Research Papers

Experimental Investigation of Springback Variation in Forming of High Strength Steels

[+] Author and Article Information
Peng Chen

Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1340

Muammer Koç1

NSF I/UCR Center for Precision Forming (CPF), and Department of Mechanical Engineering, Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU), Richmond, VA 23298-0565mkoc@vcu.edu

Michael L. Wenner

Manufacturing Systems Research Laboratory, R&D Center, General Motors, Warren, MI 48089-2544


Corresponding author.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 130(4), 041006 (Jul 10, 2008) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2951941 History: Received February 06, 2007; Revised December 03, 2007; Published July 10, 2008

The use of high strength steels (HSSs) in automotive body structures is a prominent method of reducing vehicle weight as an alternative to use of aluminum and magnesium alloys. However, parts made of HSSs demonstrate more springback than parts made of mild steels do. Moreover, variations in the incoming material, friction, and other process conditions cause variations in the springback characteristics, which prevent the practical applicability of the springback prediction and compensation techniques. Consequently, it leads to amplified variations and quality issues during assembly of the stamped components. The objective of this study is to investigate and gain an understanding of the variation of springback in the forming of HSSs. Two sets of experiments were conducted to analyze the influence of the material property (dual-phase steels from different suppliers), lubrication, and blank holder pressure on the springback variation. The experimental results showed that the variation in the incoming blank material is the most important factor. In summary, the thicker the blank is, the less the springback variation. On the other hand, blanks without a coating show less springback variation. The application of lubricant helps us to reduce springback variation, although it actually increases the springback itself. The more uniform the friction condition, the less the springback variation. The influence of blank holder pressure on the springback variation is not distinguishable from the system-level noise in our experiment.

Copyright © 2008 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.



Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Measurement illustration

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Main effects of factors on Stdev(β1), right

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

A schematic view of tools and dimensions for Phase II experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Parts after springback (Phase II)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Springback variation and its sources

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Source of variation in a typical forming process

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

A schematic view of tools and dimensions for open-channel drawing (Phase I)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Open-channel parts after drawing (Phase I)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Illustration of springbacks

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Deformed shape of the channel before springback (Phase I)



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