0
Research Papers

The Effect of Stepped Field Shaper on Magnetic Pressure and Radial Displacement in Electromagnetic Inside Bead Forming: Experimental and Simulation Analyses Using maxwell and abaqus Software

[+] Author and Article Information
Rasoul Chaharmiri

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Amirkabir University of Technology,
Tehran 15875-4413, Iran
e-mail: chaharmiri@aut.ac.ir

Alireza Fallahi Arezoodar

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Amirkabir University of Technology,
424 Hafez Avenue,
Tehran 15875-4413, Iran
e-mail: afallahi@aut.ac.ir

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received August 15, 2016; final manuscript received November 7, 2016; published online January 11, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Yannis Korkolis.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 139(6), 061003 (Jan 11, 2017) (6 pages) Paper No: MANU-16-1429; doi: 10.1115/1.4035219 History: Received August 15, 2016; Revised November 07, 2016

Electromagnetic forming (EMF) is a high strain rate forming technology which can effectively deform and shape high electrically conductive materials at room temperature. A field shaper is frequently used for concentrating the magnetic pressure in the desired forming area. The geometric parameters of a field shaper, as an intermediate device, affect the magnetic pressure and radial displacement in electromagnetic inside bead forming. EMF consists of electromagnetic and mechanical parts simulated using maxwell and abaqus software, respectively. The effects of geometric parameters of the stepped field shaper on magnetic pressure and radial displacement were investigated, and the best parameters were determined. Experimental tests were performed at various discharge voltages and the results were compared with simulation. The results indicated that using the stepped field shaper, the magnetic pressure concentration ratio increased from about 23–85% in comparison with using a direct coil. The maximum magnetic pressure increased by approximately 21% due to the effective concentration of magnetic pressure. Consequently, regardless of the electromagnetic energy losses because of using a field shaper, the radial displacement increased by 8% in simulation and 6% in experiment. The result of this study would be also helpful in designing field shapers in similar applications which is highly crucial and strongly recommended.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Psyk, V. , Risch, D. , Kinsey, B. L. , Tekkaya, A. E. , and Kleiner, M. , 2011, “ Electromagnetic Forming: A Review,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 211(5), pp. 787–829. [CrossRef]
Imbert, J. , and Worswick, M. , 2012, “ Reduction of a Pre-Formed Radius in Aluminum Sheet Using Electromagnetic and Conventional Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 212(9), pp. 1963–1972. [CrossRef]
Yu, H. , Li, C. , Zhao, Z. , and Li, Z. , 2005, “ Effect of Field Shaper on Magnetic Pressure in Electromagnetic Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 168(2), pp. 245–249. [CrossRef]
Suzuki, H. , Murata, M. , and Negishi, H. , 1987, “ The Effect of a Field Shaper in Electromagnetic Tube Bulging,” J. Mech. Work. Technol., 15(2), pp. 229–240. [CrossRef]
Gharghabi, P. , Dordizadeh, P. , and Niayesh, K. , 2011, “ Impact of Metal Thickness and Field Shaper on the Time-Varying Processes During Impulse Electromagnetic Forming in Tubular Geometries,” J. Korean Phys. Soc., 59(6), pp. 3560–3566.
Chu, Y. Y. , and Lee, R. S. , 2013, “ Effect of Field Shaper Geometry on the Lorentz Force for Electromagnetic Sheet Impact Forming Process,” J. Eng. Manuf., 227(2), pp. 324–332. [CrossRef]
Bahmani, M. A. , Niayesh, K. , and Karimi, A. , 2009, “ 3D Simulation of Magnetic Field Distribution in Electromagnetic Forming System With Field Shaper,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 209(5), pp. 2295–2301. [CrossRef]
Fallahi Arezoodar, A. R. , Garzan, E. , and Ebrahimi, H. , 2012, “ Effect of Various Field Shapers on Magnetic Pressure in Electromagnetic Inward Tube Forming,” Advances in Fluid Mechanics and Heat and Mass Transfer, pp. 338–342.
Smerd, R. , Winkler, S. , Salisbury, C. , Worswick, M. , Lloyd, D. , and Finn, M. , 2005, “ High Strain Rate Tensile Testing of Automotive Aluminum Alloy Sheet,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 32(1–4), pp. 541–560. [CrossRef]
Johnson, G. R. , and Cook, W. H. , 1983, “ A Constitutive Model and Data for Metals Subjected to Large Strains, High Strain Rates, and High Temperatures,” Seventh International Symposium on Ballistics, The Hague, The Netherlands, pp. 541–548.
Murakoshi, Y. , Takahashi, M. , and Sano, T. , 1998, “ Inside Bead Forming of Aluminum Tube by Electro-Magnetic Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 80–81, pp. 695–699. [CrossRef]
Oliveira, D. A. , Worswick, M. J. , Finn, M. , and Newman, D. , 2005, “ Electromagnetic Forming of Aluminum Alloy Sheet: Free-Form and Cavity Fill Experiments and Model,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 170(1–2), pp. 350–362. [CrossRef]
Chaharmiri, R. , and Fallahi Arezoodar, A. R. , 2016, “ The Effect of Sequential Coupling on Radial Displacement Accuracy in Electromagnetic Inside-Bead Forming: Simulation and Experimental Analysis Using maxwell and abaqus Software,” J. Mech. Sci. Technol., 30(5), pp. 2005–2010. [CrossRef]
Bartels, G. , Schatzing, W. , Scheibe, H. P. , and Leone, M. , 2009, “ Comparison of Two Different Simulation Algorithms for the Electromagnetic Tube Compression,” Int. J. Mater. Form., 2, pp. 693–696. [CrossRef]
Cui, X. , Mo, J. , Li, J. , Huang, L. , Zhu, Y. , Li, Z. W. , and Zhong, K. , 2013, “ Effect of Second Current Pulse and Different Algorithms on Simulation Accuracy for Electromagnetic Sheet Forming,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 68(5), pp. 1137–1146. [CrossRef]
Haiping, Y. U. , Chunfeng, L. I. , and Jianghua, D. E. N. G. , 2009, “ Sequential Coupling Simulation for Electromagnetic-Mechanical Tube Compression by Finite Element Analysis,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 209(2), pp. 707–713. [CrossRef]
Johnson, G. R. , and Cook, W. H. , 1983, “ A Constitutive Model and Data for Metals Subjected to Large Strains, High Strain Rates and High Temperatures,” Seventh International Symposium on Ballistics, The Hague, The Netherlands, pp. 541–548.
Lesuer, D. R. , Kay, G. J. , and LeBlanc, M. M. , 1999, “ Modeling Large Strain, High Rate Deformation in Metals,” Third Biennial Tri-Laboratory Engineering Conference on Modeling and Simulation, Pleasanton, CA, pp. 1–14.
Corbet, B. M. , 2006, “ Numerical Simulations of Target Hole Diameters for Hypervelocity Impacts Into Elevated and Room Temperature Bumpers,” Int. J. Impact Eng., 33(1–12), pp. 431–440. [CrossRef]
Manes, A. , Peroni, L. , Scapin, M. , and Giglio, M. , 2011, “ Analysis of Strain Rate Behavior of an Al 6061 T6 Alloy,” Procedia Eng., 10, pp. 3477–3482. [CrossRef]
Backus, D. L. , 2013, “ The Effect of a Field Shaper on Electromagnetic Forming of Aluminum Tubes,” Master thesis, Department of Mechanical Engineering, The Ohio State University, Colombus, OH.
Shanthala, K. , and Sreenivasa, T. N. , 2015, “ Stress Analysis of Field Shaper in Electromagnetic Welding,” Int. J. Sci. Res., 4(5), pp. 3–5.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Meshed maxwell model for C53 coil, die, and tube

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

maxwell model (C100 coil) with stepped field shaper

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Current versus time diagram in electromagnetic forming with stepped field shaper at discharge voltage of 5300 V

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Magnetic pressure versus tube length diagram at different times in electromagnetic forming process at discharge voltage of 5300 V

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Radial displacements (dmax) of the deformed tube at discharge voltage of 5300 V

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Empirical fit on true stress–strain data of Al6061-T6 material and J–C parameters

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Electromagnetic forming machine and the equipment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Experimental setup of the C53 coil, beading die, and workpiece

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Experimental setup of the C100 coil with stepped field shaper: (a) the tube before and (b) after electromagnetic forming

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Magnetic pressure distribution and maximum radial displacements at various thickness ratios at time of 38 μs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Magnetic pressure distribution and maximum radial displacements at various effective lengths at time of 38 μs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Magnetic pressure distribution and maximum radial displacements at various overall lengths at time of 38 μs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Magnetic pressure distributions at various discharge voltages by the C53 coil and the C100 coil with the optimized stepped filed shaper at time of 38 μs

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