Optimization of load paths in X- and Y-shaped hydroforming
Source abstract
Abstract
An optimization of load paths in hydroforming of angled tubes are investigated through statistical methods in conjunction with FEA and simulated annealing algorithms. The main aim of this study is to improve the tube formability by applying the optimal load parameters. A new method to design the optimal load paths is represented and it is applied to optimize the load curves in hydroforming of X- and Y- tube shapes. By the aid of proposed method, the tube is formed with good formability indicators and lower capacity of equipments. Comparing the results of this study with the experimental data confirm the effectiveness of the method.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Metal Forming Simulation Techniques · Metallurgy and Material Forming · Laser and Thermal Forming Techniques
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (14)
Show source-provided references
1. Ray P, Mac Donald BJ (2005) Experimental study and finite element analysis of simple X- and T-branch tube hydroforming processes. Int J Mech Sci 192:1498–151810.1016/j.ijmecsci.2005.06.007 ↗
2. Ray P, Mac Donald BJ (2004) Determination of the optimal load path for tube hydroforming processes using fuzzy load control algorithm and finite element analysis. Finite Elem Anal Des 41:173–19210.1016/j.finel.2004.03.005 ↗
3. Kocanda A, Sadlowska H (2006) An approach to process limitations in hydroforming of X- joints as based on formability evaluation. J Mater Process Technol 177:663–66710.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.04.069 ↗
4. Jirathearanat S, Hartl C, Altan T (2004) Hydroforming of Y-shapes-product and process design using FEA simulation and experiments. J Mater Process Technol 146:124–12910.1016/S0924-0136(03)00852-5 ↗
5. Ingarao G, Lorenzo RD, Micari F (2009) Internal pressure and counterpunch action design in Y-shaped tube hydroforming processes: a multi-objective optimization approach. Comput Struct 87:591–60210.1016/j.compstruc.2009.02.003 ↗
6. Cheng DM, Teng BG, Guo B, Yuan SJ (2009) Thickness distribution of a hydroformed Y- shape tube. Mat Sci Eng A 499:36–3910.1016/j.msea.2007.09.100 ↗
7. Douglas CM (1996) Introduction to linear regression analysis, Second Edition. John Wiley& Sons, Inc. pp.8-15
8. Kirkpatrick S (1992) Transportation planning and technology. Science 16:261–273
9. Metropolis MC (1996) Simulated annealing and I.E.T. algorithm: theory and experiments. Lmens, 96–21
10. Yingyot AUL, Gracious N, Taylan A (2004) Optimizing tube hydroforming using process simulation and experimental verification. J Mater Process Technol 146:137–14310.1016/S0924-0136(03)00854-9 ↗
11. Hwang YM, Lin TC, Chang WC (2007) Experiments on T-shape hydroforming with counter punch. J Mater Process Technol 192–193:243–24810.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.04.087 ↗
12. Fann KJ, Hsiao PY (2003) Optimization of loading conditions for tube hydroforming. J Mater Process Technol 140:520–52410.1016/S0924-0136(03)00778-7 ↗
13. Imaninejad M, Subhash G, Loukus A (2005) Loading path optimization of tube hydroforming process. Int J Mach Tool Manu 45:1504–151410.1016/j.ijmachtools.2005.01.029 ↗
14. Kashani Zadeh H, Mosavi Mashhadi M (2006) Finite element simulation and experiment in tube hydroforming of unequal T shapes. J Mater Process Technol 177:684–68710.1016/j.jmatprotec.2006.04.056 ↗