Electromagnetic forming limit diagram of AA5182-O aluminum alloy sheet: Marciniak–Kuczynski model, simulation and experiment
Source abstract
Abstract
The experimental acquisition of electromagnetic forming limit is significantly confined due to the non-uniform pulse pressure of electromagnetic actuator and the complex deformation behavior of sheet metal. Hence, it was proposed to determine the electromagnetic forming limit diagram of aluminum alloy sheet by combining theoretical model, numerical simulation and experimental verification. The Marciniak–Kuczynski model embedded with Cowper-Symonds rate-dependent hardening model was derived in order to consider the strain rate effect on the electromagnetic formability of aluminum alloy sheet. The self-loop samples were newly designed with long oval coil for electromagnetic forming experiments to accomplish the typical deformation paths of uniaxial tension and plane strain. The strain rates and strain paths were investigated by numerical simulations. With the electromagnetic forming limits under uniaxial tension and plane strain conditions, the Marciniak–Kuczynski model was calibrated to fully determine the electromagnetic forming limit diagram. The electromagnetic bulging experiment was carried out to validate the electromagnetic forming limit diagram. Compared with the quasi-static forming limit diagram, the electromagnetic forming limit diagram of AA5182-O aluminum alloy is much higher. The electromagnetic forming limits under uniaxial tension, plane strain and equal-biaxial tension conditions are improved by 43%, 53% and 59%, respectively.
Source: expertdata · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metal Forming Simulation Techniques · Metallurgy and Material Forming · Microstructure and mechanical properties
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (23)
Show source-provided references
1. Zhou J, Wan X, Li Y (2015) Advanced aluminiun products and manufacturing technologies applied on vehicles presented at the EuroCarBody conference. Mater Today Proc 2(10):5015–5022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2015.10.09110.1016/j.matpr.2015.10.091 ↗
2. Zheng K, Politis DJ, Wang L, Lin J (2018) A review on forming techniques for manufacturing lightweight complex—shaped aluminium panel components. Int J Lightweight Mater Manuf 1(2):55–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlmm.2018.03.00610.1016/j.ijlmm.2018.03.006 ↗
3. Psyk V, Risch D, Kinsey BL, Tekkaya AE, Kleiner M (2011) Electromagnetic forming—a review. J Mater Process Tech 211(5):787–829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.12.01210.1016/j.jmatprotec.2010.12.012 ↗
4. Li J, Li L, Wan M, Yu H, Liu L (2018) Innovation applications of electromagnetic forming and its fundamental problems. Procedia Manufacturing 15:14–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.07.16510.1016/j.promfg.2018.07.165 ↗
5. Banabic D (2010) Sheet metal forming processes: constitutive modelling and numerical simulation. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (ISBN 978-3-540-88112-4)10.1007/978-3-540-88113-1 ↗
6. Volk W, Groche P, Brosius A, Ghiotti A, Kinsey BL, Liewald M, Madej L, Min J, Yanagimoto J (2019) Models and modelling for process limits in metal forming. CIRP Ann 68(2):775–798. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cirp.2019.05.00710.1016/j.cirp.2019.05.007 ↗
7. Banabic D, Kami A, Comsa DS, Eyckens PJ (2021) Developments of the Marciniak-Kuczynski model for sheet metal formability. Mater Process Tech 287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.11644610.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.116446 ↗
8. Imbert JM, Winkler SL, Worswick MJ, Oliveira DA, Golovashchenko S (2005) The effect of tool-sheet interaction on damage evolution in electromagnetic forming of aluminum alloy sheet. J Eng Mater Technol 127(1):145–153. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.183921210.1115/1.1839212 ↗
9. Golovashchenko SF (2009) Material formability and coil design in electromagnetic forming. J Mater Eng Perform 16(3):314–320. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-007-9058-710.1007/s11665-007-9058-7 ↗
10. Li C, Liu D, Yu H, Ji Z (2009) Research on formability of 5052 aluminum alloy sheet in a quasi-static-dynamic tensile process. Int J Mach Tool Manu 49(2):117–124. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2008.10.00610.1016/j.ijmachtools.2008.10.006 ↗
11. Liu D, Yu H, Li C (2011) Experimental observations of quasi-static-dynamic formability in biaxially strained AA5052-O. J Mater Eng Perform 20(2):223–230. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-010-9676-310.1007/s11665-010-9676-3 ↗
12. Demir K, Goyal S, Hahn M, Tekkaya E (2020) Novel approach and interpretation for the determination of electromagnetic forming limits. Materials 13(18):4175. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma1318417510.3390/ma13184175 ↗
13. Su H, Huang L, Li J, Xiao W, Zhu H, Feng F, Li H, Yan S (2021) Formability of AA 2219-O sheet under quasi-static, electromagnetic dynamic, and mechanical dynamic tensile loadings. J Mater Sci Technol 70:125–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmst.2020.07.02310.1016/j.jmst.2020.07.023 ↗
14. Thomas JD, Triantafyllidis N (2007) Theory of necking localization in unconstrained electromagnetic expansion of thin sheets. Int J Solids Struct 44(21):6744–6767. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2007.03.00710.1016/j.ijsolstr.2007.03.007 ↗
15. Gerdooei M, Dariani BM, Liaghat GH (2009) Effect of material models on formability of sheet metals in explosive forming. World Congress on Engineering (WCE), London
16. Davies R (2012) Sheet Metal Forming and Failure during Biaxial Stretching at High Strain Rates. (Doctoral dissertation Université de Strasbourg). https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-00745707
17. Woo MA, Song WJ, Kang BS, Kim J (2019) Acquisition and evaluation of theoretical forming limit diagram of Al 6061–T6 in electrohydraulic forming process. Metals 9(4):401. https://doi.org/10.3390/met904040110.3390/met9040401 ↗
18. Zhang SH, Ma Y, Xu Y, El-Aty AA, Chen Y, Shang YL, Chen GQ, Pokrovsky AI (2018) Experimental investigation of novel impact hydroforming technology on sheet metal formability. J Phys Conf Ser 1063:012173. https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/01217310.1088/1742-6596/1063/1/012173 ↗
19. Ma Y, Chen SF, Chen DY, Banabic D, Song HW, Xu Y, Zhang SH, Fan XS, Wang Q (2021) Determination of the forming limit of impact hydroforming by frictionless full zone hydraulic forming test. Int J Mater Form 14(5):1221–1232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-021-01635-710.1007/s12289-021-01635-7 ↗
20. Rohatgi A, Soulami A, Stephens EV, Davies RW, Smith MT (2014) An investigation of enhanced formability in AA5182-O Al during high-rate free-forming at room-temperature: Quantification of deformation history. J Mater Process Tech 214(3):722–732. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.07.01510.1016/j.jmatprotec.2013.07.015 ↗
21. Liu W, Zhou H, Li J, Meng Z, Xu Z, Huang S (2022) Comparison of Johnson-Cook and Cowper-Symonds models for aluminum alloy sheet by inverse identification based on electromagnetic bulge. Int J Mater Form 15(2):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-022-01656-w10.1007/s12289-022-01656-w ↗
22. Zhang C, Leotoing L, Zhao G, Guines D, Ragneau E (2010) A methodology for evaluating sheet formability combining the tensile test with the M-K model. Mat Sci Eng A-Struct 528(1):480–485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msea.2010.09.00110.1016/j.msea.2010.09.001 ↗
23. Liu W, Zhou H, Meng Z, Li J, Huang S (2022) Less damage accumulation of aluminum alloy sheet during electromagnetic forming based on Gurson-Tvergaard-Needleman model. IOP Conf Ser Mater Sci Eng 1238(1):012019. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1238/1/01201910.1088/1757-899X/1238/1/012019 ↗