kessler, L.: Deep Drawing
get this improvement. Another approach would be Simulation Of High And Ultrahigh Strength
to take into account the phase transition during Steels Under Consideration Of Anisotropic
forming in these kinds of steels. The current Hardening. In: NUMIFORM 2007, June
modeling ignores these phase transitions 2007, Porto.
completely which leads to wrong stress predictions [7] Lemaitre, J., Chaboche, J.-L.: Mechanics of
and thus incorrect springback calculations. But solid materials. Camebridge University Press,
current approaches to this topic (e.g. by Haensel 1990.
[10]) have some limitations. On the one hand, the [8] Gese, H., Oberhofer, G.: MF GenYld +
parameter identification of these models is very CrachFEM Theory Manual, MATFEM, 2007
complex, on the other hand they do not take into [9] Roll, K., Faust, A., Kessler, L.:
account the stress state dependency of the phase Tiefziehsimulation hochfester Stähle unter
transitions. Berücksichtigung anisotroper Verfestigung.
For all the investigated materials, the calculations In: EFB-Kolloquium Blechverarveitung 2007,
with the anisotropic hardening model don’t March 2007, Fellbach.
produce improved results. So from the point of [10] Haensel, A.: Nicht isothermes
springback prediction the utilization of this model Werkstoffmodell für die FE-Simulation von
makes no sense. It has to be stated that the steel Blechwerkstoffen mit metastabilen
grades considered in this article does not exhibit a austenitischen CrNi-Stählen. Fortschr.-Ber.
severe anisotropic hardening. It is supposable that VDI Reihe 2 Nr. 491, 1998.
the results of the anisotropic hardening model are
507
StUDY ON the aCCUraCY OF SprINGBaCK preDICtIONS BY

FINIte eLeMeNt aNaLYSIS
M. Gösling1*, a. Brosius1, a. e. tekkaya1

1
Institute of Forming Technology and Lightweight Construction,
Dortmund University of Technology, Germany
aBStraCt: The objective of this study is to analyze the accuracy of springback prediction by finite
element analysis (FEA). Predicting springback by FEA requires the correct choice of model asumptions and
the settings of input parameters such as mesh density, friction, and material properties. In this paper, the
springback prediction for the hat shape drawing test (similar to Numisheet´93 Benchmark) is analyzed. The
material behaviour is defined in tensile tests and cyclic shear tests. The observed Bauschinger effect is
considered by a combined isotropic-kinematic hardening model. The influence of numerical input
parameters is studied and optimized by the Response-Surface-Methodolgy. Using the defined parameter
settings, springback experiments were reproduced numerically. The investigations show that springback
prediction is more accurate if a combined isotropic-kinematic hardening is taken into account. Further, it is
shown that a springback prediction is very sensitive to numerical input parameters. Small changes in
numerical input parameters can result in big differences in the predicted springback. But a numerical
reasonable parameter setting which allows efficient and correct springback predictions for all experiments in
a general way could not be found.
KeYWOrDS: Sheet Metal Forming, Springback, FEA.
1 INtrODUCtION because accuracy strongly depends on model

assumptions such as material model [1,2] and
Lightweight construction is one of the central because of its great sensitivity to numerical as well
challenges for engineering scientific research as as physical parameters.
well as its implementation, for instance in One major reason for poor springback prediction
transportation engineering. For sheet metal forming can be seen in the insufficient prediction of the
this means an application of materials with higher final stress state before springback takes place.
strength and with lower sheet thickness. One Springback is caused by different membrane
drawback with increasing strength and decreasing stresses in flanges and bending stresses
sheet thickness is the increase of springback after transversally through the sheet thickness. Shape
the manufacturing process. Springback, induced by deviations due to different membrane stresses can
the reduction of elastic deformation energy during be calculated correctly, but the shape deviations
unloading, is a key problem influencing product caused by bending stresses across the sheet
quality in deep drawing. It results in a deviation thickness are harder to predict [3]. In a deep
from the desired shape that needs to be drawing process, the material undergoes bending,
compensated. Nowadays, this is done in an unbending, stretching, and compression, often
iterative experimental way in the workshop. Based comprising a load reversal. After a load reversal, a
on the experience of the tool maker, the shape so-called “Bauschinger effect” can occur,
deviations are minimized stepwise by modifying depending on the material. A “Bauschinger effect”
the tool geometry. To overcome this time- means a reduction of the yield stress when the
consuming method, the springback should be loading direction is reversed. The Bauschinger
compensated by a computer-supported effect is not taken into account by an isotropic
modification of the process and the tool surfaces. hardening model, which is usually used for FE-
Therefore, it is necessary to calculate the shape simulations in sheet metal forming.
deviation precisely at an early stage, for example A further problem is that springback prediction is
by Finite-Element-Analysis (FEA). Springback sensitive to various numerical issues. On the one
prediction by FEA requires a lot of experience
____________________
* Corresponding author: Baroper Str. 301, D-44227 Dortmund, Germany, phone +49 2317552654, fax +49 2317552489,
marco.goesling@iul.tu-dortmund.de
509
hand, numerical model assumptions such as the

time integration influence the prediction result. On
the other hand, numerical parameters such as the
mesh density have an effect on the simulation
[3,4,5,6,7].
In this paper, FEA springback predictions for the
hat shape drawing test (similar to Numisheet´93
benchmark) are shown. These predictions are based
on physical measurements of the hardening
behaviour and numerical studies about the
influence of numerical parameters.
2 eXperIMeNtaL reSULtS
Evaluating the quality of a springback prediction
requires experimental data to compare simulation Figure 2: Experimental springback results
and experiment. For these investigations, hat-shape
drawing was selected, because springback is higher In order to carry out a FE-simulation, it is
in comparison to a cup drawing due to the lower necessary to characterize the material behavior. In
part stiffness. Further, the springback prediction by sheet metal forming, material characterization
FEA is difficult, because the dominating stress usually comprises uni-axial tensile tests in different
state is caused by a stretch-bending. The details of rolling directions for the determination of elasto-
the process setup are displayed in Figure 1. plastic material properties and of plane anisotropy.
To describe the material behavior after a load
reversal, a conventional tensile test is not suitable.
Therefore, cyclic shear tests were conducted.
Details about the test setup can be found in [8,9].
The observed stress-strain curves for the material
in sheet thickness 0.3 mm are displayed
in Figure 3. It has to be mentioned that the
material is a special grade (non-standard). It is a
zinc coated and microalloyed low carbon steel.
Figure 1: Process setup
A Sheet Testing Machine Erichsen 142/20 and high

strength steel are used for these experiments. The
experiments were conducted following a full
factorial design of experiments varying the punch
stroke (PS) and the blankholder force (BHF) on
three levels.
After forming, the resulting part geometry is
measured. Using the optical measuring system
Athos (GOM), 2-D section cuts are determined in
the middle plane of the parts. A deviation between
target geometry and measured geometry occurs in
the side wall and the flange. This springback
behavior is described by the side wall curvature ȡ
and the flange angle ș2. The measured results are Figure 3: Stress-strain-curves
summarized in Figure 2. The springback decreases As it can be seen from the results, the material
with increasing blankholder force and with exhibits Bauschinger effect. During the cyclic
decreasing punch stroke. shear test, a lower stress level is observed after
As the blank slides over the die radius, it undergoes reversing the loading direction. The reduction of
bending-unbending deformations developing cyclic the yield stress can be described by kinematic
bending loads. When the blank is entering the draw hardening. In the most commercial FE-codes for
radius, tensile stresses appear in the outer layer of sheet metal forming, this can be considered by the
the sheet and compressive stresses in the inner hardening model of Armstrong-Frederic-Chaboche
layer. The subsequent straightening of the sheet (AFC) [10,11]. In this model, the so-called
inverts the stress distribution, a load reversal backstress tensor X is postulated, which describes
occurs.
510
the displacement of the yield surface in the stress observed punch forces (see Figure 4).
space during plastic deformation. The backstress Figure 4 (left) illustrates the development of the
tensor is defined by the kinematic saturation stress experimentally observed punch force during the
Xsat and the kinematic hardening rate CX. Further, punch stroke. In a numerical study, the friction
the hardening model comprises an isotropic part, coefficient was varied for different blankholder
which describes an expanding of the yield surface. forces. Figure 4 (right) shows the numerically
This is defined by the isotropic saturation stress observed average punch force. The numerical
Rsat and the isotropic hardening rate CR. The punch force fits to the experimental punch force for
material parameters were determined by using a a friction coefficient of µ = 0.04. The excellent
best fit over the experimental data. sliding is caused by the sheet metal and the
Therefore, equation (1) is used for the flowstress kf lubricant. The sheet metal is zinc coated and the
before load reversal and equation (2) for the lubricant is wax (Gleitmo 2345V).
flowstress after load reversal:
kf0 V0 R X0
R Rsat ª1 eCrM º (1)

¬« ¼»
X0 X sat ª1 eC xM º
¬« ¼»
k f 1 V 0 R X1
X1 X sat ª¬ X Ch X sat º¼ e C x (M MCh ) (2)

X Ch X 0 (MCh ) X sat ª1 eCxMCh º
«¬ »¼ Figure 4: Punch forces and friction values
A springback prediction of the hat shape drawing

In equation (2), ĳCh is the plastic true strain at the
test is very sensitive to numerical parameters such
change of the loading direction.
as the discretisation. Preminaly tests were carried
The material model compared with the
out in order to define some of their values using the
measurement show a good agreement before load
Response-Surface-Methodology (RSM) [13].
reversal but differences after load reversal.
Therefore, a central composite design is used to
Especially in the first phase after unloading, the
analyze blank element size (BES), number of
material is much softer than the material model.
integration points (NIP), number of elements about
These differences emphasize the limits of the
tool radii (NER), and punch velocity (PVE). In this
chosen model. It has to be mentioned that a second
study, the blankholder force and the punch stroke
backstress term can mitigate the discrepancy [12],
are not varied and were set to fixed values.
which was not considered in this study.
A linear meta-model of second order is fitted to the
numerically observed springback values. The
3 NUMerICaL StUDY model assumption of the meta-model is illustrated
The finite element analysis of deep drawing is in equation (3):
usually conducted in two steps: the forming n n 1 n
analysis and the springback analysis. To obtain a
fast, stable, and accurate simulation, the forming
yi b0 ¦ b x ¦¦ b
j 1
j ij
j 1 n! j
jn x ji xin ¦b
j 1
2
jj xij H i (3)
analysis is done by explicit time integration, and

th
for the springback analysis, the implicit time In equation (3), yi is the i springback observation
integration method is used. The tools are described based on the parameter settings xj, bj are unknown
by rigid bodies and the blank by reduced integrated model parameters, and İi is an unknown random
Belytschko-Tsay shell elements. For the contact error.
between blank and tools, a nonlinear penalty Figure 5 shows contour surfaces of the side wall
contact algorithm and the friction law of Coulomb curvature ȡ and the flange angle ș2 according to the
was used. The material behavior is described by the considered parameters.
combined isotropic-kinematic hardening model of The calculated springback is mainly influenced by
Armstrong-Frederic-Chaboche with an assumed the mesh density (BES and NER). For high mesh
yield locus of Hill´48. The process is simulated by densities, a maximum of the springack predictions
PAMSTAMP 2G (Version 2007) from ESI. can be observed, which can be interpreted as
To build up a FE-model, input parameters have to saturation. It has to be noted that the meta-model
be chosen, describing the material behavior, the uses a model assumption of second order, which
friction, and the discretisation. The material cannot describe saturation. In order to obtain an
parameters can be obtained from material tests (see accurate simulation result, from a numerical point
above). The friction coefficient was determined by of view, a blank element size of 0.6 mm and 15
comparing experimentally and numerically elements about tool radii were chosen.
511
blankholder forces, good springback predictions

were made for the flange and poor springback
50 predictions for the sidewall. The average for the
T 2 in °
40 deviation in the flange angle is Dș2 = 8.15% and in

30 the sidewall curvature Dȡ = 6.72%.
20 20
0.3 0.6 0.9 10
15
0 1 2 3 4 5 357 9 Further, the springback experiments were
1.2 5
BES in mm N ER
PVE in m/s NIP simulated with different model assumptions and
Radj
2
= 0.90 with different values for NIP and PVE. The
number of integration points (NIP) was increased
0.020 and the punch velocity was reduced. The hardening
model was changed from combined isotropic-
-1
0.015
U in mm
0.010 kinematic to pure isotropic. The element

0.005 20 formulation was changed from reduced integrated
15 0 1 2 3 4 5 357 9
0.3 0.6
0.9 1.2 5
10 Belytschko-Tsay shell element to the fully
ER NIP
BES in mm N PVE in m/s integrated Belytschko-Wong-Chiang shell element.
Radj
2
= 0.85
The contact model was changed from the non
BES - Blank element size
T2 NER - Number of elements
linear penalty model to a conventional linear
R about tool radii penalty model. The results of these studies are
NIP - Number of integration summarized in Figure 7.
points
PVE - Punch velocity
BHF = 5.9 kN; BHF - Blankholder Force
PS = 50 mm PS - Punch Stroke
Figure 5: Influence of numerical parameters
For the punch velocity and the number of

integration points, a maximum or minimum cannot
be observed in the analyzed parameter range.
Because the effects of these parameters are small
(compared to BES and NER), the parameters were
firstly set to NIP = 5 and PVE = 3.5 m/s in order to
obtain a fast simulation.
Next, all springback experiments were simulated
using the defined parameter settings. The
deviations between simulation and experiment are
presented in Figure 6.
Figure 7: Influence of model assumptions
A combined isotropic-kinematic hardening and a

non-linear penalty contact is leading to an
improvement of the springback prediction.
Changing from reduced integrated to fully
integrated shell elements has only small effects on
the springback prediction. Increasing the number of
integration points and decreasing the punch
velocity do not improve the result.
4 CONCLUSIONS
Figure 6: Deviation of simulations to experiments
Considering the stress states occurring in sheet
Poor springback predictions were made for small metal forming processes requires a realistic
punch strokes in the flange and for small material model describing true hardening effects. If
blankholder forces in the side wall. The side wall a material exhibits Bauschinger effect, a combined
curvature ȡ is underpredicted for small blankholder isotropic-kinematic hardening model improves the
forces and the flange angle ș2 is overpredicted for simulation result compared to pure isotropic
small punch strokes. For the Blankholder force, an hardening. The considered material model is not
opposing effect can be observed. For small able to fit exactly to the experimentally observed
512
cyclic stress-strain curve. This may be a reason for NUMISHEET Conference, 2001, Jeju Island,
the poor springback predictions for small Korea, pp. 85-90.
blankholder forces. If the blankholder force is [2] Olivera, M.; Alves, J.; Chaparro, B.; Menezes,
small, the bending stresses dominate the stress L.: Study on the influence of work-hardening
distribution. So springback is larger and the modelling in springback prediction.
simulation is more challenging and more sensitive International Journal of Plasticity, Vol. 23,
to the Bauschinger effect. No. 3, pp. 516-543, 2006, ISSN 0749-6419.
The springback prediction and respectively the [3] Roll, K.; Lembke, K.; Wiegand, K.:
predicted stress state are very sensitive to Possibilities and Strategies for Simulations
numerical parameters. But a numerical reasonable and Compensations for Springback.
and efficient parameter setting could not be found, Proceedings of the Numisheet 2005, Detroit,
which is compatible with all experimentally USA, Melville, New York, pp. 295 – 302.
observed springback values. The blank element ISBN 0-7354-0265-5
size and the number of elements about tool radii [4] Lee, S.W.; Yang, D.Y.: An assessment of
have strong effects on the simulation result. For numerical parameters influencing springback
these parameters, it is possible to define robust in explicit finite element analysis of sheet
parameter settings, which means: Slight changes in metal forming process. Journal of Materials
the parameter settings have only little effect on the Processing Technology, Vol. 80-81, 1998, pp.
simulation result. For the punch velocity and the 60-67, ISSN 0924-0136.
number of integration points, such a parameter [5] Xu, W.L.; Ma, C.H.; Li, C.H.; Feng, W.J.:
setting could not be found. Such a parameter Sensitive factors in springback simululation
setting exists probably in a parameter range with for sheet metal forming. Journal of Materials
more integration points and slower punch Processing Technology, Vol. 151, 2004, pp.
velocities. But this would increase the calculation 217-222, ISSN 0924-0136.
time. So this is not an alternative solution from a [6] Wagoner, R.H.; Li, M.: Simulation of
practical point of view. Further, the obtained springback: Through-thickness integration.
results show that this would not improve the International Journal of Plasticity. Vol. 23,
results. But from a theoretical point of view, more 2007, pp. 345-360, ISSN 0749-6419.
integration points and slower punch velocities [7] Gösling, M.; Kracker, H.; Brosius, A.;
should improve the results. Gather, U.; Tekkaya, A.E.: Study of the
This seems to be a fundamental problem of an influence of input parameters on a springback
explicit forming simulation with shell elements. prediction by FEA. Proceedings of the
For predicting the stress state in an accurate way, IDDRG 2007 Conference, Györ, Hungary.
such a modelling strategy requires a lot of [8] Schikorra, M.; Brosius, A.; Kleiner, M.:
experience. Small changes in numerical input Determination of Anisotopic Hardening Sheet
parameters can result in big differences in the Metals by Shear Tests. Proceedings of the
predicted stress state and, consequently, in the Numisheet 2005, Detroit, USA, Melville,
predicted springback. New York, pp. 389 – 394.
Further investigations are planed to analyze the [9] Govindarajan, R.; Schikorra, M.; Brosius, A.;
prediction accuracy using an implicit forming Kleiner, M.: Investigation of Anistotropic
simulation with solid elements. The aim of these Hardening Behavior using Cyclic Shear Tests
studies is to clarify if different time integration and Orthogonal Tests. Proceedings of the
scheme and different element types improve the ESAFORM 2006 Conference, Glasgow UK,
results and are less sensitive to numerical input pp. 319– 322, 2006, ISBN 83-89541-68-8.
parameters. [10] Armstrong, P.J.; Frederick, C.O.: A
Mathematical Representation of the
5 aCKNOWLeDGeMeNt Multiaxial Bauschinger Effect. Report
RD/B/N 731, Central Electricity, Generating
The cooperative research program “3D-Surface Board Berkeley Nuclear Laboratories, CA,
Engineering of Tools for Sheet Metal Forming – 1966.
Manufacturing, Modelling, Machining (SFB708)” [11] Lemaitre, J.; Chaboche, J.-L.: Mechanics of
is kindly supported by the German Research Solid Materials. Cambridge University Press,
Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft Cambridge, 1985.
DFG), the central public funding organisation for [12] Krasovskyy, A.; Schmitt W.; Riedel, H.:
academic research in Germany. Material Characterisation for Reliable and
Efficient Springback Prediction in Sheet
6 reFereNCeS Metal Forming. Steel Research int. 77 (2006)
[1] Duffett, G.; Wyler, R.; De la Cruz, C.: No. 9-10, pp 747. – 753, ISSN 0177-4832.
Material Hardening Model Sensitivity in [13] Myers, R; Montgomery, D.: Response Surface
Springback Predictions. Proceedings of Methodology, Wiley, New York, 1995.
513


























               
             
              
            




         

             
            
        
        
           
        
       
       
         
  
     
           
            
     

       

 




515

              
    
      
      
           
        
 
  


 

 
        
          
        
            
                
       
 
      



     
     





    

     


      

       
      
   
     



      
     
     
     
      
     
    


      
      
       
     
    
      
   

516

        

 
         
             
     
             
           
             
       
             
       
            
     
            
       
      
        

       
       
      
      
      


 
 
       

             
           
     
        
            
      
     
  
       
      
       
 
            
 
      
      
     
      

     

517


 


       
      
      
      
       
   

         
      


 
  

           
  
  
     
        
      
        
 
 
        

       





       



 
            
         
        
         
518

                  
          
              
 
               
       
      
       


          
      
        




       


    
       




 


      
     
        
       

 

      
 
  
   
 
 
        
         

    







519

  
       
        
        
 

 
 



 



 


      

      


       
        
         
      
      
     


 


        
     
      
    
      
      
      
     
    
         
     
     
     
        
     
      
      


520
LOCaLIZeD WarMING OF Sheet MetaL partS FOr the

reDUCtION OF SprINGBaCK
Matteo Strano1*, antonio Del prete2, teresa primo2, alessia Mentella1

1
University of Cassino, Department of Industrial Engineering
2
University of Salento, Department of Innovation Engineering
aBStraCt: The purpose of the present paper is to present the results obtained during the
experimentation of a new methodology for the springback reduction in sheet metal forming operations. The
proposed innovative approach involves the following steps: 1) cold forming a sheet metal part to a specified
shape, 2) locally heating the part up to a warm temperature, 3) waiting until the part cools down, 4)
removing the loads and tools. The temperature increase is only localized, thanks to a concentrated source
that affects exclusively the component areas subjected to greater stress concentration or to greater bending
deformation. This operation allows a localized stress relieving that reduces the elastic recovery of the
deformed piece, once removed from the dies. The finite element method has been used to model the thermo-
mechanical deformation of the workpiece and it has helped in understanding the effect of the post-
deformation heating on the workpiece and in improving the proposed methodology, which could be of great
interest for industrial applications.
KeYWOrDS: Springback, warm forming, stretch bending, draw bending, numerical simulation
1 INtrODUCtION thermal residual strains is used as the fundamental

mechanism of the laser forming process [9].
In industrial sheet metal forming processes, heating Nevertheless, no studies can be found, to the
the blanks may offer several technological authors’ knowledge, about processes where the
advantages, from different points of view. Among formed blank are heated post-deformation, i.e. after
the benefits of using warm or high temperature a regular cold forming process, before springback.
processes we may count the possibility of reducing The purpose of the present paper is to demonstrate
or eliminating the phenomenon of elastic the feasibility of a new method for the reduction of
springback after forming [1-5]. A sheet formed at springback of thin sheet metal alloys. The method
an adequate warm or hot temperature usually consists of cold forming the part (e.g. stamping or
shows a significant reduction of the amount of bending) and, afterwards, locally heating it (i.e. by
springback. Usually, springback is more relevant a laser beam), before removing the forming tools
when bending occurs, although the process and the blankholding forces, i.e. before letting the
capability of most sheet metal forming operations part springback; only areas where the largest
can be affected to some extent by the intrinsic bending strains occur should be targeted. Clearly,
variability of the elastic recovery. The reduction of the method is useful only if at least one surface of
springback is mainly due to the reduction of mean the part is accessible, i.e. is not completely closed
and effective stresses occurring with increasing within a die set. If several spots must be heated
temperature. This reduction is observed although during the same operations, the zones which have
the Young’s E and shear G elastic moduli linearly been heated first will cool down as the other zones
decrease with increasing temperature for nearly all are being treated. After the maximum temperature
metallic materials [6-8]. Tmax registered in the whole part has cooled down
The interest of the scientific community and of to a given value (not necessarily the room
manufacturing companies towards heat assisted temperature), the clamping forces can be removed
forming processes of sheet metals is recent and and the part can, eventually, springback.
growing and this is also testified by several recent The study has been experimentally and numerically
publications on the subject. Besides, the idea of conducted. Two different FEM codes have been
locally warming the blanks by means of a used, based on different numerical formulations.
concentrated heat source in order to determine
____________________
* Corresponding author: via Di Biasio 43, 03043 Cassino (FR), Italy, +3907762993719, m.strano@unicas.it
521
2 eXperIMeNtaL SetUp
Two different kinds of mechanical tests, simple
bending (Figure 1) and stretch bending (Figure 2)
conducted with and without post-deformation
heating will be described as follows. They have
been used in order to develop and verify the
proposed methodology, together with a third kind
of test (draw bending), whose description will be
omitted. All tests have been performed on
rectangular thin sheet metal blanks made by
different materials and with different wall
thickness values. The same equipment and tooling,
Figure 1: Simple bending test
shown in Figure 3, can be used for both tests. The
blankholder force BHF clamps with a maximum
force of 6 tons, which is able to inhibit any draw-in
towards the punch. The punch is dome-shaped, the
central part having a larger curvature radius (100
mm) than the outer portion (50 mm). The punch is
equipped with internal holes and cavities for the
insertion, when needed, of heating devices and
sensors. In simple bending tests, the rectangular
sample is clamped only on one side and its length
is half the length of the specimens used in stretch
drawing, which are clamped on both sides. The
state of stress and strain can be obviously changed
by controlling the velocity and total stroke s of the
punch. However, in the present study the velocity Figure 2: Stretch bending test
profile of the punch has been kept constant to a
trapezoidal shape with a maximum value of 1
mm/s. The combinations of materials and shapes of
the specimens used in the study are reported in
Table 1 and Table 2.
Table 1: some pictures of the used specimens
test type images
simple bending
stretch bending
Table 2: shapes, material and wall thickness values

used in the experimental tests
Figure 3: Tooling with detail of the punch
test size material & initial thickness t0
type 3 SIMpLe BeNDING teStS
simple 110×10 Aluminium alloy AA 1050-0, t0 0.6
bending mm mm and 1 mm In simple bending (see Figure 4), the punch stroke
Magnesium alloy AZ31, 1.6 mm has been varied within the interval 40-60 mm, and
Low carbon steel (zinc coated), t0 the final springback of the part has been registered
1.5 mm through the residual bending angle D, measured
stretch 220×10 Aluminium alloys AA 1050-0, 1 after removing the specimen from the press. The
bending mm mm and AA 2024-T3, 0.3 mm angle measured after cold forming and unloading
Magnesium alloy AZ31, t0 1.6 mm tests is named Dc.
522
In Figure 6, the average values of 'D% obtained

IR with different combinations is plotted. In most
th e
rm
oc 230°C
am Dc D25°C
era w
230°C
K-type
thermocouple Tmax= 230°C
Dw
Al 1050-0,
wall thickness 0.6 mm
Dc
heating
Figure 4: Angle D measured after bending tests Figure 5: Final shapes after bending tests
As mentioned in the Introduction, tests with post-
deformation heating have been conducted as well.
'D%
Since the largest stress and strain values can be
registered at the bottom fibres of the sample, close
to the radius of the blankholder (as pointed by the
arrow in Figure 4), during tests with warm heating
after forming, local heating is performed only in
this area, by means of a small Bunsen burner
generally used for mini-welding tasks, able to heat
the strips up to 350°C, depending on the material
and the heating time. The temperature has been
monitored with a type k thermocouple placed on
the opposite face of the specimen, i.e. between the
sample and the blankholder radius. An infrared
thermocamera has been placed over the strips in
order to register the temperature map on the top
free surface. The test procedure is as follows.
Temperature Tmax [°C]
1. Rectangular strips are cut and clamped on one
short side with maximum BHF. Figure 6: Final shapes after bending tests
2. Punch is moved up to 40-60 mm with nearly
constant speed (trapezoidal profile) and sheets cases (except for steel, which is evidently not
are bent at room temperature. affected by the Tmax reached), the residual angle
3. Punch is stopped and samples are heated up to increases with increasing maximum temperature
a known maximum temperature Tmax, for a and seems to increase with decreasing thickness t0.
know heating time, with local heating applied
where pointed by the arrow in Figure 4. 3.1 NUMerICaL SIMULatIONS
4. Heater is removed and punch holds until the An FEM simulation model has been developed in
specimen is cooled to about 30°C. order to describe and explain the mechanisms of
5. Punch moves down, the strip is unclamped and the proposed process. A plain strain 2D model has
the final bending angle Dw is measured. been used with 4 through-the-thickness brick
Each experimental condition has been replicated elements (4 nodes) and coupled thermo-mechanical
twice. Tests clearly show that the treatment analysis. Given the small amount of plastic strain
significantly reduces the angle of springback. As observed during the experiments, the Green-
an example, in Figure 5, the final shapes and angles Lagrange strain tensor and the 2nd Piola- Kirchhoff
of two aluminium specimens are shown, one has stress tensor have been used. Implicit Lagrangian
been formed and unloaded at room temperature, integration has been performed. The material is
the other has undergone the mentioned procedure elastic-plastic with isotropic Johnson-Cook [10]
up to 290°C. In the same figure, both samples are hardening:
also shown by a side view, when they are still m
e · § T 18 · (2)
clamped by the blankholder. After this test, the s §
©
n

A Be ¨1 C ln
0.01 ¸ ¨¨1 T
¹©
¸
¸
melting 18 ¹
percentage increase of the final angle obtained
thanks to the proposed method can be measured: Some material properties, namely the elastic E
D w Dc modulus and Poisson’s coefficient and the thermal
'D % 100 (1) expansion coefficient have been modelled as
Dc
523
dependent on the temperature T. The data used for 'D%=15 %, which is not very different from the
material AZ31, t0=1.6 mm are reported in Table 3. experimental value (19 %, see also Figure 6).
This example demonstrates that the FEM
Table 3: material data used for AZ31 underestimates the effect of the proposed method,
but it can be used to study the evolution of stress,
A B C n m Tmelting
170 412.16 0.0223 0.223 0.06943 618
strain and forces during the process, i.e. to explain
the thermo mechanics of the phenomenon. In fact,
T [C°] E [MPa] poisson thermal exp [mm/mm*C°] the evolution of the process could be followed with
the aid of Figure 8, where the stress-strain history
0 49500 0.30 0.00002400
of the node corresponding to the point indicated by
20 49000 0.31 0.00002415 the arrow in Figure 4 is shown.
100 46000 0.32 0.00002505
200 43000 0.34 0.00002580 120
300 40000 0.36 0.00002655
400 37000 0.38 0.00002715 100
500 34000 0.4 0.00002760

80
Stress [MPa]
The temperature history recorded by the thermo- cold forming
60
couple and mapped by the thermo-camera has been heating
imposed to the corresponding nodes of the meshed 40 cooling
blank, hence no heat source has been modelled and springback
no heat exchange has been modelled between the 20
workpiece and the environment nor the tools.
Therefore, the temperature of the remaining nodes 0
is determined by the code only thanks to 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
conduction through the workpiece. In Figure 7, the Equivalent total strain
map of the equivalent total strain in the bending
Figure 8: Final shapes after bending tests
area of the sample can be seen at the end of the
cold bending phase, with punch stopped. The plot is divided into four sections: 1) “cold
forming”: while the punch moves and the sheet is
kept up at room temperature, stress and strain both
increase; 2) “heating”: while the punch is hold in
the upper position and the sheet is warmed up, the
stress goes rapidly down and the strain remains
nearly constant; 3) “cooling”: while the punch still
holds the point is compressed due to thermal
shrinking and stresses goes up again, nearly to the
previous level; 4) “springback”: the punch moves
down with the sheet nearly at room temperature;
the level of stress increases as the sheet springs
back, due to the formation of residual stresses.
4 StretCh BeNDING teStS

In stretch bending, local heating after deformation
has been applied thanks to an infrared spot heater,
placed on top of the workpiece with a small
standoff distance (< 1 mm). Blanks are previously
painted black in order to increase the IR
absorption. The distribution of stress and strain
after cold forming is not concentred in a small
Figure 7: Map of equivalent of total strain after cold region as in the previous case. Figure 9 shows the
bending strain distribution along the length of the samples.
The regions with the greatest bending strain have
The simulation of the down stroke of the punch, been heated. The springback can be measured by
i.e. the simulation of springback has been the reduction of the dome height h, measured after
performed with and without heating the workpiece the punch has come down, but before unclamping
up to a maximum Tmax of 320°C, obtaining the blank, in order to increase the precision of
respectively the values of Dc=46.45° and measurements. The whole experimental procedure
Dw=53.55°, with a simulated percentage increase can be described as follows:
524
1. Rectangular strips are cut, painted and As a further example, the plot printed in Figure 11
clamped on both sides with maximum BHF. can be considered, where the 'h% is plotted vs.
2. Punch is moved up to a maximum dome height Tmax for different total punch stroke s. The effect is
h1 (10 to 30 mm, depending on the sheet more relevant with decreasing level of
material and thickness) with nearly constant deformation, i.e. with decreasing s-value.
speed and sheets are bend-stretched at room
temperature. 10%
' h%
3. Punch is stopped and samples are heated up to
8%
a known maximum temperature Tmax, for a
know heating time, with local heating applied 6% s= 12 mm
where pointed by the arrow in Figure 9. s= 14 mm
4% s= 15 mm
4. IR Heater is switched off and the punch holds
until the specimen is cooled to about 30°C. 2%
5. Punch moves down, and the residual dome 0%
height h2 is measured; strips are unclamped. 50 70 90 110 130 150
Tests clearly show that the post-deformation T max (°C)
heating is able to reduce the amount of springback,
which can be measured as (h1-h2). This reduction Figure 11: Springback reduction 'h% for stretch
can be expressed by the following equation (3): bending tests on Al 2024-T3 samples (t0=0.3 mm)
h1 h2 cold h1 h2 warm 4.1 NUMerICaL SIMULatIONS

'h% (3)
h1 h2 cold The tests described above have been simulated
both with the implicit integration approach
emaj described in Section 3 and with a mixed
explicit/implicit approach. The mixed model is
based on quadrangular shell elements with 7
IR heater through the thickness integration points. The initial
shape of blank elements is square with 2 mm side
length. The explicit time integration has been used
for the forming phase and for the post-deformation
heating. The implicit approach has been used only
h1
for the simulation of springback. All the tools are
meshed with shell elements as well. As in Section
3.1, the temperature history has been assigned to
Figure 9: Scheme of stretch bending tests the nodes and no heat transfer is simulated between
the sheet and its environment. Since the CPU time
As an example, in Figure 10 (top), the results of for a single simulation run is very short, no
stretch bending tests performed on AZ31, both symmetry plane has been employed, as shown in
with and without post-treatment up to 160° C are Figure 12.
shown. In the bottom part of Figure 10, a strip is
shown which has been heated only in the right side,
where pointed by the arrow; the picture clearly
shows that, as the punch moves down, the residual
deformation is clearly non-symmetrical and the
right side remains higher than the left side.
~160 °C
23 °C
Figure 12: Fem model with shell elements of the

stretch bending tests
heating
The coefficient of thermal expansion is defined as
an instantaneous value and the thermal strain rate
becomes:
.T .
H ij D T G ij (4)
Figure 10: Final shapes after stretch bending tests: The material model has a strain hardening law
AZ31 heated after deformation on both sides (top); given by a user input curve. Flow stress is
Al 2024-T3 heated only on the right side after corrected by a temperature dependency. Main
deformation (bottom) material data are shown in Table 4.
525
Table 4: material data used for Aluminium alloy Numerical simulation run with a fully implicit
integration, a small strain formulation and solid
T (°C) 20 500
E [MPa] 69000 60000 (brick) elements is able to provide a thermo
Poisson 0.33 0.36 mechanical description of the phenomena involved
Thermal exp. 0.0000240 0.0000274 in the process, which is effectively summarised by
[mm/mm*C°] Figure 8.
Yield Stress (MPa) 110 48
On the contrary, mixed explicit/implicit simulation
Plastic hardening moduli 0.20 0.20
with shell elements did not provide satisfactory
results.
6 aCKNOWLeDGeMeNt
The authors wish to acknowledge the Italian
Ministry of research (MUR) for funding the present
research under the “PRIN ‘05” program titled
SMART.
7 reFereNCeS
[1] Moon Y.H., Kang S.S., Cho J.R., Kim T.G.:
Effect of tool temperature on the reduction of
the springback of aluminum sheets. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 132:365–
368, 2003.
[2] Yoshida T. et al.: Shape Control Techniques
for High Strength Steel in Sheet Metal
Forming. Nippon Steel Technical Report, 88:
27-32, 2003.
[3] Keum Y.T., Han B.Y.: Springback of FCC
Figure 13: Effective Plastic Strain distribution after sheet in warm forming. Journal of Ceramic
cold stretch bending for Aluminium alloy
Processing Research, 3(3):59-165, 2002.
[4] Mori K., Maki S., Tanaka Y.: Warm and Hot
Without post-deformation heating Stamping of Ultra High Tensile Strength Steel
Sheets Using Resistance Heating. CIRP
With post-deformation heating
Annals - Manufacturing Technology, 54(1):
209-212, 2005.
Figure 14: Comparison between cold and warm [5] Yanagimoto J., Oyamada K., Nakagawa T.:
springback for Aluminium alloy Springback of High-Strength Steel after Hot
and Warm Sheet Formings. CIRP Annals -
Figure 13 shows the effective plastic strain of the
Manufacturing Technology, 54(1):213-216,
cold formed blank at the end of the die stroke.
2005.
Finally, Figure 14 shows a comparison of the
[6] Watanabe H., Mukai T., Sugioka M.,
formed part after springback in cold conditions and
Ishikawa K., Elastic and damping properties
with warming after deformation. The figure clearly
from room temperature to 673 K in an AZ31
shows that the dome height of the warmed part is
magnesium alloy. Scripta Materialia, 51: 291-
smaller, therefore 'h% is negative, and this goes 295, 2004.
against the experimental evidence. Several other [7] Perrin G.: Theoretical determination of the
different approaches have been used for modelling temperature dependence of elastic properties
the material properties. However the results of in cubic polycristals. J. Phys.Chem Solids,
simulations were still unsatisfactory, since the 58(6):1019-1025, 1997.
simulated value of 'h% has always been negative [8] Koster W: Die Temperaturabhängigkeit des
or insignificant. Elastizitätsmoduls reiner Metalle. Z Metallk.
39:1-9, 1948.
5 CONCLUSIONS [9] Geiger M., Vollertsen F.: The mechanisms of
A new method for the reduction of springback has laser forming. 43rd Annals of CIRP: 301-304,
been presented, based on warm heating of the sheet 1993.
metal blanks after forming and before springback. [10] Johnson G. R., Cook W. H.: A constitutive
The experimental evidence has shown the method model and data for metals subjected to large
is effective for simple bending, stretch bending and strains, high strain rates and high
draw bending (draw bending tests and simulations temperatures. In: 7th International Symposium
have not been described in this paper). on Ballistics, 514-546, 1983.
526
aN INVeStIGatION tO the SprINGBaCK OF reVerSe

CUp DraWING
Mehran Kadkhodayan*, Iman Zafarparandeh
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ferdowsi university of Mashhad,

91775-1111, Mashhad, Iran
aBStraCt: In this paper a FE simulation of springback in reverse cup drawing process, taken from
NUMISHEET’99 benchmark is carried out, utilizing commercial code, ABAQUS. The forming process is
simulated in ABAQUS/Explicit while the springback simulation is performed in ABAQUS/Standard. The
utilized method is probing a relationship between the springback and other important factors such as initial
blank thickness die gap and type of material, i.e. Aluminum alloys and HSS. It will be shown that increasing
the initial blank thickness and decreasing the die gap leads to springback reduction in the cup. Considering
the required maximum punch load for different values of initial blank thickness and die gap reveals that
these parameters should be controlled appropriately. Moreover, comparing the obtained results shows that
the sheets produced from HSS exhibit smaller amount of springback after unloading, however, they require
much larger punch load during the forming process.
KeYWOrDS: Springback, reverse cup drawing, FE simulation
1 INtrODUCtION improvement in the accuracy of the sheet metal

forming simulation.
Springback is generally defined as the additional Oliveira et al. [3] evaluated several work hardening
deformation of sheet metal parts when the loading models in order to determine their influences on
is removed. Springback prediction has been under the numerical prediction of the springback
extensive research in the recent years due to the phenomenon. They investigated the effect of
expanding use of aluminum and high strength different constitutive models on the numerical
steels in automotive stamping [1, 2]. Body panels simulation of mild (DC06) and dual phase (DP600)
stamped from these materials exhibit more steels submitted to several bending/unbending
profound springback characteristics than those strain-path changes, during which a high level of
made from mild steels. The deviation from a equivalent plastic strain attained. Lee and Kim [4]
desired shape due to springback introduces focused on the evaluation of springback occurring
complexities and quality concerns during vehicle in the sheet metal flange drawing by controlling
assembly stage. Therefore a thorough some process factors like punch corner radius (PR),
understanding of their springback behavior is die corner radius (DR) and blank holding force.
critical to the design and manufacturing of the Esat et al. [5] carried out springback analysis of
vehicle components. different aluminum sheets with different
In recent years, the rapid development of computer thicknesses and explored a relation between the
technology enables numerical simulation of sheet amount of springback and total characteristic strain
metal forming operations by finite element analysis and also characteristic stress. They concluded that
code to be used in an industrial environment. To the material with higher yield strength and smaller
obtain accurate numerical solutions, mechanical characteristic strain has higher amount of
models implemented in FEA should use reliable springback than the material with lower yield
descriptions of materials’ elastoplastic behavior, strength and higher characteristic strain. Liu et al.
namely a description of anisotropy and work [6] proposed a method to control the forming
hardening behaviors. Thus, more sophisticated process of a U-shaped part by means of a
constitutive models, which take into account non- reasonable blankholder force curve.
linear kinematic hardening and more complex Springback is caused by the release of internal
internal state variables are expected to allow an stress during the unloading phase in sheet metal
forming, so the factors affecting the stress
____________________
*Corresponding author: 91775-1111, Mashhad, Iran, Fax and Phone: +98 0511 8763304, kadkhoda@um.ac.ir
527
calculation accuracy will have an effect on the dimension of the tools are shown in Figure 1. One
amount of springback. It may be indicated that the quarter of the blank is modeled with a total of 900
element size in FE analysis and the material’s shell elements (S4R) with the symmetry boundary
hardening model have greater effects on the stress conditions along the X and Y axis (Figure 2).
calculation. The material’s hardening model, viz Twenty five integration points through the
the material’s stress–strain relationship, expresses thickness are used in the modeling. Mass densities
the basic properties of the material during plastic used for dynamic explicit code are 2.7 gr/cm3 for
deformation. It is important to correctly select and the aluminum alloys and 7.8 gr/cm3 for the high
reasonably pre-digest the stress–strain curve to strength steel. The major parameters assumed in
enhance the accuracy of the springback simulation the process are:
of bending with FE codes [7, 8].
In this paper the springback occurred in the reverse
cup drawing process, taken from the
NUMISHEET’99 benchmark, is numerically
studied. Influence of initial sheet thickness, die gap
and material type on springback is investigated by
means of the FE software, ABAQUS.
2 FINIte eLeMeNt MODeLLING

Explicit models are nowadays widely utilized to
analyze sheet metal forming processes since they
allow fully 3-D geometry and complex contact
conditions to be taken into account with relevant
CPU savings with respect to the implicit
algorithms (Li et al. [9], Li et al. [10], Onate et al.
[11], Rebelo et al. [12]). At each time increment
such models solve a set of independent dynamic
equilibrium equations in order to upgrade the
geometry of the meshed structure. No inversion of
the stiffness matrix is needed, no numerical Figure 1: Schematic view of tools
iterative procedure to get a satisfactory solution is
required. In this way CPU time is saved and the
incidence of plastic instabilities can be described
well since the analysis continues even if diagonal
terms of stiffness matrix approach to zero.
However, as far as evaluation of the springback
phenomenon is concerned, when the contact
between the stamped part and the rigid dies is lost,
the deformed sheet starts to oscillate around the
new equilibrium position, until the accumulated
kinetic energy is dissipated. As a consequence, the
prediction of the elastic springback is a very time
consuming step in explicit FEM analysis of sheet
stamping processes. Actually a suitable amount of
damping should be artificially introduced in order Figure 2: One quarter of the blank used in
to accelerate the kinetic energy dissipation, but simulations
unfortunately, it is very difficult to evaluate the
correct amount of damping to be applied. The
commercial code ABAQUS used here provides
such combined approach, incorporating a
procedure by which the stress state at the end of the
loading phase, obtained through a dynamic explicit
FEM simulation carried out with
ABAQUS/Explicit, is supplied to the implicit
numerical code (ABAQUS/Standard) which
performs a simple elastic step.
The reverse cup drawing problem in
NUMISHEET'99 is the case studied here for three
materials, i.e. Al6016-T4, Al6022-T4 and high Figure 3: Deformed shapes of the blank in three
strength steel (HSS). The geometry and the stages
528
Blank diameter: 170mm displays that the springback amount for 1.15mm
Coefficient of friction: 0.168 and 1.17mm initial thicknesses are considerably
The reverse cup drawing process is composed of close. This fact demonstrates the sensitivity of
two stages; forward draw with total punch stroke of springback to value of initial blank thickness in
55 (mm) and reverse draw with total punch stroke sheet metal forming. As mentioned earlier, the
of 85 (mm). Figure 3 shows the complete deformed required maximum punch load is one of factors
shape of the cup in three conditions for both that may limit the value of the initial blank
numerical and experimental results [13]. When the thickness. The results of required maximum punch
anisotropy is considered, the earring predicted by load for the two stages are presented in Figure 6.
the ABAQUS can be observed clearly in the The results verify clearly that using larger blank
experimental specimen. Instead of applying blank thickness in the process leads to requiring higher
holder force in the model, fixed gap was amount of maximum punch load. Investigating the
considered between the blankholder and the die. In results reveals that increasing the blank thickness
simulations, the punch velocity was increased to 15 of 1.05mm by 11% up to 1.17mm, causes 33%
m/s without mass scaling that resulted in very enlargement in the maximum punch load.
small oscillation in the kinetic energy which is
acceptable for a quasi static process. In order to a)
measure the springback of the cup two parameters 39.6 BS
AS
are considered, i.e. the mean edge radius and the 39.4
bottom angel of the cup (theta), as shown in Figure
Mean radius of cup edge (mm)

39.2
4.
39
38.8
38.6
38.4
38.2
38
1.05 (mm) 1.15 (mm) 1.17 (mm)
Initial sheet thickness (mm)
b)
0.9 BS
AS
0.8
0.7
0.6
Theta (degree)
Figure 4: Springback definition for reverse cup 0.5
drawing process 0.4
0.3
2.1 eFFeCt OF INItIaL thICKNeSS 0.2
0.1
Initial thickness is one of the parameters that
clearly affects on springback in sheet metal
0
1.05 (mm) 1.15 (mm) 1.17 (mm)
forming which in fact may be utilized to control it. Initial sheet thickness (mm)
On the other hand, increasing the initial sheet Figure 5: Influence of the initial sheet thickness on
thickness causes increasing of required punch load springback: a) mean radius of the cup edge, b)
and weight of the blank that are undesirable things theta
in design parameters. Therefore, finding the
Thickness=1.05 (mm)
optimum value for initial sheet thickness is of vital 90
Thickness=1.15 (mm)
importance for the purpose of using suitable values 80 Thickness=1.17 (mm)
in the design stage. In Figure 5, the relation 70

Maximum Punch load (kN)
between the value of initial blank thickness and the 60

springback of the cup is displayed. Three different 50
values are considered for this purpose, i.e. 1.05mm,
40
1.15mm and 1.17mm. These values are chosen
deliberately that the two last ones are close to each 30
other and help us for better understanding of their 20
effects. Simulations are performed for AL6016-T4 10
and 1.22mm is assumed for the die gap. It is found 0
that increasing the initial value of the blank Stage1 Stage2
thickness apparently is a way of reducing Figure 6: Required maximum punch load for
springback. Paying more attention to the figure, different values of initial sheet thickness
529
2.2 eFFeCt OF DIe Gap 2.3 eFFeCt OF MaterIaL

Applying blankholder force in sheet metal forming The relation between the springback and material
processes is a way to control springback, because properties such as weight and strength of the
of affecting on the flow of the sheet into the die. material can affect on the materials’ applicability in
But larger blankholder forces may cause the blank industry. For instance, aluminum alloys and high
to tear or neck in side wall, therefore, the amount strength steels have found expanding usage in
of blankholder force is limited. In the current automotive industries. On the other hand, body
study, a gap is considered between the die and the panels stamped from these materials exhibit more
blankholder surfaces instead of applying force on profound springback characteristics than those
blankholder. Different die gaps in the process lead made from mild steels. Therefore, a thorough
to different amount of springback at the end. Three understanding of their springback behavior is
values are considered here in order to investigate critical to the design and manufacturing of the
the influence of die gap on springback for vehicle components. The obtained results of
AL6016T4, i.e., NoGap, 1.22mm and 1.3mm, springback for both mean radius of cup edge and
where the initial thickness is assumed to be theta, and three different materials, i.e. Al6016-T4,
1.15mm for all cases. Figure 7 demonstrates the Al6022-T4 and high strength steel (HSS) are
final amount of springback for the different values presented in the Figure 9. As it can be observed,
of the die gaps for the both springback parameters. the aluminum alloys exhibit more springback than
It can be observed that the reduction of die gap the HSS. But, it should be noticed that the initial
causes decreasing of springback where it becomes thickness is considered the same for all the
a minimum for the NoGap condition. The materials, therefore, HSS blank is two times
maximum required punch loads for the two loading heavier than the aluminum blanks and it may not
stages are compared to each other for different be an appropriate selection.
values of the die gaps. As it is expected, the NoGap Figure 10 shows the maximum required punch
condition requires the largest maximum punch load force for different materials. It is clear from the
for the both stages, Figure 8. Thus, it may be taken figure that the HSS needs a considerable higher
into consideration that applying smaller value of amount of maximum punch load in the forming
die gap increases the maximum punch load. process than the aluminum alloys. Having low
yield strength is one of the advantages of
a) aluminum alloys which make their forming
39.6 BS processes easier.
AS
39.4
90 Gap 1.3(mm)
Gap 1.22(mm)
39.2
80 NoGap
39 70
Maximum punch load (kN)
60
38.8
50
38.6
40
38.4
30
38.2 20
Gap 1.3 (mm) Gap 1.22 (mm) NoGap
Die gap (mm) 10
b) 0
BS Stage1 Stage2
0.8
AS
0.7
Figure 8: Required maximum punch load for
different values of die gap
0.6
a)
Theta (degree)
0.5
39.6 BS
0.4 AS
0.3 39.4
0.2 39.2
0.1 39
0
38.8
Gap 1.3 (mm) Gap 1.22 (mm) No Gap
Die gap (mm)
38.6
Figure 7: Influence of the die gap on springback: a)

38.4
mean radius of the cup edge, b) theta
38.2
Al60616-T4 Al6022-T4 HSS
Material
530
b) P.Dawson (eds.) NUMIFORM 95, Ithaca,

1 BS 115-124, 1995.
AS
0.9 [2] Xia Z.C., Tang S.C., Carnes J.C.: Accurate
0.8 Springback Prediction with Mixed Solid/Shell
0.7 Elements. Int. J. Huetink and F.P.T Baaijens
(eds.) NUMIFORM 98, Enschede, 813-818,
Theta (degree)
0.6
0.5 1998.
0.4 [3] Oliveira M.C., Alves J.L., Chaparro B.M.,
0.3 Menezes L.F.: Study on the Influence of
0.2 Work-Hardening Modeling in Springback
0.1 Prediction. International Journal of Plasticity,
0 23:516-543, 2007.
Al60616-T4 Al6022-T4 HSS
Material [4] Lee S.-W., Kim Y.-T.: A study on the
springback in the sheet metal flange drawing.
Figure 9: Influence of the material on springback:
Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
a) mean radius of the cup edge, b) theta
187:89-93, 2007.
140 Al6016-T4 [5] Esat V., Darendeliler H., Gokler M.I.: Finite
Al6022-T4
HSS
Element Analysis of Springback in Bending of
120
Aluminum Sheets. Journal of Materials and
Design, 23:223-229, 2002.
Maximum punch load (kN)
100
[6] Liu G., Lin Z., Xu W., Bao Y.: Variable

80
blankholder force in U-shaped part forming
60 for eliminating springback error. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, 120:259-
40
264, 2002.
20 [7] Zhang Z.T., Lee D.: Development of a new
model for plane strain bending and
springback analysis. Journal of Material
0
Stage1 Stage2
Engineering Performance, 4:291-300, 1995.
Figure 10: Maximum required punch load for [8] Zhang Z.T., Hu S.J.: Stress and residual
different materials stress distribution in plane strain bending.
International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,
40:533-543, 1998.
3 CONCLUSIONS
[9] Li K., Wagoner R.H.: Simulation of
Springback of reverse cup drawing process, chosen springback. International Conference
from NUMISHEET’99 benchmark, was studied Proceedings of NUMIFORM’98, Enschede,
numerically by means of the commercial FE 21–31, 1998.
software, ABAQUS. The influence of some [10] Li K., Geng L., Wagoner R.H.: Simulation of
important factors such as initial blank thickness, springback: choice of element. Advanced
die gap and type of the material on the springback Technology of Plasticity, 2091–2098, 1999.
of reverse cup drawing was investigated. [11] Onate E., de Saracibar C.: Alternatives for
The obtained numerical results showed that finite element analysis of sheet metal in metal
increasing the value of the initial thickness forming problems. International Conference
reducing the springback of the deformed sheet, Proceedings of NUMIFORM’92, Sophia
however, in these cases more maximum required Antipolis, 79–88, 1992.
punch loads for both stages were needed. Hence, [12] Rebelo N., Nagtegaal J.C., Taylor L.M.,
an optimum value of initial sheet thickness should Passmann R.: Comparison of implicit and
be chosen. The same discussion was valid for the explicit finite element methods in the
die gap where decreasing of the die gap lead to simulation of metal forming processes.
springback reduction. Comparing different International Conference Proceedings of
materials revealed that although HSS exhibited NUMIFORM’92, Sophia Antipolis, 99–108,
smaller springback than the aluminum alloys, but 1992.
on the other hand, HSS blank was heavier and it [13] Chun B.K., Jinn J.T., Lee J.K.: Modeling the
was not almost an appropriate feature in the Bauschinger Effect for Sheet Metals-Part 2:
forming process. applications. International Journal of
Plasticity, 18:597-616, 2002.
4 reFereNCeS
[1] Mattiasson K., Thilderkvist P., Strange A.,
Samuelsson A.: Simulation of Springback in
Sheet Metal Forming. In S.F Shen and
531
L-BeNDING aNaLYSIS WIth aN eMphaSIS ON SprINGBaCK
Mehran Kadkhodayan, Iman Zafarparandeh*
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Ferdowsi university of Mashhad,

91775-1111, Mashhad, Iran
aBStraCt: The aim of this paper is to study the springback that occurs in L-bending process after
unloading, by means of ABAQUS, a finite element code. The material’s anisotropy is considered during
simulations. The forming process is simulated in ABAQUS/Explicit while the springback simulation is
preformed in ABAQUS/Standard. The influence of die radius and die clearance on springback for an
aluminum alloy, AA6111-T4, has been investigated considering final amount equivalent plastic strain
achieved in blank and a relationship between them has been explored. The obtained results show that the
higher amount of equivalent plastic strain causes the smaller amount of springback at the end of process.
The relation of die radius and die clearance with amount of required maximum punch load is investigated as
well. The effect of three different hardening models utilized in the FE simulation on springback prediction is
studied. Finally, the springback of various materials are compared to each other.
KeYWOrDS: L-bending, springback, finite element
1 INtrODUCtION way of simulating bending operations and

predicting springback. FEA provides numerical
As a fundamental and traditional process in trial and error procedures, which lead to a less-
metallic forming technologies, sheet metal forming time-consuming and more economical way of
is widely being employed in almost all industrial designing and producing dies. In particular, some
fields. Needless to say, it is because a final sheet commercially available FEA programs provide
product of desired shape and appearance can be effective and powerful tools and environments to
quickly and easily produced with relatively simple model and simulate various operations, such as
tool set [1]. One of the most widely used sheet metal-forming applications. These programs
metal forming process is bending. This is include useful and user-friendly graphical user
employed in automobile industry, construction of interfaces, which facilitate pre- and post-processing
large spherical and cylindrical pressure vessels, stages. Also, as aluminum is a relatively expensive
curved structural components in aerospace material, FEA is employed in the design stages in
industry, etc. Bending is a process in which a order to reduce material and production costs. The
planer sheet is plastically deformed to a curved one springback prediction of bending operation using
[2]. FEA has been employed by many researchers in
In the bending process, after removing the load by the past. For instance, Cho et al. [3] carried out
withdrawal of the punch, an elastic recovery occurs numerical investigation on springback
because of the release of the elastic stresses. This characteristics in plane strain ‘U’ bending process
elastic recovery is called springback. Springback is by thermo-elastoplastic FEA. Li et al. [4] mainly
an important and decisive parameter in obtaining dealt with material hardening and modulus to
the desired geometry of the part and design of the analyze ‘V’ bending by simulation and showed that
corresponding tooling. In manufacturing industry, the material-hardening model directly affects the
it is still a practical problem to predict the final springback simulation accuracy. Bui et al. [5]
geometry of the part after springback and to design utilized the enhanced assumed strain technique for
appropriate tooling in order to compensate for locking removal in numerical simulation of
springback. Conventional approaches, which springback. Papeleux and Ponthot [6] discussed
involve using empirical formula and several trial- numerically the effect of blank holder force,
and-error procedures, result in wastage of material, friction, spatial integration, etc. on the forming
time and efforts. In recent years, finite element response. Chou and Hung [7] carried out FEA of
analysis (FEA) has been considered as an effective several springback reduction techniques such as
____________________
*Corresponding author: 91775-1111, Mashhad, Iran, Fax and Phone: +98 0511 8763304, i.zafarparandeh@yahoo.com
533
over bending, stretching, arc bottoming, pinching of sheet thickness, and are mainly caused by the
die, spanking and movement (double bend) unbalanced through-thickness stresses of the sheet
techniques used in ‘U’ channel bending. Math and once it is taken out of stamping tooling. With the
Grizelj [8] reported springback and residual progress of FE methods along with the
stresses of bent plates, designed for assembling computational hardware and software technologies,
spherical tanks made of steel, using elastic–plastic the explicit and implicit incremental formulations
incremental FE calculations and experimental have been developed for the process modeling and
validation. Lei et al. [9] analyzed the free bending analysis. The explicit dynamic and static
and square cup deep drawing to predict the incremental methods have found widespread use in
springback, stress distribution, etc. for stainless the modeling and analysis of 3-D sheet metal
steel using finite element method (FEM). forming due to its ability of better contact handling
Springback is caused by the release of internal and relatively low computational cost when
stress during the unloading phase in sheet metal compared to the implicit static incremental method.
forming, so factors affecting the stress calculation In the forming analysis phase, an initially flat sheet
accuracy will affect the springback calculation. It is is placed between the stamping die elements
indicated that the finite element dimensions and the usually involving the die, punch and blankholder.
material’s hardening model have greater effects on It is common, in sheet metal forming analysis, to
the stress calculation. The material’s hardening include only the surface of the tooling in the FE
model, viz the material’s stress–strain relationship, model, rather than the complete geometry, as rigid
expresses the basic properties of the material geometric entities.
during plastic deformation. It is important to The L-bending process as shown in Figure 1 is a
correctly select and reasonably pre-digest the case studied in this paper for three materials:
stress–strain curve to enhance the accuracy of the AA5754-O, AA6111-T4 and DP-Steel. The
springback simulation of bending with FE codes materials basic properties are summarized in Table
[10,11]. 1. To increase the computational efficiency, the
In this paper the finite element simulation of the simulation of the L-bending process is modeled in
springback in L-bending process using FE code, the finite element program ABAQUS\Explicit,
ABAQUS, is studied. The influence of die radius, while the springback analysis is simulated in
die clearance and material on springback is ABAQUS\Standard as it would take a long time to
investigated by considering the required maximum obtain a quasi-static solution of springback analysis
punch load and the achieved amount of equivalent in ABAQUS\Explicit. Half of the blank is modeled
plastic strain in sheet. Also, three different with a total of 300 shell elements (S4R) and 9
hardening models are utilized in the simulations in integration points through the thickness. For
order to study their effects on springback definition of contact in ABAQUS/Explicit, the
prediction. general contact algorithm was utilized. The Hill48
anisotropic yield function is utilized to consider the
2 Fe SIMULatION material anisotropy. Mass densities used for
dynamic explicit code are 2.7 gr/cm3 for the
In this part, the computer simulation of the aluminum alloy and 7.8 gr/cm3 for the high
stamping process is conducted in two major steps. strength steel. The initial dimension of the sheet
Firstly, a forming analysis is conducted, including was 127mm (length) u 25.4mm (width) u
the blank and tooling, in order to determine the 1.016mm (thickness) with the 70mm total punch
sheet metal deformation during the stamping stroke. The contact between tools and the sheet
process and, secondly, the sheet metal springback blank is simulated as a frictionless choice in the FE
deformations following the removal of the code, while lubricant is used in experimental
stamping tooling are computed using the forming procedure. The punch velocity was speeded up to 3
stress distribution and the deformed geometry m/s in the dynamic explicit code. The change in
along with thickness distribution. There are some parameter ș after unloading is considered as
fundamental differences in the characteristics of springback. Simulations are preformed for three
both computation phases. The forming process is different die radiuses (Ri), die clearances (d) and
controlled by the time-dependent interactions of hardening models.
the blank and stamping tooling through a frictional
contact-interface, and results in gross shape
3 reSULtS aND DISCUSSION
changes of the sheet metal. Consequently, the
computational modeling of the forming process 3.1 eFFeCt OF DIe raDIUS
necessitates an incremental formulation due to the Three different values for die radius, say 12.7mm,
geometrically non-linear kinematics of sheet metal 9.525mm and 4.7625mm are considered in our
deformation involving large displacements, large simulations while other parameters are assumed to
rotations and finite plastic strains. On the other be constant. The variation of springback with
hand, the springback deformations of a typical changes in die radius for the aluminum alloy,
stamping part are comparatively small, on the order
534
AA6111-T4 and 1.55mm die clearance is

summarized in Figure 2. The results are presented 92 BF
AF
in two manners: before springback (BF) and after 90
88
Table 1: Basic materials’ properties 86
Thetal (degree)
84
AA5754- AA6111- DP- 82
O T4 Steel 80
Young’s 78
Modulus 73.25 75.25 205.35 76
(GPa) 74
Poisson’s
0.33 0.33 0.3 72
ratio 12.7mm 9.525mm 4.7625mm
Die radius (mm)
Yield
strength 102.4 149.1 358.7 Figure 2: Effect of die radius on springback
(MPa)
Ultimate 350
tensile 300
234.2 279.3 570.9
strength 250
(MPa)
Punch load (N)

200
150
100
50
0
12.7mm 9.525mm 4.7625mm
Die radius (mm)
Figure 3: Maximum punch load for different values

of die radius
0.12
Figure 1: Schematic view of tools Die radius
12.7mm
0.1
9.525mm
springback occurrence (AF). Therefore, the greater 4.7625mm
difference of BF and AF indicates the larger 0.08
springback. It is found that decreasing the die

radius causes the reduction of springback, which 0.06
means less variation in amount of ș. Therefore, 0.04

decreasing the die radius up to a limit value would
guarantee the reduction of springback. One of the 0.02
important factors that limits the amount of die

radius, is the maximum punch load applied in the 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
process. Figure 3 shows the required maximum True distance (mm)
punch load for the three values of die radius. The Figure 4: Distribution of equivalent plastic strain
obtained results show that using smaller die radius along Path1 for different values of die radius
requires higher value of punch load. The reason of
this fact, springback reduction by decreasing the
die radius, may be attributed to the equivalent 3.2 eFFeCt OF DIe CLearaNCe
plastic (characteristic) strain achieved in the sheet In order to study the influence of die clearance on
for the different values of die radius through the springback in the L-bending process, three
process. In Figure 4 distribution of the equivalent different values are chosen which are 1.55mm,
plastic strain along Path1, located along the sheet 1.35mm and 1.1mm. The obtained results by the
length on the front side and top layer of the sheet, FE simulation for AA6111-T4 are shown in Figure
is shown. As it can be observed, decreasing the 5, while the die radius is assumed to be 12.7mm.
amount of die radius causes the level of the Referring to the figure, springback increases while
equivalent plastic strains to ascend. Consequently, the die clearance is enlarging, although some
the plastic strains, especially axial plastic strain, restrictions take place during this enlargement. One
increases. It is noticeable that the area under the of the most important limitations that occur is the
equivalent plastic curve for the smaller die radius is maximum required punch load, similar to the die
larger which justifies the larger required maximum radius as shown in Figure 6. It is observed that the
punch load for it.
535
smaller die clearance requires the larger maximum 0.045
punch force during the process. 0.04 Die clearance

1.55mm
0.035 1.35mm

92 BF 1.1mm
AF 0.03
90
0.025
88
0.02
86
Theta (degree)
0.015
84
0.01
82
80 0.005
78 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
76
True distance (mm)
74
72
Figure 7: Distribution of equivalent plastic strain
1.55mm 1.35mm 1.1mm along Path1 for different values of die clearance
Die clearance (mm)
Figure 5: Effect of die clearance on springback

A non-linear kinematic hardening rule was first
used by Armstrong and Frederick [15]. The non-
This diversity, also for springback angle, is linear kinematic hardening rule presented by
considerable for 1.1mm in comparison with the Lemaitre and Chaboche [16] introduced a recall
two other values. It should be noted that, naturally term to realize the smooth elastic-plastic transition
when the punch go farther into the die, less upon the change of loading path. Three hardening
moment is required to bend the sheet. Reviewing models are utilized in our simulations: isotropic
the distribution of the equivalent plastic strain hardening model (ISO), linear kinematic hardening
along the Path1 achieved by the sheet for the three model (KIN) and combined hardening (ISO-KIN).
die clearances during the process, as presented in Figure 8 demonstrates the springback results for
Figure 7, helps us to understand the detail. The the hardening models where the 12.7mm radius
sheet has gained of highest level the equivalent and 1.55mm clearance is considered for the die in
plastic strain at the end of the process when the die the process. According to the figure, the isotropic
clearance is 1.1mm, which is the smallest value. model has predicted the largest variation in
parameter ș, while the kinematic model predicted
122 the smallest one. Because the elements of the sheet
do not undergo reversal loading in this process, the
120
difference between obtained results is not
118 significant. Therefore, the achieved results by
Punch load (N)
116
utilizing the isotropic model in FE simulating still
are reliable.
114
112 BF
90
AF
110 88
86
108
1.55mm 1.35mm 1.1mm 84
Theta (degree)
Die clearance (mm)

82
Figure 6: Maximum punch load for different values 80
of die clearance 78
76
3.3 eFFeCt OF harDeNING MODeL

74
72
On of the remarkable factors in the simulation of ISO-KIN ISO KIN
sheet metal forming is the hardening model type Hardening model
utilized in finite element code. The classic isotropic

hardening model does not consider the Figure 8: Effect of hardening model on springback
prediction
Bauschinger effect; therefore, when elements of the
sheet undergo reversal loading it confounds leading Required maximum punch loads predicted by
to a reliable result, but inaccurate springback is different hardening model are compared to each
predicted. The linear kinematic hardening proposed other in Figure 9. The kinematic hardening has
by Prager [13] and Ziegler [14] can only be applied predicted the largest required maximum punch load
into materials with linear stress-strain curve and it applied through the process. Investigating the
usually under-predicts the springback. distribution of the equivalent plastic strain along
the Path1 predicted by the hardening models
536
reveals that the higher level of the equivalent more springback. Besides, the superiority of
plastic strain prediction leads to the higher amount AA5754-O may be probed in the amount of
of maximum punch load anticipated by the maximum required punch load, as shown in Figure
hardening model. 12. It may be observed clearly that the bending of
AA5754-O requires less maximum punch force
118 than the other two materials which means less
116
amount of energy is needed for performing of the
process.
114
Punch load (N)
112 90 BF
AF
88
110
86
108
Theta (degree)
84
106
82
104
ISO-KIN ISO KIN 80
Hardening model
78
Figure 9: Maximum punch load predicted by 76

different hardening models
74
AA5754-O AA6111-T4 DP-Steel
0.045 Material
0.04 Hardening model Figure 11: Effect of material type on springback

0.035 ISO-KIN
ISO
0.03 KIN 350
0.025 300
0.02
250
Punch load (N)
0.015
200
0.01
150
0.005
0 100
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
True distance (mm) 50
Figure 10: Distribution of equivalent plastic strain 0

along Path1 predicted by different hardening AA5754-O AA6111-T4 DP-Steel
Material
models
Figure 12: Maximum punch load for the different
materials
3.4 eFFeCt OF MaterIaL tYpe
Relation between the springback and material type, 0.045
like the relation between the springback and other 0.04

Material
material properties such as weight and strength of 0.035 AA5754-O
the material, affects the applicability of the 0.03

AA6111-T4
DP-Steel
materials in the industry. Aluminum alloys and 0.025
high strength steels have been found expanding 0.02
usage in automotive industry. On the other hand,
0.015
body panels stamped from these materials exhibit
more profound springback characteristics than 0.01
those made from mild steels. Therefore, a thorough 0.005
understanding of their springback behaviors is 0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
critical to the design and manufacturing of the True distance (mm)
vehicle components. In Figure 11 the obtained

Figure 13: Distribution of equivalent plastic strain
results of springback for three different materials, along Path1 for different materials
i.e. AA5754-O, AA6111-T4 and DP-Steel are
compared to each other, when the die radius and The maximum required punch load for DP-Steel
die clearance are assumed to be 12.7mm and has a considerable difference with the aluminum
1.55mm, respectively. As it may be observed from alloys because of about a two times larger yielding
the figure, AA5754-O demonstrates less stress. Distributions of the equivalent plastic strain
springback, whereas AA6111-T4 and DP-Steel for the materials are compared in Figure 13.
almost result in the same variation of parameter ș, AA5754-O approximately has the highest level of
although the aluminum alloy leads to a little bit the equivalent plastic strain whereas AA6111-T4
537
has the lowest one. This relation can also be found [6] Papeleux L., Ponthot J.P.: Finite element
in the springback angles for the three materials simulation of springback in sheet metal
(Figure 11). forming. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 125-126:785-791, 2002.
4 CONCLUSIONS [7] Chou I.N., Hung C: Finite element analysis
and optimization on springback reduction.
A numerical study of springback phenomenon in International Journal of Machine Tools and
the L-bending process utilizing the FE code, Manufacturing, 39:517-536, 1999.
ABAQUS was provided in this paper. Effects of [8] Math M., Grizelj B.: Finite element approach
different factors such as die radius, die clearance in the plate bending process, Journal of
and material type on springback have been Materials Processing Technology, 125-
investigated. Also, the influence of different 126:778-784, 2002.
hardening models on predicting springback was [9] Lei L.P., Hwang S.M., Kang B.S.: Finite
presented. element analysis and design in stainless steel
Decreasing the die radius causes the reduction of sheet forming and its experimental
the springback, because the process let the blank comparison, Journal of Materials Processing
achieve higher level of equivalent plastic strain Technology, 110:70-77, 2001.
after the forming stage. On the other hand, the [10] Zhang Z.T., Lee D.: Development of a new
required maximum punch load increased for the model for plane strain bending and
higher values of die radius. Similar event occurred springback analysis. Journal of Material
for the die clearance. The investigation was Engineering Performance, 4:291-300, 1995.
extended for different types of materials where [11] Zhang Z.T., Hu S.J.: Stress and residual
AA5754-O lead to smaller springback by reaching stress distribution in plane strain bending.
to the higher amount of equivalent plastic strain. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences,
Comparing the results of springback for the 40:533-543, 1998.
different materials revealed that AA5754-O [12] Gau J.T., Kinzel G.L.: An experimental
required less maximum punch load through the investigation of the influence of the
process. After all, the influence of hardening Bauschinger effect on springback predictions.
models on springback prediction was investigated. Journal of Materials Processing Technology,
It was found that results were so close to each 108:369-375, 2001.
others because the elements of the blank did not [13] Prager W.: Recent developments in the
undergo reversal loading. mathematical theory of plasticity.
International Journal of Applied Mechanics,
5 reFe reNCeS 78-493, 1956.
[1] Lingbeek R., Huetink J., Ohnimus S., Petzoldt [14] Ziegler H.: A modification on Pragr's
M., Weiher J.: The development of a finite hardening rule. Quarte. of Applied
elements based springback compensation tool Mathematic, 17-55 1959.
for sheet Metal products. Journal of Materials [15] Armstrong P.J., Frederick: A mathematical
Processing Technology, 169:115-125, 2005. representation of the multiaxial Bauschinger
[2] Panthi S.K., Ramarishnan N., Pathak K.K., effect. G.E.G.B. Report RD/d/B/N, 1966.
Chouhan J.S.: An analysis of springback in [16] Lemaitre J., Chaboche J.-L.: Mechanics of
sheet metal bending using finite element Solid Materials, Cambridge University Press,
method(FEM). Journal of Materials 1990.
Processing Technology, 186:120-124, 2007.
[3] Cho J.R., Moon S.J., Moon Y.H., Kang S.S.:
Finite element investigation on springback
characteristics in sheet metal U-bending
process. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 141:109-116, 2003.
[4] Li X., Yang Y., Wang Y., Bao J., Li S.: Effect
of material-hardening mode on the
springback simulation accuracy of V-free
bending. Journal of Materials Processing
Technology, 123:209-211, 2002.
[5] Bui Q.V., Papeleux L., Ponthot J.P.:
Numerical simulation of springback using
enhanced assumed strain elements. Journal of
Materials Processing Technology,
153í154:314-318, 2004.
538
aCCUraCY aND preCISION aSSeSMeNt OF StOChaStIC

SIMULatION tOOLS FOr SprINGBaCK VarIatION
t. de Souza1, B. F. rolfe2*
1
Centre for Material and Fibre Innovation, Geelong Technology Precinct. Deakin
University. Waurn Ponds. 3217. Victoria, Australia.
2
Department of Engineering and Information Technology. Deakin University. Waurn
Ponds. 3217. Victoria, Australia.
aBStraCt: The sheet forming industry is plagued by inherent variations in its many input variables,
making quality control and improvements a major hurdle. This is particularly poignant for Advanced High
Strength Steels (AHSS), which exhibit a large degree of property variability. Current FE-based simulation
packages are successful at predicting the manufacturability of a particular sheet metal components, however,
due to their numerical deterministic nature are inherently unable to predict the performance of a real-life
production process. Though they are now beginning to incorporate the stochastic nature of production in
their codes. This work investigates the accuracy and precision of a current stochastic simulation package,
AutoForm Sigma v4.1, by developing an experimental data set where all main sources of variation are
captured through precise measurements and standard tensile tests. Using a Dual Phase 600Mpa grade steel a
series of semi-cylindrical channels are formed at two Blank Holder Pressure levels where the response
metric is the variation in springback determined by the flange angle. The process is replicated in AutoForm
Sigma and an assessment of accuracy and precision of the predictions are performed. Results indicate a very
good correspondence to the experimental trials, with mean springback response predicted to within 1° of the
flange angle and the interquartile spread of results to within 0.22°.
KeYWOrDS: Sheet Metal Forming, Robustness, Variation, Springback, AHSS.
1 INtrODUCtION consider the inherent variation of the stamping

process [3-8]. One of these tools is the robustness
Achieving a Six-Sigma performing stamping assessment add-in module to the automotive
process is something many organisations aim to specific forming software AutoForm, called Sigma.
achieve. The use of numerical simulation This aims to provide efficient and effective
techniques, such as FEM, are often an attractive solutions for robustness analysis through the
option for evaluating the success of a stamping coupled usage of FEM and statistical process
operation. However, the inconsistent nature of control techniques.
incoming material properties, process conditions, Usage of this tool is widespread with a great deal
press forces and other sources of variation [1], of work being produced [9-11] with good success.
make the ability to accurately predict the realistic However, in order to perform these “noise-based”
response of a stamping system difficult from a simulations a few assumptions must be made.
single FEM simulation. This is emphasised with Paraphrasing Donald Rumsfeld, “there are known
the increased implementation of Advance High unknowns – that is, there are things we know we
Strength Steels (AHSS) into modern day vehicles, don’t know; and there are unknown unknowns -
which, due to their relative infancy, exhibit a large that is, there are things we don’t know we don’t
degree of property variation [2]. This, coupled with know”. Typically, current numerical packages
increased levels of springback has also posed make an assumption that all variation is caused by
geometric tolerance concerns, as often sporadic known sources that can be captured and quantified
final part shapes cause difficulties at the assembly as noise inputs to the simulation. This however
stage which can lead to defects. This challenge has may not be the case, as often attempts to
received a great deal of attention with academics characterise the effect of inherent stamping
and industry developing tools and techniques to variation has been extremely difficult. Especially
____________________
* Corresponding author: School of Engineering and Information Technology, Deakin University, Waurn Ponds, 3217,
Victoria, Australia. Phone: +61 3 5227 2417. Fax: +61 3 5227 2167. Email: brolfe@deakin.edu.au
539
when performed using an industrial stamping press 2 eXperIMeNtaL prOCeDUre

due to the inaccuracy and lack of resolution of the
response and measurement techniques as shown by The development a semi-controlled experimental
Rolfe et.al [12] when attempting to examine press data set with a high level of resolution of capturing
force signatures and their correlation to variations small changes in input parameters and, a high level
in thinning for an automotive component. Often of accuracy and precision in measuring the
unknown sources of variation are also part of these springback response was important to ensure the
industrial trials which make it difficult to assess the aims of this study could be successful.
response and consecutively, assess how accurate Using a fully instrumented Erichsen formability
the stochastic predictive tools are. tester and tooling specifically designed to allow a
This work involves the development of a semi- simple and stable measure of springback a series of
controlled experimental data set using precise 2D channels with a semi-cylindrical punch were
laboratory equipment, whereby, the main sources formed. Material property variation has been
of variation are quantitatively captured. This allows captured through a series of tensile tests and blank
the accuracy and precision assessment of measurements. Variation in process parameters
springback predictions from a current stochastic have been kept to a minimum, by not using a
simulation tool, AutoForm Sigma, to be performed. lubricant in an attempt provide a more consistent
By performing this evaluation, an indication as to friction co-efficient and blank holder force is
whether the ‘unknown unknowns’ have a controlled precisely by the Erichsen formability
significant effect on the final springback response tester. Hence, variation is assumed to be purely
can also be established. material based.
Two sets of experiments were performed,
1.1 aCCUraCY aND preCISION examining two operating windows defined by low
and high Blank Holder Pressure (BHP) settings of
Analysing the quality of a data set involves looking 21 MPa and 57 MPa respectively. Fifty replicates
at various aspects. Two of which are accuracy and were performed for each data set to provide a
precision. Accuracy is the measure of how close suitable response space. The BHP levels chosen are
the measured value is to the actual value. This is at the either bound of formability. The lower
usually achieved by taking a number of exhibits very little thinning and is primarily a
measurements and establishing a mean value, for drawing process, whilst the higher level, shows
which a comparison can be made. Precision is a noticeable thinning and is at the upper limit of
measure of the repeatability of the process and formability. The lower BHP window however, still
often is related to the dispersion of numerous exhibits a suitable amount of sheet tension to
results as represented by Figure 1. conform the blank to the die radii during the initial
Actual M ean
stages of forming. This allows direct comparison of
Density
the final springback profiles, as the ‘drawn’

Accuracy
profiles are alike.
2.1 FOrMING GeOMetrY

Many structural components found in automotive
vehicles are representative of various channel
sections found in chassis rails, B-pillars and other
cross-members. The selected forming geometry is
Precision R esponse representative of this on a smaller scale and is
Figure 1: Representation of Accuracy and
displayed in Figure 2, where Rd = 5mm and
Precision. Rd = 20mm. The cylindrical punch allows a simple
and accurate method of assessing springback,
In this study the accuracy is defined as the which is critical, as minute changes between each
comparison of mean responses from the FEM stamping needs to be evaluated.
prediction and the mean experimental response. 204.20
Springback accuracy assessments have been 150
performed widely in both academia and industry Rd
with mixed responses; depending upon the DIE to
complexity of the material and/or forming process.

However, precision evaluation of springback BLANK
HOLDER
predictions from FEM tools have received lesser
attention, and in some cases could be deemed more Rp
crucial to ensure reliability and robustness is PUNCH
achieved in the final stamping process.
Figure 2: The cylindrical channel tooling geometry.
540
2.2 Sheet MaterIaL VarIatION Correlation between YS and UTS

A Dual Phase (DP) 600 MPa grade steel has been 680
used, as it is representative of the typical usage in a 670
structural component for many modern day 660

R2 = 0.878
vehicles. To quantify the potential material
UTS (MPa)
650
variation, 36 intrinsic tensile tests were performed 640
according to AS 1391-2005 standards. The tensile 630
specimens were blanked from the same coil, at 620

different locations, hence only showing ‘in coil’ 610
variation, which is suitable for this study. Figure 3
600
displays the material flow curves for each test in 460 470 480 490 500 510 520 530
grey and the mean experimental flow curve in red. Yield Stress (MPa)
A relative large dispersion of flow behaviour is
Figure 4: Correlation between Yield Stress and
observed, primarily caused by shift in the yield Ultimate Tensile Stress for DP600.
stress and not so much variation in the strain
hardening properties. Table 1: Variation of material parameters extracted
A power law approximation (Equation 1) was used from intrinsic tensile tests and blank geometry
to characterise the material behaviour of each test measurements
specimen. In order to accurately represent the true
Material Mean Std. Min Max
scattering behaviour of the DP600, correlation
Parameter Dev
between the material parameters was performed to
ıy (0.2%) 489.46 12.55 467.69 535.01
establish if any dependence occurred. It was found
UTS 632.99 14.37 605.43 674.60
that the Yield Stress and the Ultimate Tensile
Stress were linearly dependent upon one another as t0 (BHP-21MPa) 1.958 0.017 1.919 1.979
shown in Figure 4, with the strength co-efficient, t0 (BHP-57MPa) 1.963 0.013 1.914 1.982
K, related by Equation 2. The strain hardening, n, w0 (BHP-21MPa) 19.55 0.234 18.94 19.94
remained constant at 0.143. w0 (BHP-57MPa) 19.55 0.155 19.20 19.80
V KH n (1)
2.3 prOCeSS SetUp
Vy An Erichsen (Model 145) sheet metal formability
K (2)
H 0n tester has been used for the forming process.
Relatively slow punch speeds of approximately
Quantitative characterisation of the spread in
3.4mm/s have been used to allow an adequate
material parameters was performed by determining
sampling rate of data for tool forces and punch
the standard deviation, which assumes a normal
stroke displacement. To limit frictional variation
distribution, and minimum and maximum limits,
effects no lubricant was used and both the tools and
which are represented in Table 1. Normal
blank were cleaned with an acetone covered cloth
probability plots were performed to ensure a
before each stamping.
normal distribution fit is acceptable.
Blank holder force was monitored and precisely
Blank thickness and width variation was also
controlled to within 1% of the desired value due to
measured for each specimen before forming and is
the resolution of the load cell.
recorded in Table 1 for each of the BHP operating
windows explored.
DP600 Material Variation
3 SprINGBaCK MeaSUreMeNt
900
Average Experimental Max AF Sigma Achieving an accurate, precise and reliable method
Material
800 Mean
Variation to determine the amount of springback was crucial
Min
700 Approximation
to ensuring that the subtle changes in geometry
True Stress (MPa)
600
from stamping to stamping were captured. A
500 simple yet accurate method to characterise the final
400 part shape has been developed which involves the
300 following process.
200 Firstly the channel edges are marked with a white
100 paint marker to ensure a good level of contrast
0 when each channel is scanned. The channels are
then scanned on a flat-bed at a resolution of 300dpi
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35
True Strain
using a black and white filter. The image (*.tif) is
Figure 3: Material variation of the DP600 steel, then inverted to provide a white background
indicating the variation approximation used within leaving a solid outline of the channel profile. A
the AutoForm FEM simulations.
MATLAB script has been developed to process the
image, utilising chain coding which converts the
541
image file into a x-y data set. To allow reference to 5. The selected experimental data set represents the
the tooling geometry when analysing the amount of average punch force response, whilst the nominal
springback, the bottom edge of the channel is simulations were chosen, with all noise parameters
traced. From here the 2D profile is rotated, to set at their mean values. This process also allowed
ensure the flange angles are balanced, providing an the selection of a suitable friction co-efficient
axis of symmetry. A linear regression fit of flange which accurately captured the forming forces.
region allows the angle from horizontal to be Table 2: Description of Numerical Parameters used
determined. The flange is a common mating face, in the FEM simulation.
and its dimensional accuracy is critical at the
assembly stage, hence is a useful metric. Numerical Parameter Value
Tools
3.1 MeaSUreMeNt UNCertaINtY Tool Stiffness 100 N/mm3
To establish the uncertainty in the measurement Tool Columns (Binder) Tool Centre
technique two processes where employed. The first Material
analysed the accuracy and determined if any bias Flow Curve Ludwik
error was prevelant. This involved generating a Yielding Criterion Hill (Isotropic)
CAD profile of a semi-cylindrical channel with a Bi-axial stress factor 1
specifed amount of springback i.e. flange angle of Lubrication – all tools 0.135
5° and performing the springback charaterisation Element Type Elastic-Plastic
measurement process. This was repeated ten times. Shell
The average measured flange angle was 4.96° Meshing
indicating a very small negative bias 0.04° (0.09%) Accuracy User Defined
concluding excellent accuracy in the measurement Radius Penetration 0.04 mm
process. Max Element Angle 22.5°
To assess the precision of the process, the spread of Initial Number of Elements 2500
the results from the ten tests were investigated, Max Refinement Level 0
with a total range of flange angle measurements Layers 11
equalling 0.09º. Hence, the measurement technique Time Steps
exhibits excellent resolution with the ability to Max Displacement 0.2
accurately and reliably measure the final flange Comparison of Punch Forces
angle of the component. 50
Average Experimental
45 BHP = 57 MPa
AutoForm Prediction
40
4 FeM SIMULatION prOCeDUre

Drawing Force (kN)
35
30
BHP = 21 MPa
The FEM simulation was performed using 25
AutoForm v4.1. Initially, a sensitivity analysis of 20
numerical parameters was performed to ensure an

15
10
accurate, stable and converged solution of the 5
forming process was achieved. The numerical 0

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
parameters used are described in Table 2 for all Punch Stroke (mm)
simulations. Figure 5: Comparison of experimental and

It was found that the mesh density was most AutoForm predicted punch forces vs displacement
sensitive to springback, whilst, small changes in curves for both Blank Holder Pressure settings.
the max-displacement (time step) had little effect
on springback, but affected the stability of the 4.2 StOChaStIC aNaLYSIS
solutions punch force predictions. Therefore, to Two noise analyses were performed, replicating the
ensure that numerical perturbations had minimal two BHP settings explored experimentally. One
effect, the adaptive meshing scheme employed by hundred individual simulations were performed per
AutoForm, to reduce simulation times, has been operating window explored, as recommended by
disabled and constant mesh geometry used AutoForm. The noise parameters are defined as
throughout the entire simulation. To improve outlined in Table 1 using Gaussian approximations.
computational efficiency a double symmetry model The Ultimate Tensile Stress was defined as
was used. dependent on the Yield Stress, to replicate the
material behaviour as indicated in Figure 4. All
4.1 COrreLatION OF NOMINaL other noise parameters are independent. The
SIMULatION variation input space is automatically determined
To ensure the simulation accurately reflected the via a Latin Hypercube sampling technique [9],
experimental process the punch force during which is employed by AutoForm Sigma. The
forming was recorded and a comparison performed simulations were automatically performed and the
with the AutoForm prediction as shown in Figure output response generated.
542
5 reSULtS 0.22° when compared to the experimental

response. A more pointed distribution is evident in
To investigate the variation in springback, each Figure 7 indicating the slightly larger difference in
individual simulations part profile after springback IQR to total range.
was exported. This allowed the same measurement
process to be applied to the simulated data as was Springback Distribution (BHP = 21 MPa)
performed on the experimental trials minus the 0.25 100%
physical scanning and chain coding. AutoForm
Mean = 8.86
Histograms for both experimental and AutoForm 0.2

StDev = 0.24
Median = 8.85
80%
predicted data sets were generated and some basic IQR = 0.34
Experimental
Normalised Frequency
Min = 8.35
Mean = 9.14
statistical descriptors determined as shown in Max = 9.55
StDev = 0.37
Cumulative (%)
Range = 1.20
0.15 Median = 9.14 60%
Figure 6 and Figure 7. A normalised frequency is
Range (%) =
IQR = 0.55
Min = 8.14
used to allow direct comparison between different 0.1
Max = 9.83
Range = 1.69 40%
sample sizes. Cumulative density plots are also Range (%) =
18.49
illustrated, which aid in determining probable 0.05 20%

reject rates if tolerance levels are assigned. Figure
8 provides a summary indicating the mean 0 0%
springback magnitude, which is a measure of 8 8.2 8.4 8.6 8.8 9 9.2 9.4
Springback - Flange Angle (deg)
9.6 9.8 10 10.2 10.4
accuracy. Precision is assessed by evaluating the

total range and interquartile range (IQR). Figure 6: Springback distribution comparisons
between AutoForm and experimental data at
5.1 aCCUraCY aSSeSMeNt BHP = 21 MPa.
Assessing the accuracy of the AutoForm’s ability Springback Distribution (BHP = 57 MPa)
to predict springback, involves an analysis of the 0.25 100%
mean response. At the lower BHP operating

window of 21 MPa, AutoForm is able to predict 0.2 AutoForm Experimental
80%
the mean springback magnitude with a high level Mean = 4.21

Normalised Frequency
Mean = 5.43
StDev = 0.26 StDev = 0.39
of accuracy, a difference of only 0.28° (approx 3%) Median = 4.16
Cumulative (%)
Median = 5.45
0.15 IQR = 0.24 60%
IQR = 0.46
when compared to the experimental mean. The Min = 3.69
Max = 5.45
Min = 4.32
Max = 6.17
higher BHP setting of 57 MPa shows a slight larger

Range = 1.77 Range = 1.85
0.1 Range (%) = 41.95 Range (%) = 34.10 40%
mean difference of 1.22° (approx 22%). However,

this magnitude in discrepancy is still quite small in 0.05 20%
terms of an applied usage. The result indicates a

slight inaccuracy in the prediction at higher strains; 0 0%
however, overall accuracy is still very good.

3.5 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.5 4.7 4.9 5.1 5.3 5.5 5.7 5.9 6.1 6.3 6.5 6.7 6.9
Springback - Flange Angle (deg)
Figure 7: Springback distribution comparisons

5.2 preCISION aSSeSMeNt
between AutoForm and experimental data at
Precision is more difficult to quantitatively assess, BHP = 57 MPa.
as the output response may fit to different
distribution types, each with different statistical Comparison of Mean, IQR and Range between
characteristics. Therefore, the total range, which AutoForm and Experimental Data
captures 100% of the output response and the 10
9
8.86
9.14
AutoForm
interquartile range (IQR), which represent the 8
Experimental
range between the first and third percentiles, have 7

Flange Angle (°)
been investigated. The IQR is a good 6 5.43
representation of statistical dispersion as it is not 5 4.21

4
heavily influenced by outliers, like the total range 3
and is not dependent on the type of distribution. 2 1.20
1.69 1.77 1.85
Hence, the two metrics provide a good overview to 1 0.34 0.55 0.24 0.46
the shape of the output response space. 0

Mean IQR Range Mean IQR Range
Firstly, the lower BHP setting shows a slightly BHP = 21 MPa BHP = 57 MPa
reduced variation prediction from the FEM when
compared to the experimental histogram as shown Figure 8: Comparison of mean springback
in Figure 6. There was a difference in the total response and the total range for the AutoForm
range prediction of 0.5° and IQR difference of predictions and experimental data sets.
0.21° when compared to the mean experimental
data.
The higher BHP setting exhibits quite a precise
6 DISCUSSION
prediction from the FEM, with a total range In general, the accuracy and precision predictions
difference of only 0.08° and IQR difference of of springback variation were very good, with
543
relatively small differences shown in all 8 aCKNOWLeDGeMeNt

comparisons made. However, the common trend
shows that the AutoForm predictions under The authors would like to acknowledge a fellow
estimate the variation of the forming process as colleague, Michael Pereira, who has helped with
shown in Figure 8 by the IQR and range. This the design and manufacture of the tooling for the
could be due to two factors. Firstly, as a limited experimental data set. We would also like to
number of tensile tests were performed due to time acknowledge Prof. P. D. Hodgson and Prof. J. L.
and material limitations, the potential variation in Duncan for the support and motivation throughout
material properties could have been this work. The authors also acknowledge the
underestimated, which has effectively reduced the support of the Australian Research Council, (Large
input variation space and in-turn the output Grant LP0455249)
response is reduced of the FEM simulation. Also,
the variation of material properties in each blank 9 reFereNCeS
formed could not be tracked, therefore, the 36
[1] Blumel, K.W., et al.: Variations of the
tensile tests performed had to be purely
Stamping Process. In: Controlling Sheet Metal
representative of the actual material variation for
Forming Processes, 9-16, 1988.
all of the formed sheets. Secondly, despite attempts
[2] AutoSteel Partnership, Material Uniformity of
to eliminate fluctuations in friction conditions,
High Strength Sheet Steels-Vol 2., 1998,
through a dry forming process, small differences in
Auto/Steel Partnership.
surface texture of the incoming sheet and changes
[3] Vlahinos, A. and Kelkar, S.: Body-in-White
in tribological conditions after repeated stampings
Weight Reduction via Probabilistic Modeling
could have introduced a further input variation
of Manufacturing Variations. In: International
source.
Body Engineering Conference and Exhibition.
In spite of some of the inabilities to precisely
SAE International, 2001.
capture all variation sources and quantities, the
[4] Strano, M.: Optimization under uncertainty of
major sources of noise have been considered and
sheet-metal-forming processes by the finite
good results are apparent. This indicates that for
element method. Proceedings of the Institution
this relatively controlled stamping process, the
of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of
effect of unknown sources of variations are
Engineering Manufacture, 220(8): 1305-1315,
minimal and our ‘known unknowns’ contribute to
2006.
the majority of the final variation we see.
[5] Atzema, E.H., et al.: Long and Short Term
Strategy to Deal with Material Property
7 CONCLUSIONS Variation in Sheet-Metal Forming. In: IDDRG
An assessment of a current stochastic simulation 2006, 121-128, 2006.
tool, AutoForm Sigma v4.1, has been performed by [6] AutoSteel Partnership., Automotive Sheet Steel
developing a semi-controlled experimental data set Stamping Process Variation, Technical
at two Blank Holder Pressure settings with the Report, 2000.
variation in springback as the main focus. Noise [7] de Souza, T. and Rolfe, B.: Multivariate
sources have been quantitatively captured and modelling of variability in sheet metal
characterised through a series of standard tensile forming. Journal of Materials Processing
tests and blank geometry measurements, whilst the Technology, In Press, 2007.
variation of process parameters such as friction [8] de Souza, T., et al.: Quantitative Analysis of
have been minimised by conducting a non- Robustness in a Simulated Stamping Process.
lubricated trial. In: IDDRG 2006, 543-550, 2006.
The experimental trials were replicated using [9] Sigvant, M.: Influence on Simulation Results
AutoForm Sigma and the springback variation from Material and Process Scatter. In:
predictions in terms of both accuracy and precision IDDRG 2006, 551-558, 2006.
were very good. Mean springback prediction were [10] Carleer, D.B.: Scattering Parameters is Not a
accurate to within approximately 1° and the Problem Anymore For Robust Forming
precision assessment of the IQR was within 0.22° Processes. In: IDDRG 2004, 124-132, 2004.
in the worst of the two cases. This indicates that the [11] Carleer, D.B. and Kannan, K.S.: The new
key sources of variation were appropriately frontier in stamping simulation - ensuring
captured and the unknown sources had little effect. production robustness under the "reality" of
The high level of accuracy and precision shown process and raw material scatter. In:
has entrusted more confidence within the FEM tool Numiform 2004.
and is consequently a step forward to dissolving [12] Rolfe, B., et al.: Analysis of Stamping
the differences between a ‘realistic’ stamping Production Data with view towards Quality
process and the ‘deterministic’ behaviour of Management. In: 9th International Conference
traditional FEM simulation tools. on Manufacturing Excellence, 1-15, 2003.
544
PARAMETER IDENTIFICATION FOR THE STEEL LH800 AND

ITS APPLICATION TO THE SIMULATION OF DRAW-BENDING
AND DEEP-DRAWING
C.Barthel1∗, B.Svendsen1 ,
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, D-44227 Dortmund, Germany
ABSTRACT: The work deals with a draw-bending process where a strip is being pulled from right to left
over a roller under tension, and with deep drawing of a cup. After the description of the material model used in
the simulations the identification of the hardening parameters for isotropic, kinematic and combined hardening
is discussed. Finally the simulation results for the draw bending are presented and compared to experimental
results. The deep drawing simulation is work in process and will be presented at the conference.
KEYWORDS: metal forming, springback, draw-bending, deep-drawing
1 INTRODUCTION suming pure isotropic or kinematic hardening.

The draw bending processes was investigated exper-
Sheet metal forming is one of the most important imentally as well which facilitates a comparison of
manufacturing processes. Computer simulation has simulation results and test results.
become the tool for modeling such processes and
also for predicting the springback in the final part.
This work deals with two different metal forming
2 MATERIAL MODEL
processes, namely draw-bending and deep-drawing The material model for LH800 used in this work
of a cup. Common to both processes as to most restricts attention for simplicity to isothermal com-
metal forming processes is the fact that very high bined hardening processes. In the on-going charac-
plastic deformations but small elastic deformations terization of this material, the presence of possible
occur. Hence the theory of large deformations and additional hardening processes such as cross hard-
an appropriate modeling of the hardening behavior ening [1, 2] is being investigated. For simplicity,
are important. this effect is neglected in the current work. In this
Due to its geometry the springback has an enormous context, the current model is based on the ansatz
impact on the final shape of the strip in the draw-
bending case. Therefore springback was taken into K = RE MRT
E
account in the simulations which have been carried
out with Abaqus Standard. As will be shown later, for the Kirchhoff stress K and the evolution equa-
the deformation-results depend strongly on the hard- tion
ening model. The draw-bending model is therefore
appropriate for the validation of the parameter iden- Ṁ = CE [DE ]
tification.
for Mandel stress. Here, RE is the spin of the inter-
An elasto-plastic material model working with a mediate configuration, CE the elasticity tensor, and
Voce-ansatz for the isotropic hardening and an
Armstrong-Frederick form for the evolution of DE = RT
E DRE − DP
the back-stress tensor was used for the simula-
tions (section 2). The identification of the Voce- the rate of elastic deformation. The latter depends
parameters and the material parameters belonging to on the rate of continuum deformation D. Restrict-
the Armstrong-Frederick form is part of this work ing attention here to pure hardening behaviour, the
(section 3). The parameter were identified under the inelastic behavior is determined constitutively by the
assumption of combined hardening as well as as- inelastic rate of deformation DP and the plastic spin
WP . In terms of the continuum spin W, the evolu-
∗ Corresponding
author: Department of Mechanical Engi- tion equation for RE is given as
neering, Leonhard Euler Str. 5, D-44227 Dortmund, Ger-
many, Phone: +49 231 755 5717, Fax: +49 231 755 2688,
c.barthel@mech.mb.uni-dortmund.de ṘE = WRE − RE WP .
545
For simplicity, effects related to WP (i.e., texture

evolution) are neglected here, in which case this spin
is zero and the intermediate configuration rotates
with the continuum. On the other hand, the inelastic
rate of deformation DP is given by the associated
relation
DP = λ NP
in terms of the plastic multiplier λ and the direction
NP = ∂M−X φ
of inelastic flow determined by the yield function


φ= (M − X) · A(M − X) − σY0 − r.
Here, X is the back stress tensor, σY0 the initial

yield stress, and r the variation of the yield stress
due to isotropic hardening. The symmetric fourth-
order tensor A embodies initial flow anisotropy (i.e. Figure 1: Simulation of the tension experiment
Hill orthotropy). In more sophisticated models ac-
counting for additional hardening effects such as, hardening. The matlab routine reads in the exper-
e.g., cross hardening, this tensor evolves due to the imental stress-strain curve in oder to compare to
development of planar dislocation substructures re- the analytical stress-strain function. In the analyt-
sulting in cross hardening [1, 2]. Since the deter- ical function the parameters σY0 , xsat and cx are
mination of the material parameters for such cross chosen by the user and rsat and cr are iteratively
hardening in LH800 represents work in progress, solved by the program. The program takes advan-
this effect is neglected in the current work for sim- tage of the Matlab function “lsqnonlin” which works
plicity. with a least square approach. The parameters for the
The evolution equation for isotropic hardening is combined model were then found by simulating the
given by the Voce-ansatz tension-compression test till the Baschinger-effect
was taken into account in an appropriate manner.
ṙ = cr (rsat − r) λ.
Here, cr and rsat are the saturation rate and the satu-
ration value of r respectively. Kinematic hardening
is modeled by the Armstrong-Frederick form
Ẋ = cx (xsat NP − X) λ
for the evolution of X depending on the saturation

rate cx and the scalar saturation value xsat of X.
3 PARAMTER IDENTIFICATION
Setting rsat , cr , xsat and cx to zero results in ideal
plasticity in which case the initial yield stress is
σY0 . If xsat and cx are chosen equal to zero, pure
isotropic hardening results. On the other hand, set-
ting rsat and cr to zero results in purely kinematic
hardening.
The total amount of hardening is given by the ten-
sion test. Each valid parameter set has to fulfill this
condition. To this end a Matlab-routine was pro- Figure 2: Simulation of the tension-compression ex-
grammed which iteratively evaluates the “isotropic periment
parameters” depending on the given “kinematic pa-
rameters”. For the uniaxial tension case the stress Figure 1 shows the test result and the simulation re-
can be expressed as a function of the strain by in- sults for the uniaxial tension test. The re-calculation
tegrating the evolution equations belonging to the
546
of the tension test succeeds with all three investi- 4 DRAW-BENDING PROCESS
gated parameter sets.
The finite element model for the draw-bending test
In Figure 2 the results for a tension compression test
is shown in Figure 3. This process is simulated here
can be seen. The parameters in the simulations are
in 5 steps by analogy with the experimental proce-
the same as in Figure 1. In the case of unloading
dure. In the first step, the sheet metal strip is pre-
and reloading in the opposite direction the behavior
bent to 90 degrees using the bending tool. Secondly,
is symmetric only in the isotropic case as one would
the bending tool is removed. Thirdly, the strip is
expect. For the combined hardening case the simu-
clamped into the machine at both ends and pulled
lation result is closer to the experiments compared
tight over a rubber roller from both ends, putting it
with the two other hardening types. Table 1 to Ta-
under tension. The actual test begins with the strip
ble 2 show the identified parameters for the different
being pulled from right to left over the roller under
hardening models.
tension, where it experiences bending-unbending.
Table 1: Isotropic hardening parameters Since the roller moves with the strip, there is little or
no friction between them. In the last step, the strip
Parameter Value is unclamped and the resulting springback process is
E 200450 MPa simulated (Figure 4 and Figure 5).
ν 0.3
σY0 340.61 MPa
rsat 276.57 MPa
cr 12.26
Table 2: Kinematic hardening parameters
Parameter Value
E 200450 MPa
ν 0.3
σY0 340.61 MPa
xsat 276.57 MPa
cx 12.26
Figure 3: FE-Model for draw-bending
Table 3: Combined hardening parameters
Parameter Value
E 200450 MPa
ν 0.3
σY0 340.61 MPa
xsat 100.00 MPa
cx 25
rsat 225.23 MPa
cr 5.96
By now also an identification with the optimization

program LS-Opt was done but is not discussed in
this paper.
The tension tests on LH 800 have been carried out in
three different directions to the direction of rolling
indicating a very mild anisotropy which was ne-
glected in the simulations. The producer (Salzgit-
ter AG) names for the r-value for the perpendicular
anisotropy a range from 0.8 to 1.2. Figure 4: Comparison of experimental and FE sim-
ulation results for springback in metal strips subject
to draw-bending (r=10mm)
The finite element model used is based on conven-
547
will be included in the FE-simulations.
6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Financial support for this work was provided by the
German National Science Foundation (DFG) under
the contract SV 8/9-1 in the priority program 1204
and is gratefully acknowledged.
REFERENCES
[1] J. Wang, V. Levkovitch, F. Reusch,
B. Svendsen, J. Huéting, and M. Van Reel. On
the modeling of hardening in metals during
non-proportional loading. In International
Journal of Plasticity 24, pages 1039–1070,
2008.
[2] V. Levkovitch and B. Svendsen. Accurate
hardening modeling as basis for the realistic
simulation of sheet forming processes with
Figure 5: Comparison of experimental and FE sim- complex strain-path changes. In Proceedings of
ulation results for springback in metal strips subject the 9th international Conference on Numerical
to draw-bending (r=15mm) Methods in Industrial Forming Processes,
pages 1331–1336, 2007, Porto.
tional shell elements. For efficiency, the symmetry [3] J. Wang, V. Levkovitch, F. Reusch, and
of the strip (Figure 3) has been exploited in the sim- B. Svendsen. On the modeling and simulation
ulation. The minimal friction taking place between of induced anisotropy in polycrystalline metals
the roller and strip has been modelled in ABAQUS with application to springback. In Archive of
via the definition of a ”Contact Property” of ”Fric- Applied Mechanics 74, pages 890–899, 2005.
tion” type. A comparison of the simulation and ex-
perimental results for springback of the strip using
rollers of diameter 10 mm and 15 mm are shown in
Figure 4 and Figure 5. The agreement between these
is very good in the case of the combined hardening
modeling. For comparison, simulation results based
on models for purely isotropic and purely kinematic
hardening are also shown for the 10 mm case in Fig-
ure 4. As shown, the purely isotropic model results
in an overestimate, and the purely kinematic model
in an underestimate, of the amount of springback. In
particular, note that the purely isotropic model un-
derestimates the amount of inelastic deformation. In
order to satisfy the boundary conditions, then, the
amount of elastic deformation is overestimated, re-
sulting in too much springback. Similar results have
been obtained for other types of steels, e.g., DP 600
[3].
5 CONCLUSIONS
Using the tension-compression test results, models
for purely isotropic, purely kinematic, and com-
bined hardening have been identified for the new
steel LH800. The identified model was validated
with the help of the finite-element simulation of
draw-bending. The deep drawing process is work in
progress which will be presented at the conference.
This holds for the experiments and the simulations.
In particular spring-back and distortional hardening
548

07 Numisheet2008 Proceedings Chapter7

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

07 Numisheet2008 Proceedings Chapter7

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Chapter 7

FORMABILITY AND SPRINGBACK OF TWIP AUTOMOTIVE

Kanghwan Ahn1, Donghoon Yoo1, Kyung-Hwan Chung1, Min-Hong Seo2,

KEYWORDS: TWIP Steel, Springback, Formability.

1 INTRODUCTION high manganese content. Unlike other high strength

True Stress (MPa)

high n value, 0.68, in Fig.2. Yield stresses and R- Tension

1200 -0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05

1000 True Strain

2.5 YIELD FUNCTION

s cc Ccc  s Ccc  T  ı Lcc  ı ,

Here, Cc and Ccc (therefore, Lc and Lcc ) contain

Newton-Raphson procedure and the exponent, M 2.6 CHARACTERIZATION OF THE

1.5 V total  V comp

D V total  V iso (8)

where V iso and D represent the effective isotropic

V tot 2362 ( H  0.078)

1.08 Exp. 11.99 H

Angle from RD (Degree) True Strain

Figure 8: R-value variation Figure 9: Tension-Compression curves with

The experimental failure point of the water-jet

0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 1000

Eng. Stress (MPa)

200 and numerically. The size of the milled specimen

Based on the combined hardening model, the

while the ABAQUS/Implicit was used to simulate 4 CONCLUSIONS

200 for Aluminum Alloy Sheets – Part 1: Theory.

SprINGBaCK preDICtION BY YOShIDa-UeMOrI MODeL

Ninshu Ma1*, Yasuyoshi Umezu1, Yuko Watanabe1, takaki Ogawa1

aBStraCt: Authors programmed a subroutine of Yoshida-Uemori model to commercial software LS-

KeYWOrDS: Springback, Tool compensation, Kinematic hardening model, Solid, Shell.

1 INtrODUCtION 2 LS-DYNa USer SUBrOUtINe

measured cyclic stress-strain relation must be

Figure 1: Young’s modulus change with plastic

2.3 YOShIDa-UeMOrI MODeL[2]

2.4 eXperIMeNt aND VerIFICatION OF

4 SprINGBaCK OF UNDer BODY

(b) Boundary condition for springback

Figure 7: Cross member model for simulation [8]

Table 3: Stamping conditions in simulation

Table 4: Material parameters for Y-U model of

4.2 SIMULateD DraWING reSULtS

good agreement is obtained between measurement VT ^Vˆ ,Vˆ ,0,Wˆ ,0,0`

Where, V M ,V T ,V C are called as bending stress,

ᵒᵎ d1 d4 membrane stress and out of plane stress,

Figure 10: Springback displacement due to

5 SprINGBaCK reSearCh 6 COMpeNSatION OF tOOL

Initial Tools (CAD) 6.3 eXaMpLe OF tOOL COMpeNSatION

Tool compensation (FEM)

10.0 Automotive Stamping, Proc. of

ADVANCED MODELING OF REVERSE LOADING EFFECTS FOR

Waldemar Kubli 1, Andriy Krasovskyy1*, Matthias Sester1

KEYWORDS: Bauschinger effect, Kinematic hardening, Sheet metal forming, Springback

1 INTRODUCTION for sheet metals is complex. Sheet metal tends to

plastification, is defined by the initial tangent

εrl = (2) 0.6

tangent modulus El typically reduced exponenti- 0

reduction of E0 , typically ranging between 0.1 and

between 20 and 60. The influence of El on the

Figure 4: Influence of the parameter K on the

1 evolution of reversal stress and tangent modulus

200 hardening at the same accumulated strain. In [7],

s cc Ccc s Ccc T ı Lcc ı ,

1.5 V total V comp

D V total V iso (8)

V tot 2362 ( H 0.078)

1.08 Exp. 11.99 H