0
Research Papers

Robustness for Intelligent Tooling While Forming Shallow Aluminum Pans

[+] Author and Article Information
William J. Emblom

 Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Louisiana at Lafayette, P.O. Box 44170, Lafayette, LA 70504-4170wjemblom@louisiana.edu

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 134(5), 051007 (Sep 10, 2012) (9 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4007461 History: Received December 21, 2010; Revised July 31, 2012; Published September 10, 2012; Online September 10, 2012

This study examines the robustness of stamp forming tooling. An oval pan was formed using tooling that included a flexible blank holder, active draw beads, and closed-loop control of both wrinkling and local punch forces. The results were compared to open-loop tests using the same tooling and earlier work that utilized tooling that produced similar pans but included a rigid blank holder. For the current study, robustness was defined as the ability to delay wrinkling or tearing. A description of the tooling design process is provided as well as a synopsis of the development of the control system for the tooling. Open-loop and closed-control tests using AL 6111-T4 blanks were performed in order to evaluate the ability to reject process disturbances and demonstrate improved robustness of the tooling. During open-loop tests, the current tooling was shown to be more robust than the earlier tooling with the rigid blank holder. Control of wrinkling eliminated one form of part failure while closed-loop control of local punch forces significantly improved the robustness of the tooling by delaying tearing.

Copyright © 2012 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Typical sheet metal stamping operation [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Process/press optimization system [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Aluminum test panel [9]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Configurations of the hydraulic cylinders and the six selected blank holder displacement points evaluated during design of the blank holder [5]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Location of instrumentation in the oval Stamp Forming Research Die

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Lower die with sensors and draw beads and schematic of forming process [11]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Local punch force versus draw depth, DB height = 1 mm; lubrication: Towerdraw A9113 @ 5 g/m2 ; BHF = 137 kN

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

LPF 1 as a function of BHF and draw bead; draw depth = 20 mm; lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

LPF 13 as a function of BHF and draw bead; draw depth = 20 mm; lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

LPF 1 as a function of BHF and draw bead; draw depth = 49 mm; lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

LPF 13 as a function of BHF and draw bead; draw depth = 40 mm; lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

LPF 5 as a function of BHF and draw bead; draw depth = 20 mm; lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

LPF 5 as a function of BHF and draw bead; draw depth = 40 mm; lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Wrinkling versus draw depth for a typical test where wrinkling occurs; DB = 5 mm, uniform BHF = 27 kN

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Operating envelope of die as a function of blank holder force and draw bead penetration. Each curve identifies the mode of failure (tearing or wrinkling) for open-loop tests [19].

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Operational envelope for various DB and BHF. The max draw depth = 51 mm. Lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2 [19].

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Closed-loop control of LPF 1 shown as a function of punch position. DB 1 and DB 2 commands are uniform. Lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 5 g/m2 ; BHF = 110 kN [19].

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Closed-loop control of die shoulder sensors LPFs// 1 and 7 shown as a function of punch position using independently controlled DB 1 and DB 2. Lubrication: Towerdraw A-9113 @ 10 g/m2 ; BHF = 110 kN [19].

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Closed-loop control of die shoulder sensors LPFs 1 and 7 shown as a function of punch position using independently controlled DB 1 and DB 2. No lubrication. BHF = 110 kN [19].

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 20

Closed-loop control of binder gap while at the same time controlling LPF 1 [19]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 21

Closed-loop control of LPF 1 while at the same time controlling blank holder forces [19]

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 22

Draw depth as a function of quantity of Towerdraw A-9113 for fixed draw bead position tests and variable draw bead closed-loop tests; BHF = 110 kN (after Ref. [9])

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 23

Draw depth as a function of quantity of Tower P-1224 for fixed draw bead position tests and variable draw bead closed-loop tests; BHF = 110 kN

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