Probabilistic design of aluminum sheet drawing for reduced risk of wrinkling and fracture

Often, sheet drawing processes are designed to provide the geometry of the final part, and then the process parameters such as blank dimensions, blank holder forces (BHFs), press strokes and interface friction are designed and controlled to provide the greatest drawability (largest depth of draw without violating the wrinkling and thinning constraints). The exclusion of inherent process variations in this design can often lead to process designs that are unreliable and uncontrollable. In this paper, a general multi-criteria design approach is presented to quantify the uncertainties and to incorporate them into the response surface method (RSM) based model so as to conduct probabilistic optimization. A surrogate RSM model of the process mechanics is generated using FEM-based high-fidelity models and design of experiments (DOEs), and a simple linear weighted approach is used to formulate the objective function or the quality index (QI). To demonstrate this approach, deep drawing of an aluminum Hishida part is analyzed. With the predetermined blank shape, tooling design and fixed drawing depth, a probabilistic design (PD) is successfully carried out to find the optimal combination of BHF and friction coefficient under variation of material properties. The results show that with the probabilistic approach, the QI improved by 42% over the traditional deterministic design (DD). It also shows that by further reducing the variation of friction coefficient to 2%, the QI will improve further to 98.97%.

[1]  Brad L. Kinsey,et al.  Next generation stamping dies — controllability and flexibility , 2001 .

[2]  Wei Chen,et al.  Probabilistic Design in a Sheet Metal Stamping Process under Failure Analysis , 2005 .

[3]  Beom-Seon Jang,et al.  Managing approximation models in multiobjective optimization , 2003 .

[4]  Jian Cao,et al.  On the prediction of side-wall wrinkling in sheet metal forming processes , 2000 .

[5]  Jasbir S. Arora,et al.  Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering , 2004 .

[6]  Tomas Jansson,et al.  Minimizing the risk of failure in a sheet metal forming process , 2006 .

[7]  Karl Kuzman,et al.  Sensitivity and stability evaluation of the deep drawing process , 2002 .

[8]  Hakim Naceur,et al.  Optimization of drawbead restraining forces and drawbead design in sheet metal forming process , 2001 .

[9]  Tomas Jansson,et al.  Optimizing sheet metal forming processes—Using a design hierarchy and response surface methodology , 2006 .

[10]  Matthew Dingle,et al.  Side-wall thickness in draw die forming , 2007 .

[11]  Sridhar Santhanam,et al.  An algorithm for determining the optimal blank shape for the deep drawing of aluminum cups , 2002 .

[12]  S. K. Maiti,et al.  Sensitivity analysis of a deep drawing process for miniaturized products , 2004 .

[13]  R. H. Wagoner,et al.  Variability of sheet formability and formability testing , 2002 .

[14]  Karl D. Majeske,et al.  Identifying Sources of Variation in Sheet Metal Stamping , 2003 .

[15]  R. H. Myers,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[16]  Robert H. Wagoner,et al.  Modeling of the friction caused by lubrication and surface roughness in sheet metal forming , 2002 .

[17]  John F. Siekirk.  Process variable effects on sheet metal quality , 1986 .

[18]  Michał Kleiber,et al.  Reliability assessment for sheet metal forming operations , 2002 .

[19]  M. M. Moshksar,et al.  Optimization of the tool geometry in the deep drawing of aluminium , 1997 .

[20]  Wei Chen,et al.  Sequential Optimization and Reliability Assessment Method for Metal Forming Processes , 2004 .