Abstract
In sheet metal forming (SMF), deformation is caused by the relative movement between the sheet and tool, which generates friction forces. However, materials behave differently during plastic deformation. In this study, a tribo-simulator was designed to investigate the effect of different contact conditions or formability tests on the tribological behavior of AISI 304 and AISI 430 stainless-steel sheets. The effects of the texture and microstructure of the sheets on the measured coefficients of friction (COFs) and changes that occurred on the tribosurfaces also were investigated. Roughness and microhardness measurements, optical and scanning electron microscopy, and X-ray diffraction were used in the analyses. The tribo-simulator was successfully manufactured, and the repeatability of the measured COFs was satisfactory (standard deviation of ~0.02). A comparative analysis of the formability tests revealed differences in the COFs. In the bending under tension test, the COF for ferritic steel was 33% higher, while in the strip-tension test, the COF for austenitic steel was 44% higher. Friction was strongly influenced by the texture and microstructural characteristics of the steel sheets. The samples exhibited galling due to severe adhesive wear.
Highlights
In sheet metal forming (SMF) processes, deformation is caused by the relative movement between the sheet and tool, which generates frictional forces
Four different types of formability tests can be performed in an automated manner: bending under tension (BUT) test, strip-tension test (STT), draw-bend springback (DBS), and draw-bend fracture (DBF)
The hydraulic system is equipped with two hydraulic pumps, one with low and one with high flow, allowing the tribo-simulator to be operated at different speeds, pressures, forces, and stop times
Summary
In sheet metal forming (SMF) processes, deformation is caused by the relative movement between the sheet and tool, which generates frictional forces. FSS sheets have a higher limiting drawing ratio (LDR) (ratio of the blank diameter/punch diameter) and mean normal anisotropy coefficient ( R ) compared to ASS sheets, which indicates greater resistance to deformation in the thickness direction, allowing for deeper drawing. ASS sheets have a higher limiting dome height (LDH) and lower planar anisotropy coefficient ( ∆R ) compared to FSS sheets, which indicates better performance in pure forming by stretching and lower levels of earing, producing less waste in the production line[10,11,12]. There has not been a comparative study of the tribological
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
