0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Analysis of Tube Hydroforming by Means of an Inverse Approach

[+] Author and Article Information
Ba Nghiep Nguyen, Kenneth I. Johnson, Mohammad A. Khaleel

Computational Mechanics and Material Behavior Group, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 125(2), 369-377 (Apr 15, 2003) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1559166 History: Received September 01, 2001; Revised November 01, 2002; Online April 15, 2003
Copyright © 2003 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Guo,  Y. Q., Batoz,  J. L., Detraux,  J. M., and Duroux,  P., 1990, “Finite Element Procedures for Strain Estimations of Sheet Metal Forming Parts,” Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng., 30, pp. 1385–1401.
Zhang,  S. H., 1999, “Developments in Hydroforming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 91, pp. 236–244.
Ahmetoglu,  M., and Altan,  T., 2000, “Tube Hydroforming: State-of-the-Art and Future Trends,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 98, pp. 25–33.
Asnafi,  N., 1999, “Analytical Modeling of Tube Hydroforming,” Thin-Walled Struct., 34, pp. 295–330.
Chenot, J. L., Wood, R. D., and Zienkiewicz, O. C. eds, 1992, “Numerical Methods in Industrial Forming Processes,” NUMIFORM 92, Balkema, Rotterdam, Brookfield.
Owen, D. R. J., Onate, E., and Hinton, E., eds, 1997, “Computational Plasticity — Fundamentals and Applications,” COMPLAS V, CIMNE, Barcelona.
Guo,  Y. Q., Batoz,  J. L., Naceur,  H., Bouabdallah,  S., Mercier,  F., and Barlet,  O., 2000, “Recent Developments on the Analysis and Optimum Design of Sheet Metal Forming Parts Using a Simplified Inverse Approach,” Comput. Struct., 78, pp. 133–148.
Batoz,  J. L., Guo,  Y. Q., and Mercier,  F., 1998, “The Inverse Approach With Simple Triangular Shell Elements for Large Strain Predictions of Sheet Metal Forming Parts,” Engineering Computations, 15(7), pp. 864–892.
Chung,  K., Barlat,  F., Brem,  J. C., Lege,  D. J., and Richmond,  O., 1997, “Blank Shape Design for a Planar Anisotropic Sheet Based on Ideal Forming Design Theory and FEM Analysis,” Int. J. Mech. Sci., 39(1), pp. 105–120.
Chung,  K., Yoon,  J.-W., and Richmond,  O., 2000, “Ideal Sheet Forming With Frictional Constraints,” Int. J. Plast., 16, pp. 595–610.
Lee,  C. H., and Huh,  H., 1998, “Blank Design and Strain Estimates for Sheet Metal Forming Processes by a Finite Element Inverse Approach With Initial Guess of Linear Deformation,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 82, pp. 145–155.
Davies, R., Grant, G., Herling, D., and Smith, M., 2000, “Formability Investigation of Aluminum Extrusions Under Hydroforming Condition,” SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper # 2000-01-2675, International Body Engineering Conference, Detroit, Michigan, October.
Nguyen, B. N., Johnson, K. I., Davies, R. W., and Khaleel, M. A., 2002, “Inverse Analysis of Tube Free Hydroforming,” Plasticity, Damage and Fracture at Macro, Micro and Nano Scales, Proceedings of Plasticity 02, Khan, A. S., Lopez-Pamies, O., eds, NEAT Press, Maryland, pp. 427–429.
Nguyen, B. N., Johnson, K. I., Davies, R. W., and Khaleel, M. A., 2002, “A Computation Tool for Hydroforming Prediction Using an Inverse Approach,” SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper # 2002-01-0785, SAE 2002 World Congress, Detroit, Michigan, March.
Hill,  R., 1948, “A Theory of the Yielding and Plastic Flow of Anisotropic Metals,” Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, A193, pp. 281–297.
Lemaitre, J., and Chaboche, J. L., 1985, Mécanique des Matériaux Solides, Bordas, Paris.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Schematic description of tube free hydroforming
Grahic Jump Location
Flow chart for the computational procedure using the one-step inverse approach.
Grahic Jump Location
Forming limit diagram for the AA6061-T4 seamless tube population based on the experimental data from Ref. 12
Grahic Jump Location
Triangular finite element mesh and deformed configurations at (a) s1=s2=6.4 mm and (b) s1=s2=7.72 mm for a quarter of the tube
Grahic Jump Location
Equivalent plastic strains along a longitudinal arc length measured from a tube end to a middle section point for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(a)
Grahic Jump Location
Thickness distributions along a longitudinal arc length measured from a tube end to a middle section point for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(a)
Grahic Jump Location
Equivalent plastic strains along a longitudinal arc length measured from a tube end to a middle section point for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(b)
Grahic Jump Location
Equivalent stresses along a longitudinal arc length measured from a tube end to a middle section point for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(b)
Grahic Jump Location
Thickness distributions along a longitudinal arc length measured from a tube end to a middle section point for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(b)
Grahic Jump Location
Internal pressure computed by the inverse analysis starting from the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(b)
Grahic Jump Location
Prediction of necking for the deformation configuration given in Fig. 4(b) (1: failed, <1: safe)
Grahic Jump Location
Axial (minor) strains along a longitudinal arc length measured from a tube end to a middle section point for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(b)
Grahic Jump Location
Circumferential (major) strains along a longitudinal arc length measured from a tube end to a middle section point for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 4(b)
Grahic Jump Location
Loading history prescribed in the incremental analysis with s1≠s2
Grahic Jump Location
Initial and deformed configuration at s1=10 mm and s2=27.2 mm
Grahic Jump Location
Equivalent plastic strains along a longitudinal arc length measured from one tube end to another for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 15
Grahic Jump Location
Equivalent stresses along a longitudinal arc length measured from one tube end to another for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 15
Grahic Jump Location
Thickness distributions along a longitudinal arc length measured from one tube end to another for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 15
Grahic Jump Location
Internal pressure computed by the inverse analysis for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 15
Grahic Jump Location
Prediction of necking for the deformation state given in Fig. 15 (1: failed, <1: safe)
Grahic Jump Location
Axial (minor) strains along a longitudinal arc length measured from one tube end to another for the deformed configuration given in Fig. 15
Grahic Jump Location
Circumferential (major) strains along a longitudinal arc length measured from one tube end to another for the deformed configuration given in Fig 15

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In