Abstract

Conventionally, plastic anisotropy is calibrated by using standard uniaxial tensile and biaxial test results. Alternatively, heterogeneous strain field specimens in combination with full-field measurements can be used for this purpose. As reported by the literature, such an approach reduces the number of required tests enormously, but it is challenging to obtain reliable results. This paper presents an alternative methodology, which represents a compromise between the conventional and heterogeneous strain field calibration technique. The idea of the method is to use simple tests, which can be conducted on the uniaxial testing machine, and to avoid the use of advanced measuring equipment. The procedure is accomplished by conducting standard tensile tests, which are simple and reliable, and by a novel heterogeneous strain field tensile test, to calibrate the biaxial stress state. Moreover, only two of the parameters required for full characterisation need to be inversely identified from the test response; the other parameters are directly determined from the uniaxial tensile test results. This way, a dimension of optimization space is reduced substantially, which increases the robustness and effectiveness of the optimization algorithm.

Highlights

  • In sheet metal forming processes, mechanical behaviour usually depends on the extent of plastic anisotropy

  • The accuracy of the predictions depends on the flexibility of the yield function, which is correlated to a set of parameters that have to be calibrated against experimental data

  • This paper presents an alternative methodology, which represents a compromise between the conventional anisotropy calibration procedure as described in [34] and full-field measurement-based approaches, as outlined above

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In sheet metal forming processes, mechanical behaviour usually depends on the extent of plastic anisotropy. The accuracy of the predictions depends on the flexibility of the yield function, which is correlated to a set of parameters that have to be calibrated against experimental data. To characterize biaxial flow stress and biaxial R-value, a bulge test [5], through-thickness disk compression test [6,7] or a cruciform specimen test [8,9,10] needs to be conducted. Such intricate experimental procedures require specific testing equipment, which may not always be available in industrial labs

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call