Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

Anne Marie Habraken, Toros Arda Aksen, Jose L. Alves, Rui L. Amaral, Ehssen Betaieb, Nitin Chandola, Luca Corallo, Daniel J. Cruz, Laurent Duchene, Bernd Engel, Emre Esener, Mehmet Firat, Peter Frohn-Soerensen, Jesus Galan-Lopez, Hadi Ghiabakloo, Leo A. Kestens, Junhe Lian, Rakesh Lingam, Wencheng Liu, Jun MaLuis F. Menezes, Tuan Nguyen-Minh, Sara S. Miranda, Diogo M. Neto, Andre F. G. Pereira, Pedro A. Prates, Jonas Reuter, Benoit Revil-Baudard, Carlos Rojas-Ulloa, Bora Sener, Fuhui Shen, Albert Van Bael, Patricia Verleysen, Frederic Barlat, Oana Cazacu, Toshihiko Kuwabara, Augusto Lopes, Marta C. Oliveira, Abel D. Santos, Gabriela Vincze

Tutkimustuotos: LehtiartikkeliArticleScientificvertaisarvioitu

15 Sitaatiot (Scopus)
31 Lataukset (Pure)


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.

DOI - pysyväislinkit
TilaJulkaistu - syysk. 2022
OKM-julkaisutyyppiA1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä


Sukella tutkimusaiheisiin 'Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations'. Ne muodostavat yhdessä ainutlaatuisen sormenjäljen.

Siteeraa tätä