0
RESEARCH PAPERS

A New Model for Springback Prediction for Aluminum Sheet Forming

[+] Author and Article Information
Jenn-Terng Gau1

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL 60115Gau@ceet.niu.edu

Gary L. Kinzel

Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University,Columbus, OH 43210Kinzel.1@osu.edu

1

Corresponding author.

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 127(3), 279-288 (Mar 23, 2005) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1924563 History: Received May 11, 2004; Revised March 23, 2005

A new model for springback, based on isotropic and kinematic hardening models, the Mroz multiple surfaces model, and observations from experimental data, is proposed in this paper. In this model, a material parameter (CM), which is significant after reverse yielding, is suggested to handle the Bauschinger effect. A simple, low-cost, multiple-bending experiment has been developed to determine CM for aluminum alloys AA6022-T4 and AA6111-T4. The new model fits available experimental results better than the isotropic and kinematic hardening models and the Mroz multiple surfaces model.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2005 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Yield surfaces for the new method

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

An example showing how to determine the loading bending moment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

(a) Thirty ton ERC linkage press and (b) the tooling setup

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

The experimental results using AA6022-T4

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

The experimental results of AA6111-T4 with small clearance

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

The experimental results of AA6111-T4 with large clearance

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

The internal stress distributions within the specimen of four different processes of 12.7mm bending radius insert (a) B, (b) BR, (c) BRB, and (d) BRBR processes

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of experimental results with the results of the four different methods for AA6022-T4: (a) 12.7mm radius insert and (b) 9.525mm radius insert

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of experimental results for four different methods using AA6111-T4 with small clearance: (a) 12.7mm radius insert and (b) 9.525mm radius insert

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of experimental results for four different methods using AA6111-T4 with large clearance: (a) 12.7mm radius insert and (b) 9.525mm radius insert

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

The relation between the true stress and true strain in principal direction 1 for four different methods while the specimen undergoes cyclical loading: (a) isotropic hardening, (b) kinematic hardening, (c) Mroz method, and (d) new model

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In