Research Papers

Finite Element Analysis of Self-Pierce Riveting in Magnesium Alloys Sheets

[+] Author and Article Information
J. F. C. Moraes, J. B. Jordon

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
The University of Alabama,
Tuscaloosa, AL 35401

D. J. Bammann

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Mississippi State University,
Mississippi State, MS 39762

Contributed by the Materials Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING MATERIALS AND TECHNOLOGY. Manuscript received January 21, 2014; final manuscript received November 6, 2014; published online December 12, 2014. Assoc. Editor: Marwan K. Khraisheh.

J. Eng. Mater. Technol 137(2), 021002 (Apr 01, 2015) (9 pages) Paper No: MATS-14-1016; doi: 10.1115/1.4029032 History: Received January 21, 2014; Revised November 06, 2014; Online December 12, 2014

Conventional fusion joining methods, such as resistance spot welding (RSW), have been demonstrated to be ineffective for magnesium alloys. However, self-pierce riveting (SPR) has recently been shown as an attractive joining technique for lightweight metals, including magnesium alloys. While the SPR joining process has been experimentally established on magnesium alloys through trial and error, this joining process is not fully developed. As such, in this work, we explore simulation techniques for modeling the SPR process that could be used to optimize this joining method for magnesium alloys. Due to the process conditions needed to rivet the magnesium sheets, high strain rates and adiabatic heat generation are developed that require a robust material model. Thus, we employ an internal state variable (ISV) plasticity material model that captures strain-rate and temperature dependent deformation. In addition, we explore various damage modeling techniques needed to capture the piercing process observed in the joining of magnesium alloys. The simulations were performed using a two-dimensional axisymmetric model with various element deletion criterions resulting in good agreement with experimental data. The simulations results of this study show that the ISV material model is ideally suited for capturing the complex physics of the plasticity and damage observed in the SPR of magnesium alloys.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Atzeni, E., Ippolito, R., and Settineri, L., 2009, “Experimental and Numerical Appraisal of Self-Piercing Riveting,” CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol., 58(1), pp. 17–20. [CrossRef]
Barnes, T. A., and Pashby, I. R., 2000, “Joining Techniques for Aluminum Spaceframes Used in Automobiles Part II—Adhesive Bonding and Mechanical Fasteners,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 99(1–3), pp. 72–79. [CrossRef]
Yan, J., Xu, Z., and Li, Z., 2005, “Microstructure Characteristics and Performance of Dissimilar Welds Between Magnesium Alloy and Aluminum Formed by Friction Stirring,” Scr. Mater., 53(5), pp. 585–589. [CrossRef]
Czerwinski, F., 2011, “Welding and Joining of Magnesium Alloys,” Magnesium Alloys—Design, Processing and Properties, F.Czerwinski, ed., Intech, Bolton, ON, Canada, pp. 469–491.
Florea, R. S., Solanki, K. N., Bammann, D. J., Baird, J. C., Jordon, J. B., and Castanier, M. P., 2012, “Resistance Spot Welding of 6061-T6 Aluminum: Failure Loads and Deformation,” Mater. Des., 34(1–4), pp. 624–630. [CrossRef]
Ren, D., Liu, L., and Li, Y., 2011, “Investigation on Overlap Joining of AZ61 Magnesium Alloy: Laser Welding, Adhesive Bonding, and Laser Weld Bonding,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 61(1–4), pp. 195–204. [CrossRef]
Harooni, M., Carlson, B., and Kovacevic, R., 2014, “Dual-Beam Laser Welding of AZ31B Magnesium Alloy in Zero-Gap Lap Joint Configuration,” Opt. Laser Technol., 56(1), pp. 247–255. [CrossRef]
Jordon, J. B., Horstemeyer, M. F., Daniewicz, S. R., Badarinarayan, H., and Grantham, J., 2010, “Fatigue Characterization and Modeling of Friction Stir Spot Welds in Magnesium AZ31 Alloy,” ASME J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 132(4), p. 41008. [CrossRef]
Wang, J. W., Liu, Z. X., Shang, Y., Liu, A. L., Wang, M. X., Sun, R. N., and Wang, P.-C., 2011, “Self-Piercing Riveting of Wrought Magnesium AZ31 Sheets,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 133(3), p. 031009. [CrossRef]
Porcaro, R., Hanssen, A. G., Langseth, M., and Aalberg, A., 2006, “Self-Piercing Riveting Process: An Experimental and Numerical Investigation,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 171(1), pp. 10–20. [CrossRef]
He, X., Pearson, I., and Young, K., 2008, “Self-Pierce Riveting for Sheet Materials: State of the Art,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 199(1–3), pp. 27–36. [CrossRef]
Durandet, Y., Deam, R., Beer, A., Song, W., and Blacket, S., 2010, “Laser Assisted Self-Pierce Riveting of AZ31 Magnesium Alloy Strips,” Mater. Des., 31(1), pp. S13–S16. [CrossRef]
Casalino, G., Rotondo, A., and Ludovico, A., 2008, “On the Numerical Modelling of the Multiphysics Self Piercing Riveting Process Based on the Finite Element Technique,” Adv. Eng. Softw., 39(9), pp. 787–795. [CrossRef]
Hoang, N.-H., Porcaro, R., Langseth, M., and Hanssen, A.-G., 2010, “Self-Piercing Riveting Connections Using Aluminium Rivets,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 47(3–4), pp. 427–439. [CrossRef]
Huang, L., Lasecki, J. V., Guo, H., and Su, X., 2014, “Finite Element Modeling of Dissimilar Metal Self-Piercing Riveting Process,” SAE Int. J. Mater. Manf., 7(3), pp. 698–705. [CrossRef]
Bouchard, P. O., Laurent, T., and Tollier, L., 2008, “Numerical Modeling of Self-Pierce Riveting—From Riveting Process Modeling Down to Structural Analysis,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 202(1–3), pp. 290–300. [CrossRef]
Bammann, D., 1984, “An Internal Variable Model of Viscoplasticity,” Int. J. Eng. Sci., 22(8), pp. 1041–1053. [CrossRef]
Bammann, D., and Aifantis, E. C., 1989, “A Damage Model for Ductile Metals,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 116(3), pp. 355–362. [CrossRef]
Bammann, D. J., Chiesa, M. L., and Johnson, G. C., 1996, “Modeling Large Deformation and Failure in Manufacturing Processes,” Theoretical and Applied Mechanics , T.Tatsumi, E.Wannabe, and T.Kambe, eds., Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp. 256–276.
Horstemeyer, M., and Gokhale, A., 1999, “A Void–Crack Nucleation Model for Ductile Metals,” Int. J. Solids Struct., 36(33), pp. 5029–5055. [CrossRef]
Marin, E. B., Bammann, D. J., Regueiro, R. A., and Johnson, G. C., 2006, “On the Formulation, Parameter Identification and Numerical Integration of the EMMI Model: Plasticity and Isotropic Damage,” Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA, Report No. SAND2006-0200.
Horstemeyer, M. F., 2001, “From Atoms to Autos: A New Design Paradigm Using Microstructure-Property Modeling. Part 1: Monotonic Loading Conditions,” Sandia National Laboratories, Livermore, CA, Report No. SAND2000-8662.
Horstemeyer, M. F., and Wang, P., 2004, “Cradle-to-Grave Simulation-Based Design Incorporating Multiscale Microstructure-Property Modeling: Reinvigorating Design With Science,” J. Comput. Mater. Des., 10(1), pp. 13–34. [CrossRef]
Jordon, J. B., Horstemeyer, M. F., Solanki, K., and Xue, Y., 2007, “Damage and Stress State Influence on the Bauschinger Effect in Aluminum Alloys,” Mech. Mater., 39(10), pp. 920–931. [CrossRef]
Cocks, A. C. F., and Ashby, M. F., 1980, “Intergranular Fracture During Power-Law Creep Under Multiaxial Stresses,” Met. Sci., 14(8–9), pp. 8–9. [CrossRef]
Cocks, A. C. F., and Ashby, M. F., 1982, “On Creep Fracture By Void Growth,” Prog. Mater. Sci., 27(3–4), pp. 189–244. [CrossRef]
Hasenpouth, D., 2010, “Tensile High Strain Rate Behavior of AZ31B Magnesium Alloy Sheet,” Master thesis, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada.
Wu, H., Sun, P., and Lin, F., 2011, “Anisotropic and Tensile Flow Behaviors of Mg Alloy AZ31B Thin Sheet in H24 Condition at Elevated Temperatures,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A, 528(6), pp. 2522–2531. [CrossRef]
LSTC, 2012, LS-DYNA Keyword User's Manual, Livermore Software Technology Corp., Livermore, CA.
Bammann, D., Chiesa, M., Horstemeyer, M. F., and Weingarten, L., 1993, “Failure in Ductile Material Using Finite Element Methods,” Structural Crashworthiness and Failure, N.Jones, and T.Weirzbicki, eds., Elsevier Applied Science, London, UK, pp. 1–52.
Ceretti, E., Fiorentino, A., and Giardini, C., 2008, “Process Parameters Influence on Friction Coefficient in Sheet Forming Operations,” Int. J. Mater. Form., 1(S1), pp. 1219–1222. [CrossRef]
Bolz, R. E., and Tuve, G. L., 1973, CRC Handbook of Tables for Applied Engineering Science, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Xu, W. L., Ma, C. H., Li, C. H., and Feng, W. J., 2004, “Sensitive Factors in Springback Simulation for Sheet Metal Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 151(1–3), pp. 217–222. [CrossRef]
Finn, M. J., Galbraith, P. C., Wu, L., Hallquist, J. O., Lum, L., and Lin, T.-L., 1995, “Use of a Coupled Explicit-Implicit Solver for Calculating Spring-Back in Automotive Body Panels,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 50(1–4), pp. 395–409. [CrossRef]
Aberlenc, F., and Babeau, J.-L., 1992, “OPTRIS and FICTURE: Industrial Tools to Modelize Sheet Metal Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 34(1–4), pp. 125–132. [CrossRef]
Ahad, F. R., Enakoutsa, K., Solanki, K. N., and Bammann, D. J., 2014, “Nonlocal Modeling in High-Velocity Impact Failure of 6061-T6 Aluminum,” Int. J. Plast., 55, pp. 108-132. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Schematic of the SPR process steps: (1) clamping, (2) piercing, (3) mechanical interlock obtained, and (4) punch release

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Comparison between the experimental and the ISV model correlation results of a tensile test

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

SPR die and rivet geometry

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Initial configuration of the axisymmetric SPR finite element model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

The SPR process at different time steps: (a) effective stress, (b) effect strain, and (c) final shape of the FEA superimposed on the experimental results. Experimental image adapted from Ref. [9].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Comparison between numerical analysis and experimental results [5] for of the final shape of the SPR: (a) isothermal and strain to failure based on uniaxial tensile results (55%); (b) isothermal, strain to failure of 250% on top sheet; (c) Isothermal and strain to failure of 250% on top and bottom sheets; (d) adiabatic, strain to failure of 250% on top sheet; (e) adiabatic and failure based on damage criterion on top sheet; and (f) adiabatic and failure based on damage criterion on top and bottom sheets. Experimental images adapted from Ref. [9].

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

History plot of one element from top sheet: (a) an element selected in top sheet, (b) temperature, and (c) von Mises Stress

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Comparison between numerical analysis and experimental results showing crack prediction at room temperature for SPR of magnesium alloy: (a) location of the elements deleted on the final configuration of the joint during the simulation, (b) elements deleted from the simulation, and (c) bottom of the joint obtained experimentally. Adapted from Ref. [9].




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