0
Research Papers

Effective Damage Indicator for Aluminum Alloy (AA6082Zr) Processed by ECAE

[+] Author and Article Information
M.A. Agwa

Department of Mechanical Design
and Production Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
Zagazig University,
Zagazig 44519, Egypt
e-mail: mwa.agwa@gmail.com

M.N. Ali

Department of Mechanical Design
and Production Engineering,
Faculty of Engineering,
Zagazig University,
Zagazig 44519, Egypt

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received April 4, 2018; final manuscript received September 7, 2018; published online October 8, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Yannis Korkolis.

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 140(12), 121014 (Oct 08, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: MANU-18-1205; doi: 10.1115/1.4041479 History: Received April 04, 2018; Revised September 07, 2018

The present research aims to study the influence of equal channel angular extrusion (ECAE) parameters (die channel angle, die corner angle, and friction coefficient) on cracking and fracture tendency. For this type of analysis, a MATLAB code integrated with finite element Abaqus/Explicit model was developed and used. A parametric study is done to investigate how the damage tendency varies with changes of ECAE parameters. The distribution of the damage factor based on Cockcroft–Latham equation for different channel angles, corner angles, and friction coefficients is depicted. It is observed that the appearance of cracks on the upper surface is more likely to occur than on the lower surface. The reduction in friction coefficient does not guarantee minimum damage tendency. Finally, the optimum parameters for reducing the fracture tendency in ECAE are presented.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Arab, M. S. , El Mahallawy, N. , Shehata, F. , and Agwa, M. A. , 2014, “ Refining SiCp in Reinforced Al-SiC Composites Using Equal-Channel Angular Pressing,” Mater. Des., 64, pp. 280–286. [CrossRef]
Comaneci, R. , Zaharia, L. , and Chelariu, R. , 2011, “ Damaging Prediction of Difficult-to-Work Aluminum Alloys During Equal Channel Angular Pressing,” J. Mater. Eng. Perform., 21(3), pp. 287–297. [CrossRef]
Xia, Y.-F. , Quan, G.-Z. , and Zhou, J. , 2010, “ Effects of Temperature and Strain Rate on Critical Damage Value of AZ80 Magnesium Alloy,” Trans. Nonferrous Met. Soc. China, 10(suppl. 2), pp. 580–583. [CrossRef]
Yu-Feng, X. , Gui-Chang, L. , Dong-Senwu , Guo-Zheng, Q. , and Jie, Z. , 2013, “ The Evaluation of Varying Ductile Fracture Criteria for 3Cr20Ni10W2 Austenitic Heat-Resistant Alloy,” Adv. Mech. Eng., 5, pp. 1–10.
Linardon, C. , Favier, D. , Chagnon, G. , and Gruez, B. , 2014, “ A Conical Mandrel Tube Drawing Test Designed to Assess Failure Criteria,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 214(2), pp. 347–357. [CrossRef]
Topa, A. , and Shah, Q. H. , 2014, “ Failure Prediction in Bulk Metal Forming Process,” Int. J. Manuf. Eng., 2014, p. 385065.
Tohidlou, E. , and Bertram, A. , 2017, “ Effect of Initial Orientation on Subgrain Formation in Nickel Single Crystals During Equal Channel Angular Pressing,” Mech. Mater., 114, pp. 30–39. [CrossRef]
Figueiredo, R. B. , Cetlin, P. R. , and Langdon, T. G. , 2007, “ The Processing of Difficult-to-Work Alloys by ECAP with an Emphasis on Magnesium Alloys,” Acta Mater., 55(14), pp. 4769–4779. [CrossRef]
Semiatin, S. L. , DeLo, D. P. , and Shell, E. B. , 2000, “ The Effect of Material Properties and Tooling Design on Deformation and Fracture During Equal Channel Angular Extrusion,” Acta Mater., 48(8), pp. 1841–1851. [CrossRef]
Yu, X. , Li, Y. , Wei, Q. , Guo, Y. , Suo, T. , and Zhao, F. , 2015, “ Microstructure and Mechanical Behavior of ECAP Processed AZ31B over a Wide Range of Loading Rates Under Compression and Tension,” Mech. Mater., 86, pp. 55–70. [CrossRef]
Agwa, M. A. , Ali, M. N. , and Al-Shorbagy, A. E. , 2016, “ Optimum Processing Parameters for Equal Channel Angular Pressing,” Mech. Mater., 100, pp. 1–11. [CrossRef]
Rafsanjani, A. , and Abbasion, S. , 2009, “ Investigation of the Viscous and Thermal Effects on Ductile Fracture in Sheet Metal Blanking Process,” Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol., 45(5–6), pp. 459–469. [CrossRef]
Cao, T. S. , Bobadilla, C. , Montmitonnet, P. , and Bouchard, P. O. , 2015, “ A Comparative Study of Three Ductile Damage Approaches for Fracture Prediction in Cold Forming Processes,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 216, pp. 385–404. [CrossRef]
Gouveia, B. P. , Rodrigues, J. M. , and Martins, P. A. , 2000, “ Ductile Fracture in Metalworking: Experimental and Theoretical Research,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 101(1–3), pp. 52–63. [CrossRef]
Cockcroft, M. G. , and Latham, D. J. , 1968, “ Ductility and the Workability of Metals,” J. Inst. Met., 96, pp. 33–39.
Cai, Z. , Jose, M. A. , Cesar, D. S. , and Andrade Pires, F. M., 2007, “ A Comparison of Models for Ductile Fracture Prediction in Forging Processes,” Comput. Methods Mater. Sci., 7(4), pp. 389–396.
Oyane, M. , Sato, T. , Okimoto, K. , and Shima, S. , 1980, “ Criteria for Ductile Fracture and Their Applications,” J. Mech. Work. Technol., 4(1), pp. 65–81. [CrossRef]
Oh, S. I. , Chen, C. C. , and Kobayashi, S. , 1979, “ Ductile Fracture in Axisymmetric Extrusion and Drawing—Part 2: Workability in Extrusion and Drawing,” ASME J. Eng. Ind., 101(1), pp. 36–44. [CrossRef]
Figueiredo, R. B. , and Langdon, T. G. , 2009, “ Achieving Microstructural Refinement in Magnesium Alloys Through Severe Plastic Deformation,” Mater. Trans., 50(1), pp. 111–116. [CrossRef]
Dizaji, S. A. , Darendeliler, H. , and Kaftanoğlu, B. , 2018, “ Prediction of Forming Limit Curve at Fracture for Sheet Metal Using New Ductile Fracture Criterion,” Eur. J. Mech.-A/Solids, 69, pp. 255–265. [CrossRef]
Reihanian, M. , and Naseri, M. , 2016, “ An Analytical Approach for Necking and Fracture of Hard Layer During Accumulative Roll Bonding (ARB) of Metallic Multilayer,” Mater. Des., 89, pp. 1213–1222. [CrossRef]
Seung Chae, Y. , Cheon Hee, B. , Min Hong, S. , Taek-Soo, K. , and Hyoung Seop, K. , 2008, “ Comparison in Deformation and Fracture Behavior of Magnesium During Equal Channel Angular Pressing by Experimental and Numerical Methods,” Mater. Trans., 49(5), pp. 963–966. [CrossRef]
Comaneci, R. , and Comanici, A. , 2010, “ Damaging of AL-MG Alloys Severely Plastic Deformed by Equal Channel Angular Pressing,” 21st International Daam Symposium, Vienna, Austria, Oct. 20–23.
Cerri, E. , De Marco, P. P. , and Leo, P. , 2009, “ FEM and Metallurgical Analysis of Modified 6082 Aluminum Alloys Processed by Multipass ECAP: Influence of Material Properties and Different Process Settings on Induced Plastic Strain,” J. Mater. Process. Technol., 209(3), pp. 1550–1564. [CrossRef]
Segal, V. M. , 2004, “ Engineering and Commercialization of Equal Channel Angular Extrusion ECAE,” Mater. Sci. Eng. A., 386(1–2), pp. 269–276. [CrossRef]
Berman, A. D. , Ducker, W. A. , and Israelachvili, J. N. , 1996, “ Experimental and Theoretical Investigations of Stick-Slip Friction Mechanisms,” Physics of Sliding Friction, B. N. J. Persson and E. Tosatti , eds., Springer-Netherlands, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp. 51–68.
Bhushan, B. , 2013, Introduction to Tribology, Wiley, New York.
Agwa, M. A. , 2011, Friction-Induced Dynamic Instabilities and Solution (Non-)Uniqueness in Contact Mechanics, Technical University of Lisbon, Instituto Superior Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Predicted distributions of damage factor, D, for ψ = 15 deg and different channel angles indicated below each graph. Left: frictionless (μ = 0). Right: friction (μ = 0.15): (a) ϕ=75 deg,Dmaxb=0.246, Dmaxs=0.223, (b) ϕ=75 deg, Dmaxb=0.303, Dmaxs=0.084, (c) ϕ=90 deg, Dmaxb=0.257,Dmaxs=0.257, (d) ϕ=90 deg, Dmaxb=0.266, Dmaxs=0.119, (e) ϕ=105 deg, Dmaxb=0.374, Dmaxs=0.295, (f) ϕ=105 deg, Dmaxb=0.347, Dmaxs=0.189, (g) ϕ=120 deg, Dmaxb=0.305, Dmaxs=0.296, and (h) ϕ=120 deg, Dmaxb=0.289, Dmaxs=0.265.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Distribution of the hydrostatic pressure for ψ = 15 deg and different channel angles indicated below each graph. Left: frictionless (μ = 0). Right: friction (μ = 0.15): (a) ϕ = 75 deg, (b) ϕ = 75 deg, (c) ϕ = 90 deg, (d) ϕ = 90 deg, (e) ϕ = 105 deg, (f) ϕ = 105 deg, (g) ϕ = 120 deg, and (h) ϕ = 120 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Predicted distributions of damage factor, D, for ϕ = 90 deg and different corner angles indicated below each graph. Left: frictionless (μ = 0). Right: friction (μ = 0.15): (a) ψ=15 deg,Dmaxb=0.257, Dmaxs=0.257, (b) ψ=15 deg, Dmaxb=0.266, Dmaxs=0.119, (c) ψ=30deg, Dmaxb=0.328,Dmaxs=0.329, (d) ψ=30 deg, Dmaxb=0.281, Dmaxs=0.178, (e) ψ=45deg, Dmaxb=0.432, Dmaxs=0.335, (f) ψ=45deg, Dmaxb=0.362, Dmaxs=0.244, (g) ψ=60 deg, Dmaxb=0.502, Dmaxs=0.383, (h) ψ=60 deg,Dmaxb=0.461, Dmaxs=0.31, (i) ψ=75 deg, Dmaxb=0.508, Dmaxs=0.396, (j) ψ=75 deg, Dmaxb=0.481,Dmaxs=0.341, (k) ψ=90 deg, Dmaxb=0.485, Dmaxs=0.408, and (l) ψ=90 deg, Dmaxb=0.461,Dmaxs=0.341.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Distribution of the hydrostatic pressure for ϕ = 90 deg and different corner angles indicated below each graph. Left: frictionless (μ = 0). Right: friction (μ = 0.15): (a) ψ = 15 deg, (b) ψ = 15 deg, (c) ψ = 30 deg, (d) ψ = 30 deg, (e) ψ = 45 deg, (f) ψ = 45 deg, (g) ψ = 60 deg, (h) ψ = 60 deg, (i) ψ = 75 deg, (j) ψ = 75 deg, (k) ψ = 90 deg, and (l) ψ = 90 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Evolution of damage factor at the location of maximum damage in the steady-state region (Dmaxs) represented by a circle (○) as a function of the vertical displacement of the punch in mm. Left: μ = 0. Right: μ = 0.15; (a) ϕ = 75 deg, (b) ϕ = 75 deg, (c) ϕ = 90 deg, (d) ϕ = 90 deg, (e) ϕ = 105 deg, (f) ϕ = 105 deg, (g) ϕ = 120 deg, and (h) ϕ = 120 deg.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Equal channel angular extrusion die with channel angle equals 90 deg and different corner angles 0 deg, 30 deg, 60 deg, and 90 deg: (a) the full ECAE die and (b) magnified view of the region that connects the outer and inner corners

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Predicted values of the maximum damage factor across the steady-state region, Dmaxs, for different channel angles indicated below each graph: (a) ϕ = 75 deg, (b) ϕ = 90 deg, (c) ϕ = 105 deg, and (d) ϕ = 120 deg

Tables

Errata

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