journal article·2022-03

Comparison of Johnson-Cook and Cowper-Symonds models for aluminum alloy sheet by inverse identification based on electromagnetic bulge

Wei Liu, Haibo Zhou, Jiaqi Li, Zhenghua Meng, Zhigang Xu, Shangyu Huang

Publisher page

Abstract

The strain rates of sheet metal often reach several 103 s−1 in various high speed forming processes, and how to determine the strain-rate-sensitive hardening behavior of sheet metal at such high strain rate is an essential issue. The dynamic bulge experiment of aluminum alloy sheet was performed by using electromagnetic pulse forces. The strain-rate-sensitive parameters of hardening models were inversely identified by minimizing the discrepancy between the simulated and experimental displacements of specimen after electromagnetic bulge. The strain-rate-sensitive hardening models of Johnson-Cook and Cowper-Symonds were determined for 2024-O aluminum alloy sheet. Both the models showed that 2024-O aluminum alloy sheet exhibits a positive strain rate sensitivity when the strain rate rises higher than 500 s−1. The flow stresses of Johnson-Cook model increase very slightly when the strain rate ranges from 500 s−1 to 3500 s−1, and they increase about 10% when compared with the quasi-static ones. Meanwhile, the flow stresses of Cowper-Symonds model increase progressively and more significantly. They increase from about 5–35% when the strain rate changed from 500 s−1 to 3500 s−1. The electromagnetic hole-flanging experiment was also conducted to verify that Johnson-Cook model is more accurate for strain-rate-sensitive hardening model of 2024-O aluminum alloy sheet at high strain rates of 103 s−1.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: High-Velocity Impact and Material Behavior · Metal Forming Simulation Techniques · Metal and Thin Film Mechanics

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (28)

Show source-provided references
1. Zittel G (2010) A historical review of high speed metal forming. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on High Speed Forming. Columbus, pp 1-14. https://doi.org/10.17877/DE290R-868710.17877/DE290R-8687 ↗
2. Mynors DJ, Zhang B (2002) Applications and capabilities of explosive forming. J Mater Process Technol 125:1–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-0136(02)00413-210.1016/S0924-0136(02)00413-2 ↗
3. Ji-Yeon S, Kang BY (2017) Development of electrohydraulic forming process for aluminum sheet with sharp edge. Adv Mater Sci Eng 2017:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/271509210.1155/2017/2715092 ↗
4. Psyk V, Risch D, Kinsey BL, Tekkaya AE, Kleiner M (2011) Electromagnetic forming-A review. J Mater Process Technol 211:787–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.12.01210.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.12.012 ↗
5. Vivek A, Brune RC, Hansen SR, Daehn GS (2013) Vaporizing foil actuator used for impulse forming and embossing of titanium and aluminum alloys. J Mater Process Technol 214:865–875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.12.00310.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.12.003 ↗
6. Ma Y, Xu Y, Zhang SH, Banabic D, El-Aty AA, Chen DY et al (2018) Investigation on formability enhancement of 5A06 aluminium sheet by impact hydroforming. CIRP Ann 67:281–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2018.04.02410.1016/j.cirp.2018.04.024 ↗
7. Hahn M, Tekkaya A (2020) A quick model for demonstrating high speed forming capabilities. Mech Res Commun 108:103579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechrescom.2020.10357910.1016/j.mechrescom.2020.103579 ↗
8. Psyk V, Scheffler C, Tulke M, Winter S, Guilleaume C, Brosius A (2020) Determination of material and failure characteristics for high-speed forming via high-speed testing and inverse numerical simulation. J Manuf Mater Process 4(2):31. https://doi.org/10.3390/jmmp402003110.3390/jmmp4020031 ↗
9. ISO 26203-1 (2018) Metallic materials — tensile testing at high strain rates — part 1: elastic-bar-type systems
10. Tan X, Guo W, Gao X, Liu K, Wang J, Zhou P (2017) A new technique for conducting split hopkinson tensile bar test at elevated temperatures. Exp Tech 41:191–201. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40799-017-0167-410.1007/s40799-017-0167-4 ↗
11. Chen WN, Song B (2011) Split Hopkinson (Kolsky) Bar: Design, testing and applications. Springer, Berlin10.1007/978-1-4419-7982-7 ↗
12. Yan SL, Yang H, Li HW (2014) Experimental study of macro-micro dynamic behaviors of 5A0X aluminum alloys in high velocity deformation. Mater Sci Eng A 598:197–206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2013.12.00110.1016/j.msea.2013.12.001 ↗
13. Prakash G, Singh NK, Gupta NK (2020) Deformation behaviours of Al2014-T6 at different strain rates and temperatures. Struct 26:193–203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.istruc.2020.03.06810.1016/j.istruc.2020.03.068 ↗
14. ISO 16808 (2014) Metallic materials-Sheet and strip-determination of biaxial stress-strain curve by means of bulge test with optical measuring systems
15. Grolleau V, Gary G, Mohr D (2008) Biaxial testing of sheet materials at high strain rates using viscoelastic bars. Exp Mech 48:293–306. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11340-007-9073-510.1007/s11340-007-9073-5 ↗
16. Ramezani M, Ripin ZM (2010) Combined experimental and numerical analysis of bulge test at high strain rates using split Hopkinson pressure bar apparatus. J Mater Process Technol 210:1061–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.02.01610.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.02.016 ↗
17. Brosius A, Beerwald C, Kleiner M (2006) Determination of flow curves at high strain rates using the electromagnetic forming process and an iterative finite element simulation scheme. CIRP Ann 55:267–270. https://doi.org/10.1051/jp4:2002074910.1051/jp4:20020749 ↗
18. Henchi I, Da EG, Yuan Z, Vivek A, Stander N (2008) Material constitutive parameter identification using an electromagnetic ring expansion experiment coupled with LS-DYNA and LS-OPT. In: 10th International LS-DYNA Users Conference
19. Johnson JR, Taber GA, Daehn GS, Columbus (2010) Constitutive relation development through the FIRE test. In: Proceedings of 4th International Conference on High Speed Forming. Columbu. https://doi.org/10.17877/DE290R-1577110.17877/DE290R-15771 ↗
20. Jeanson AC, Avrillaud G, Mazars G, Cuq-Lelandais JP, Bay F, Massoni E et al (2014) Determination of high strain-rate behavior of metals: applications to magnetic pulse forming and electrohydraulic forming. Key Eng Mater 611–612:643–649. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.611-612.64310.4028/www.scientific.net/KEM.611-612.643 ↗
21. Li HW, Yan SL, Zhan M, Zhang X (2019) Eddy current induced dynamic deformation behaviors of aluminum alloy during EMF: Modeling and quantitative characterization. J Mater Process Technol 263:423–439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.08.02410.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.08.024 ↗
22. Chu YY, Lee RS, Psyk V, Tekkaya A (2012) Determination of the flow curve at high strain rates using electromagnetic punch stretching. J Mater Process Technol 212:1314–1323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2012.01.01710.1016/j.jmatprotec.2012.01.017 ↗
23. Noh HG, Lee K, Kang BS, Kim J (2016) Inverse parameter estimation of the cowper-symonds material model for electromagnetic free bulge forming. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 17:1483–1492. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12541-016-0174-x10.1007/s12541-016-0174-x ↗
24. Deng H, Yang S, Li G, Zhang X, Cui J (2020) Novel method for testing the high strain rate tensile behavior of aluminum alloys. J Mater Process Technol 280:116601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2020.11660110.1016/j.jmatprotec.2020.116601 ↗
25. Paese E, Geier M, Homrich RP, Rosa PAR, Rossi R (2019) Sheet metal electromagnetic forming using a flat spiral coil: Experiments, modeling, and validation. J Mater Process Technol 263:408–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.08.03310.1016/j.jmatprotec.2018.08.033 ↗
26. Tian Y, Huang L, Ma HJ, Li JJ (2014) Establishment and comparison of four constitutive models of 5A02 aluminium alloy in high-velocity forming process. Mater Des 54:587–597. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.08.09510.1016/j.matdes.2013.08.095 ↗
27. CANTWELL W J (2011) Structural behaviour of fibre metal laminates subjected to a low velocity impact. Sci China Phys Mech 54:1168–1177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11433-011-4261-910.1007/s11433-011-4261-9 ↗
28. Gan T, Yu ZQ, Zhao YX, Evsyukov SA, Lai XM (2018) Effects of backward path parameters on formability in conventional spinning of aluminum hemispherical parts. T Nonferr Metal Soc 28:328–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1003-6326(18)64666-710.1016/S1003-6326(18)64666-7 ↗