TY - JOUR
T1 - Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations
AU - Habraken, Anne Marie
AU - Aksen, Toros Arda
AU - Alves, Jose L.
AU - Amaral, Rui L.
AU - Betaieb, Ehssen
AU - Chandola, Nitin
AU - Corallo, Luca
AU - Cruz, Daniel J.
AU - Duchene, Laurent
AU - Engel, Bernd
AU - Esener, Emre
AU - Firat, Mehmet
AU - Frohn-Soerensen, Peter
AU - Galan-Lopez, Jesus
AU - Ghiabakloo, Hadi
AU - Kestens, Leo A.
AU - Lian, Junhe
AU - Lingam, Rakesh
AU - Liu, Wencheng
AU - Ma, Jun
AU - Menezes, Luis F.
AU - Tuan Nguyen-Minh, null
AU - Miranda, Sara S.
AU - Neto, Diogo M.
AU - Pereira, Andre F. G.
AU - Prates, Pedro A.
AU - Reuter, Jonas
AU - Revil-Baudard, Benoit
AU - Rojas-Ulloa, Carlos
AU - Sener, Bora
AU - Shen, Fuhui
AU - Van Bael, Albert
AU - Verleysen, Patricia
AU - Barlat, Frederic
AU - Cazacu, Oana
AU - Kuwabara, Toshihiko
AU - Lopes, Augusto
AU - Oliveira, Marta C.
AU - Santos, Abel D.
AU - Vincze, Gabriela
PY - 2022/9
Y1 - 2022/9
N2 - This article details the ESAFORM Benchmark 2021. The deep drawing cup of a 1 mm thick, AA 6016-T4 sheet with a strong cube texture was simulated by 11 teams relying on phenomenological or crystal plasticity approaches, using commercial or self-developed Finite Element (FE) codes, with solid, continuum or classical shell elements and different contact models. The material characterization (tensile tests, biaxial tensile tests, monotonic and reverse shear tests, EBSD measurements) and the cup forming steps were performed with care (redundancy of measurements). The Benchmark organizers identified some constitutive laws but each team could perform its own identification. The methodology to reach material data is systematically described as well as the final data set. The ability of the constitutive law and of the FE model to predict Lankford and yield stress in different directions is verified. Then, the simulation results such as the earing (number and average height and amplitude), the punch force evolution and thickness in the cup wall are evaluated and analysed. The CPU time, the manpower for each step as well as the required tests versus the final prediction accuracy of more than 20 FE simulations are commented. The article aims to guide students and engineers in their choice of a constitutive law (yield locus, hardening law or plasticity approach) and data set used in the identification, without neglecting the other FE features, such as software, explicit or implicit strategy, element type and contact model.
AB - This article details the ESAFORM Benchmark 2021. The deep drawing cup of a 1 mm thick, AA 6016-T4 sheet with a strong cube texture was simulated by 11 teams relying on phenomenological or crystal plasticity approaches, using commercial or self-developed Finite Element (FE) codes, with solid, continuum or classical shell elements and different contact models. The material characterization (tensile tests, biaxial tensile tests, monotonic and reverse shear tests, EBSD measurements) and the cup forming steps were performed with care (redundancy of measurements). The Benchmark organizers identified some constitutive laws but each team could perform its own identification. The methodology to reach material data is systematically described as well as the final data set. The ability of the constitutive law and of the FE model to predict Lankford and yield stress in different directions is verified. Then, the simulation results such as the earing (number and average height and amplitude), the punch force evolution and thickness in the cup wall are evaluated and analysed. The CPU time, the manpower for each step as well as the required tests versus the final prediction accuracy of more than 20 FE simulations are commented. The article aims to guide students and engineers in their choice of a constitutive law (yield locus, hardening law or plasticity approach) and data set used in the identification, without neglecting the other FE features, such as software, explicit or implicit strategy, element type and contact model.
KW - Benchmark
KW - 6016-T4 aluminium alloy
KW - Deep drawing modelling
KW - Model comparisons
KW - Earing profile prediction
KW - Force prediction
KW - Thickness prediction
KW - ANISOTROPIC YIELD FUNCTIONS
KW - PLASTIC ANISOTROPY
KW - TEXTURE DEVELOPMENT
KW - SHEET METALS
KW - PART I
KW - STRAIN
KW - DEFORMATION
KW - CRITERION
KW - FRICTION
KW - BEHAVIOR
U2 - 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w
DO - 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w
M3 - Article
SN - 1960-6206
VL - 15
JO - International Journal of Material Forming
JF - International Journal of Material Forming
IS - 5
M1 - 61
ER -