0
Research Papers

Maximum Bulge Height and Weld Line Displacement in Hydroforming of Tailor Welded Blanks

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Kumar

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi,
New Delhi 110016, India
e-mail: amitk3551@gmail.com

V. Gautam

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Delhi Technological University,
Bawana Road,
New Delhi 110042, India
e-mail: vijay.dce@gmail.com

D. R. Kumar

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi,
New Delhi 110016, India
e-mail: dravi@mech.iitd.ac.in

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received April 22, 2017; final manuscript received November 7, 2017; published online December 21, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Yannis Korkolis.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 140(3), 031005 (Dec 21, 2017) (14 pages) Paper No: MANU-17-1274; doi: 10.1115/1.4038513 History: Received April 22, 2017; Revised November 07, 2017

Tailor welded blank (TWB) has many advantages over a traditional blank for manufacturing automobile sheet metal components, such as significant flexibility in product design, higher structural stiffness, and crash behavior. However, lower formability and weld line movement are some of the problems associated with forming of TWBs. Hydroforming is a potential technique to enhance formability. In this work, the effect of thickness ratio on maximum dome height and weld line movement in hydraulic bulging of laser welded interstitial-free (IF) steel blanks of different thickness combinations has been predicted using finite element (FE) simulations. The results are also validated with hydraulic bulging experiments on TWBs. It has been found that with increase in thickness ratio, the maximum bulge height decreased and weld line displacement toward thicker side increased. These results have been used to relocate the weld line toward the thinner side in the initial blanks and achieve a more uniform bulge profile of the dome. The peak pressure to achieve maximum safe dome height and percentage thinning has also been found out. The results showed huge improvement in uniformity of bulge profile with little reduction in dome height.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Sinke, J. , Iacono, C. , and Zadpoor, A. A. , 2010, “ Tailor Made Blanks for the Aerospace Industry,” Int. J. Mater. Form., 3(1), pp. 849–852. [CrossRef]
Kinsey, B. , Liu, Z. , and Cao, J. , 2000, “ A New Forming Technology for Tailor-Welded Blanks,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 99(1–3), pp. 145–153. [CrossRef]
Merklein, M. , and Giera, A. , 2008, “ Laser Assisted Friction Stir Welding of Drawable Steel-Aluminium Tailored Hybrids,” Int. J. Mater. Form., 1(1), pp. 1299–1302. [CrossRef]
Bandyopadhyay, K. , Panda, S. K. , and Saha, P. , 2014, “ Investigations Into the Influence of Weld Zone on Formability of Fiber Laser-Welded Advanced High Strength Steel,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 23(4), pp. 1465–1479. [CrossRef]
Chen, W. , Lin, G. S. , and Hu, S. J. , 2008, “ A Comparison Study on the Effectiveness of Stepped Binder and Weld Line Clamping Pins on Formability Improvement for Tailor-Welded Blanks,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 207(1–3), pp. 204–210. [CrossRef]
He, S. , Wu, X. , and Hu, S. J. , 2003, “ Formability Enhancement for Tailor-Welded Blanks Using Blank Holding Force Control,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 125(3), pp. 461–467. [CrossRef]
Chan, L. C. , Chan, S. M. , Cheng, C. H. , and Lee, T. C. , 2005, “ Formability and Weld Zone Analysis of Tailor Welded Blanks for Various Thickness Ratios,” ASME J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 127(2), pp. 179–185. [CrossRef]
Song, Y. , and Hua, L. , 2014, “ Influence of Thickness Ratio of Base Sheets on Formability of Tailor Welded Blanks,” Proc. Eng., 81, pp. 730–735. [CrossRef]
Chan, L. C. , Cheng, C. H. , Chan, S. M. , Lee, T. C. , and Chow, C. L. , 2005, “ Formability Analysis of Tailor-Welded Blanks of Different Thickness Ratios,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 127(4), pp. 743–751. [CrossRef]
Korouyeh, R. S. , Naeini, H. M. , Torkamany, M. J. , and Liaghat, G. , 2013, “ Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of Thickness Ratio Effect on the Formability of Tailor Welded Blank,” Opt. Laser Technol., 51, pp. 24–31. [CrossRef]
Khan, A. , Satya Suresh, V. V. N. , and Regalla, S. P. , 2014, “ Effect of Thickness Ratio on Weld Line Displacement in Deep Drawing of Aluminium Steel Tailor Welded Blanks,” Proc. Mater. Sci., 6, pp. 401–408. [CrossRef]
Padmanabhan, R. , Oliveira, M. C. , and Menezes, L. F. , 2008, “ Deep Drawing of Aluminium–Steel Tailor Welded Blank,” Mater. Des., 29(1), pp. 154–160. [CrossRef]
Heo, Y. M. , Wang, S. H. , Kim, H. Y. , and Seo, D. G. , 2001, “ The Effect of the Drawbead Dimensions on the Weld-Line Movements in the Deep Drawing of Tailor-Welded Blanks,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 113(1–3), pp. 686–691. [CrossRef]
Ahmetoglu, M. A. , Brouwers, D. , Shulkin, L. , Taupin, L. , Kinzel, G. L. , and Altan, T. , 1995, “ Deep Drawing of Round Cups From Tailor-Welded Blanks,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 53(3–4), pp. 684–694. [CrossRef]
Satya Suresh, V. V. N. , Regalla, S. P. , and Gupta, A. K. , 2016, “ Combined Effect of Thickness Ratio and Selective Heating on Weld Line Movement in Stamped Tailor-Welded Blanks,” Mater. Manuf. Processes, 32(12), pp. 1363–1367.
Button, S. T. , and Caldin, R. , 2008, “ Formability Evaluation in Hydroforming Steel Tailor Welded Blanks,” Int. J. Mech. Manuf. Syst., 1(2–3), pp. 195–205.
Panda, S. K. , Kumar, D. R. , Harish, K. , and Nath, A. K. , 2007, “ Characterization of Tensile Properties of Tailor Welded IF Steel Sheets and Their Formability in Stretch Forming,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 183(2), pp. 321–332. [CrossRef]
Pourboghrat, F. , Venkatesan, S. , and Carsley, J. E. , 2013, “ LDR and Hydroforming Limit for Deep Drawing of AA5754 Aluminium Sheet,” J. Manuf. Processes, 15(4), pp. 600–615. [CrossRef]
Kang, B. S. , Son, B. M. , and Kim, J. , 2004, “ A Comparative Study of Stamping and Hydroforming Processes for and Automobile Fuel Tank Using FEM,” Int. J. Mach. Tools Manuf., 44(1), pp. 87–94. [CrossRef]
Marandi, F. A. , Jabbari, A. H. , Sedighi, M. , and Hashemi, R. , 2016, “ An Experimental, Analytical, and Numerical Investigation of Hydraulic Bulge Test in Two Layer Al-Cu Sheets,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng. 139(3), p. 031005. [CrossRef]
Chao, X. Y. , Cong, H. , and Shijian, Y. , 2011, “ Deformation Optimization for Inconel 718 Super Alloy Sheet Hydroforming Numerically and Experimentally,” ASME J. Manuf. Sci. Eng., 133(6), p. 061013. [CrossRef]
Gautam, V. , and Kumar, D. R. , 2017, “ Experimental and Numerical Investigations on Springback in V-Bending of Tailor-Welded Blanks of Interstitial Free Steel,” Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng., Part B, epub.
ASTM, 1999, “ Metals Test Methods and Analytical Procedures,” Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol. 3.01, American Society for Testing Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, pp. 78–98, 501–508.
Barlat, F. , and Lian, K. , 1989, “ Plastic Behavior and Stretchability of Sheet Metals. Part I: A Yield Function for Orthotropic Sheet Under Plane Stress Conditions,” Int. J. Plast., 5(1), pp. 51–66. [CrossRef]
Narayanan, R. G. , and Narasimhan, K. , 2008, “ Predicting the Forming Limit Strains of Tailor Welded Blanks,” J. Strain Anal. Eng. Des., 43(7), pp. 551–563. [CrossRef]
Cheng, C. H. , Chan, L. C. , and Chow, C. L. , 2007, “ Weldment Properties Evaluation and Formability Study of Tailor Welded Blanks of Different Thickness Combinations and Welding Orientation,” J. Mater. Sci., 42(15), pp. 5982–5990. [CrossRef]
Hecker, S. S. , 1975, “ Simple Technique for Determining FLC,” Sheet Met. Ind., 52, pp. 671–675.
Li, Y. , and Lin, J. , 2015, “ Experimental and Numerical Investigations of Constraint Effect on Deformation Behavior of Tailor-Welded Blanks,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 24(8), pp. 2957–2969. [CrossRef]
Zampaloni, M. , Abedrabbo, N. , and Pourboghrat, F. , 2003, “ Experimental and Numerical Study of Stamp Hydroforming of Sheet Metals,” Inter. J. Mech. Sci., 45(11), pp. 1815–1848. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Dimensions of the subsize specimen of TWBs used for tensile tests as per ASTM-E8M

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Stress–strain curves of parent sheets and TWBs

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Weld line displacement in TWB of 0.7–1.4 mm combination: (a) simulation and (b)experiment

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

FE simulation results of hydraulic bulging of TWBs: (a) 0.7–1.4 mm combination at the maximum safe height, (b) 0.7–1.4 mm combination at failure, (c) 0.8–1.2 mm combination at failure, and (d) 0.8–0.8 mm combination at failure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Experimental setup for hydraulic bulging (a) die, (b) blank holder, (c) assembly of tools, (d) shim, and (e) deformed specimen

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

FE model of tools and blank in simulation of hydraulic bulging

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Schematic of hydraulic bulge test (dimensions in mm)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Microhardness profile across the weld line for (a) TWB 0.8–0.8 mm and (b) TWB 0.8–1.2 mm [22]

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Variation of percentage thinning in the deformed samples (up to maximum height) for TWBs of combination: (a) 0.8–0.8 mm, (b) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line at the center), (c) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line away from the center), (d) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line at the center), and (e) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line away from the center)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Typical microstructure of the weld zone of a TWB of IF steel sheets

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Microstructure of the IF steel sheet of thickness: (a) 0.8 mm and (b) 1.2 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Effect of thickness ratio in TWBs on (a) maximum bulge height and (b) peak pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Profile of the samples predicted by FE simulation of hydraulic bulging of TWBs of combination: (a)0.7–1.4 mm (weld line at the center), (b) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line away from the center), (c) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line at the center), and (d) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line away from the center)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Profile of the samples obtained from hydraulic bulging experiments on TWBs of combination (a) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line at the center), (b) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line away from the center), (c) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line at the center), and (d) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line away from the center)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Profile of the samples predicted by FE simulations of hydraulic bulging of TWBs at the same bulge height (a) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line at the center), (b) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line away from the center), (c) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line at the center), and (d) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line away from the center)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Variation of bulge height with distance from the pole before and after weld line relocation for TWBs ofcombination: (a) 0.7–1.4 mm (simulation), (b) 0.7–1.4 mm (experiment), (c) 0.8–1.2 mm (simulation), and (d)0.8–1.2 mm (experiment)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Major strain distribution ((a) and (b)) and thickness variation ((c) and (d)) obtained from FE simulations before and after weld line relocation for TWB of combination 0.8–1.2 mm

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Strain distribution profiles in the deformed samples (up to maximum height) for TWBs of combination: (a)0.8–0.8 mm, (b) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line at the center),(c) 0.8–1.2 mm (weld line away from the center), (d)0.7–1.4 mm (weld line at the center), and (e) 0.7–1.4 mm (weld line away from the center)

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