0
Research Papers

Behavior and Quality Evaluation of Electroplastic Self-Piercing Riveting of Aluminum Alloy and Advanced High Strength Steel

[+] Author and Article Information
Ming Lou

Ph.D. Candidate
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacture for Thin-walled Structures,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, PRC

YongBing Li

Associate Professor
State Key Laboratory of Mechanical System and Vibration,
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacture for Thin-walled Structures,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, PRC
e-mail: yongbinglee@sjtu.edu.cn

YaTing Li

M.S. Candidate

GuanLong Chen

Professor
Shanghai Key Laboratory of Digital Manufacture for Thin-walled Structures,
School of Mechanical Engineering,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University,
Shanghai 200240, PRC

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Manufacturing Engineering Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF MANUFACTURING SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING. Manuscript received January 30, 2012; final manuscript received October 24, 2012; published online January 18, 2013. Assoc. Editor: Jyhwen Wang.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 135(1), 011005 (Jan 18, 2013) (9 pages) Paper No: MANU-12-1030; doi: 10.1115/1.4023256 History: Received January 30, 2012; Revised October 24, 2012

The hybrid use of dissimilar lightweight materials, such as aluminum alloy and advanced high strength steel (AHSS), has become a critical approach to reduce the weight of ground transportation vehicles. Self-piercing riveting (SPR) as a preferred cold-forming fastening method is facing problems like weak interlocking and insufficient penetration, due to the reduced formability of AHSS. In this paper, a new process named electroplastic self-piercing riveting (EP-SPR) was proposed to reduce the deformation resistance of AHSS DP780, by applying a direct current (dc) to it during the riveting process. The influence of dc on force and displacement characteristics throughout the riveting process, joint physical attributes and quasi-static performances for two sheet combinations, e.g., AA6061-T6 to DP780 (combination 1) and DP780 to AA6061-T6 (combination 2), were studied and compared with the traditional SPR joints. The results showed that compared with the traditional SPR joints, the EP-SPR ones increased by 12.5% and 23.3% in tensile-shear strength and cross-tension strengths for combination 1, respectively. For combination 2, even though the EP-SPR joints decreased by 5.8% in tensile-shear strength, it could reduce the penetration risk of bottom AA6061-T6, and present a better energy absorption capability for the increased undercut amount. In addition, the corresponding cross-tension strength of EP-SPR joints still increases by 6.1%.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2013 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

EP-SPR prototype system. (a) System overview and (b) details for applying electric current.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Drawings of the (a) rivet and (b) die (unit: millimeters)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Drawings of quasi-static strength testing samples: (a) top view of tensile-shear sample, (b) side view of tensile-shear sample for combination 1, (c) side view of tensile-shear sample for combination 2, (d) top view of cross-tension sample, and (e) side view of cross-tension sample (unit: millimeters)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Force–displacement curves for combination 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Typical cross sections for (a) a SPR joint and (b) an EP-SPR joint of combination 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Vickers hardness comparison between SPR and EP-SPR joints of combination 1 (error bars show the maximum and minimum values of the three replicates)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of quasi-static strength between SPR and EP-SPR joints for combination 1 (error bars show the maximum and minimum values of the three replicates)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Typical quasi-static force versus displacement curves for both SPR and EP-SPR joints of combination 1

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Force–displacement curves for combination 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Typical cross sections for (a) a SPR joint and (b) an EP-SPR joint of combination 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Vickers hardness comparison between SPR and EP-SPR joints of combination 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Comparison of quasi-static strength between SPR and EP-SPR joints for combination 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Typical quasi-static force versus displacement curves for both SPR and EP-SPR joints of combination 2

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

(a) Bottom view and (b) lateral view of the typical tested tensile-shear samples of top DP780 with rivet for both SPR and EP-SPR joints

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