INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NIRMA UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD 382 481, 08-10 DECEMBER, 2011

Investigating Springback effect in U-Die Bending Process by varying different Parameters

Jaydeep R. Shah*12, S. K. Sharma#1, B. C. Patel$1 # Associate professor, Mechanical Department $ Assistant Professor, Mechanical Department * Research Scholar, Mechanical Department 1 S. V. M Institute of Technology College Campus, College Campus, Old NH. No. 8, Bharuch

Abstract-- In sheet metal forming, the most sensitive feature is the elastic recovery during unload-ing, called spring-back. Spring-back leads to some geometric changes in the product. This phenomenon will affect bend angle and bend curvature, and can be inuenced by various factors. This research paper reflects the different parameters on spring-back in U-die bending of different materials with different sheet thickness and tip radius were studied by numerical simulations and compared with experimental results. Index TermsSpringback effect, U die bending, Sheet metal forming, Orientation, Tip-Radius.

I. INTRODUCTION

n sheet metal forming industry, especially in sheet bending process, spring-back has a very signicant role. In this process, the dimension precision is a major concern, due to the considerable elastic recovery during unloading which leads to spring-back. Also, under certain conditions, it is possible for the nal bend angle to be smaller than the original angle. Such bend angle is referred to as spring-go or spring-forward. The amount of spring-back/ spring-go is inuenced by various process parameters, such as tool shape and dimension, contact friction condition, material properties, sheet anisotropy, and sheet thickness. During the past two decades, number of researchers have investigated and attempted to obtain a basic understanding of spring- back behavior. Tekiner [1] examined the effect of bending angle on spring-back of six types of materials with different thicknesses in V-die bending. Moon et al. [2] experimentally showed the effect of combined hot die and cold punch on reduction of spring-back of aluminum sheets. Li et al. [3] Also showed that the accuracy of spring-back simulation is directly affected by the material-hardening model. In addition, Cho et al. [4] carried out numerical studies on the effects of some parameters such as punch and die corner radii, punch-die clearance, and coefficient of friction on spring-back in U-die bending process. Xu et al. [5] Investigated the inuenced of some sensitive factors on the accuracy and efficiency of spring- back simulation. Gomes et al. [6] simulated material models based on various

anisotropic models and compared their results with the experimental outcome to show the variation of spring-back with the orientation of anisotropic sheet in U-die bending process. Papeleux and Ponthot [7] investigated the effect of blank holder force and friction coefficient on spring-back in U-die bending. Thipprakmas and Rojananan [9] examined the spring-back and spring-go phenomena on the V-bending process using the nite element method (FEM). In this paper, experimental and numerical studies of the effects of signicant parameters including sheet thickness, sheet anisotropy and punch tip radius on spring-back/springgo in U-die bending processes of three different sheet materials have been conducted. The results of numerical simulations were performed on Altair hyper works software in hyperform module and these results are compared with the experimental results.

II. PROCEDURE Theoretical Approach In U-bending, the sheet deformation in die and punch corner region can be considered as sheet stretch-bending. The following assumptions are applied: 1) The stretching force per unit width in each layer is considered to be uniform through thickness. However, it is different for each layer. It causes sheet thinning and neutral surface shifting. 2) Straight lines perpendicular to the neutral surface remain straight during process. 3) The strain in the width direction z is zero. 4) The transverse stress, r, in each layer is neglected. 5) The adherence of the two layers is perfect, so there is no strain discontinuity in two layers interface. 6) Volume conservation is kept during stretchbending process, i.e. r++z=0. Where r and are the tangential and transverse strain, respectively.

2 (A) Material characteristics :

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CURRENT TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, NUiCONE 2011

To characterize the material properties and anisotropy, different specimens of 30*220 mm of three different materials sheets of ALUMINUM, DD1079 and EDD513 were cut at different orientations to the rolling directions (0, 45, and 90). Tensile specimens were used to determine the stressstrain curves and the sheet anisotropy parameters, rvalues. During the bending tests, the sheets with thicknesses 0.6, 1.2 and 1.8 mm, were examined and results were simulated with the help of hyperworks software, to show the different parameters on spring back in U die bending.

Fig. 3. Stress strain diagram of DD1079 material

(B) Model setup Table 1 Material Properties of the Three Materials.

Material ALUMINIUM EDD 513 DD 1079 K(Gpa) 0.181 0.501 0.854 n 0.06 0.2415 0.29 E(Gpa) 210 210 210 0.33 0.3 0.3 (Kg/mm3) 7.8 x 10 -6 7.8 x 10 -6 7.8 x 10 -6 UTS (Gpa) 0.18-0.23 0.27-0.35 0.26-0.39

The U-channel bending carried out with the experimental set-up which is shown in Fig. 4. In order to study the effect of parameters, three different set of thickness of ALUMINUM, DD1079 and EDD513 sheets tested according to Table 1.

K = strength of coefficient N = work hardening co efficient E = youngs modulus = Poissons ratio = density UTS = ultimate tensile strength YS = yield strength Stress-strain curve for ALUMINUM, DD1079 and EDD513 are shown below.

Fig. 4. Model setup in 3-D view in HYPERWORKS

Fig. 1. Stress strain diagram of aluminium

Fig.5 Model setup in 2-D view with the dimensions.

Fig. 2. Stress strain diagram of EDD513 material

(C) Spring Back And Spring Go Phenomena With Sheet Anisotropy.

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NIRMA UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD 382 481, 08-10 DECEMBER, 2011

Spring back and spring go effect in U die bending

Fig. 6. Spring back effects in U die bending

distribution and bending moment of cross-section are calculated by stretchbending formulation. Region III is the unsupported part and has undergone complex deformation history. It is initially stretched and bent around die corner and then unbent to become sidewall of Upart. The stress and strain distribution and bending moment are calculated using isotropic hardening rule. Because of the bending moment acting on sheet cross-section, the sheet in this region should also have a curvature during forming process. But since the clearance between the die and punch is far smaller than the punch stroke distance, this region can be considered as straight during forming process. However, after the loading is removed, the sheet in this region has a relatively large curvature because of spring back.

Fig. 7. Spring go effects in U die bending

Sheet anisotropy:

Fig. 9. Deformation regions in U die bending

Fig. 8. Normal and planer anisotropy

Anisotropy factor is nothing but the ability of material to resist against thinning. (D) Analysis of U- die bending The deformation area of sheet U-bending can be divided into five regions along the length direction as shown in Fig. 9, and the stretching force and bending moment acting on each region are shown in Figure no: 9. Region I and V are the flat parts contacting with the straight edges of punch and die, respectively. For simplicity, the bending moment acting on these two regions is neglected, although they should have a curvature. Region II and IV undergoes stretchbending around the punch and die corner, respectively, in which the sheet thickness, stress and strain

(E) Spring back of sheet in u bending The non-uniform distribution of stress in cross-section during forming process will change the part profile and cause spring back when the loading is removed. For U-bending, spring back happens only in the regions II, III and IV, while the regions I and V remain to be flat before and after the loading are removed. Assuming that the unloading does not cause reverse yielding, the deformation in spring back is equivalent to the deformation by adding a reverse bending moment -M in corresponding region. The simulated results are compared with the experimental results which are taken from the research paper presented by Hamed adibi, spring back in sheet metal laminates in U die bending; metal 2010[11].

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CURRENT TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, NUiCONE 2011

III. FINITE ELEMENT SIMULATION In this research paper the finite element simulation is carried out with the help of ALTAIR HYPERWORKS software in HYPERFORM module. The three different materials of ALUMINUM, DD1079 and EDD513 of sheet metals are taken with three different thicknesses 0.6mm, 1.2mm, and 1.8mm. The different phenomenon that affects the spring back effect after carried out the simulation results are shown below; (1) As the sheet metal thickness increases the spring back effect decreases.
Table 2 SPRINGBACK EFFECT IN DIFFERENT THICKNESS SHEET MATERIAL THICKNESS 0.6MM 1.2MM ALUMINIUM 4.991 -0.437 EDD513 4.036 -2.02 DD1079 2.204 -2.256

Fig. 11. Spring back to spring go effect

(3) Spring back effect decreases as the material strength

increases. TABLE 4 SPRINGBACK AND SPRING GO

MATERIAL THICKNESS 0.6MM 1.2MM ALUMINIUM 4.991 -0.437 DD1079 2.204 -2.256

Fig. 10. Springback effect in different thickness sheet Fig. 10 shows as the material thickness increases springback effect decreases. (2) As the strength of material increases the spring back effect will decreases and it will move towards spring go effect. TABLE 3 EFFECT OF MATERIAL STRENGTH ON SPRINGBACK MATERIAL THICKNESS 0.6MM 1.2MM . ALUMINIUM 4.991 -0.437 EDD513 4.036 -2.02 DD1079 2.204 -2.256

Fig. 12. Material Strength Effect on Springback

(4) At zero orientation it will give most optimum result of spring back in U die bending.

TABLE 5 EFFECT OF ORIENTATION ON SPRINGBACK MATERIAL EDD513 DD1079 ORIENTATION 0 45 90 3.69 4.109 4.486 2.086 2.256 2.569

The negative sign shows the spring-go effect in the U die bending during the sheet metal forming.

INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, NIRMA UNIVERSITY, AHMEDABAD 382 481, 08-10 DECEMBER, 2011

IV. RESULT AND DISCUSSION 1) Effect of Sheet Thickness Table 2 and Fig. 10 show the influence of sheet thickness on springback in U-die bending at various sheet thicknesses. In the figure (also in the figures are shown later), the values on the horizontal axis may be positive or negative. The negative value of spring-back is called spring-go. As Fig. 10 shows, by increasing the sheet thickness from 0.6 mm to 1.2 mm, the amount of spring-back and spring-go decreases. Fig. 13 shows the effect of the sheet thickness on springback at various sheet orientations for the punch tip radius 5mm in U-die bending. By increasing the sheet thickness, the amount of springback decreases. In sheet metal forming processes, the less the spring-back or spring-go, the better be the process parameters selected. According to the diagrams, the experimental and simulation results are in good agreements. The results obtained in this research are generally in agreement with those reported in the literature [1], [4]. Similar qualitative results were obtained for the other punch tip radii 7 mm in U-die bending; and for the thickness of the 1.8 mm sheet. (Data are not shown). 2) Effect of strength of material (A) Spring back to spring go conversion. As the material strength increases the spring back and spring go effect decreases. Table2 and Fig. 11 shows the data of spring back effect in three materials of ALUMINUM, DD1079 and EDD513 with material thickness of 0.6mm and 1.2mm. As per the Table 1 the material DD1079 has a maximum strength, and the strength of the material EDD513 and ALUMINIUM decreases respectively, as the strength of this three material decreases the spring back effect increases(Table 3). For 0.6 mm sheet thickness there is spring back effect in decreasing order as material strength increases, but in 1.2 mm sheet thickness there is a spring go effect in increasing order as material strength increases. So as per the results shown in Table 3 and graphical representation in Fig. 11 we can say that, as material strength decreases there will be conversion of spring back effect to the spring go effect. (B) Springback decreases as material strength increases. As the material strength increases the spring back and spring go effect decreases. Table3 and Fig. 12 shows the data of spring back effect in three materials of ALUMINUM and DD1079 with material thickness of 0.6mm and 1.2 mm. As per the Table 1 the material DD1079 has a maximum strength, and the strength of the material EDD513 and ALUMINIUM decreases respectively, as the strength of this three material decreases the spring back effect in the U die bending increases(Table 4). So as the material strength increases the springback effect decreases.

Fig. 13 Effect of Orientation on Springback Table 6 R- VALUES FOR THE SHEET OF DIFFERENT MATERIALS

Material 0 EDD 513 DD 1079 1.8 0.884 45 1.11

r 90 1.81 0.726

0.952

(5) As the tip radius increases the spring back effect will increases.
Table 7 TIP-RADIUS EFFECT ON SPRINGBACK

MATERIAL THICKNESS 0.6MM 1.2MM 5MM 4.036 -2.02 7MM 4.263 2.492 5MM 2.204 -2.256 7MM 4.245 2.283

Fig.14.1 Effect of Tip-Radius on Springback (DD1079 material)

Fig. 14.2 Effect of Tip-Radius on Springback (EDD513 material)

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CURRENT TRENDS IN TECHNOLOGY, NUiCONE 2011

V. CONCLUSION 3) Effect of orientation in sprig back. Table 5 and Fig. 13 shows the effect of sheet anisotropy on the spring-back at various sheet thicknesses for punch tip radius 5 mm in U-die bending. As it is shown in the gure, in general, increasing the bending direction to the rolling direction resulted in an increase in the spring-go. Accordingly, it was concluded that the bending of the sheet at orientation 0 was a suitable condition for spring-back or spring- go reduction in U-die bending processes. These ndings are in agreement with the study conducted by other [6]. Similar qualitative results were obtained for the other punch tip radii 7 mm in U-die bending. 4) Effect of tip radius in spring back Table 7 and Fig. 14 illustrate the changes in the springback/spring-go versus punch tip radius for orientation 45o at various sheet thick- nesses in U-die bending. As the results show in the illustrated gure, for any of the sheet thicknesses, at a certain value of the punch tip radius there is no springback/spring-go. Fig. 14.1 shows the result for DD1079 material for two sheet thicknesses of 0.6mm and 1.2mm. Similarly Fig. 14.1 shows the result for EDD513 material for two sheet thicknesses of 0.6mm and 1.2mm.as per the results it can be derived that the spring go effect is induced at smaller tip radius which can 5mm or below it. For 7mm tip radius the result table shows that there will be only spring back effect no spring go effect will induced. In addition, the amount of the spring-back increased as the punch tip radius increased. As it is shown in the gure, the trends of the experimental and simulation results are similar. The obtained results are generally in agreement with the ndings and the results reported in the literatures [4],[8]. Similar qualitative results are obtained for the other thick- nesses 1.8 mm for both the tip radii of 5mm and 7mm. (data are not shown). Fig. 15 shows the final simulated model after U die bending.
[1]

The following results were obtained from the present research: (1) As the thickness of the sheet metal increases there will be a decrease in the spring back effect. (2) As material strength decreases there will be conversion of spring back effect to the spring go effect. (3) As the material strength increases the spring back effect decreases. (4) The bending of the sheet at orientation0 was a suitable condition for spring-back or spring- go reduction in U-die bending processes. (5) As the tip radius increases the spring back effect will also be increased.

VI. REFERENCES
Tekiner Z. An experimental study of the examination of spring-back of sheet metals with several thicknesses and properties in bending dies. J Mater Process Technol 2004; 145:10917 [2] Moon YH, Kang SS, Cho JR, Kim TG. Effect of tool temperature on the reduction of the spring-back of aluminum sheets. J Mater Process Technol 2003; 132:3658. [3] Li X, Yang Y, Wang Y, Bao J, Li S. Effect of the materialhardening mode on the spring-back simulation accuracy of V-free bending. J Mater Process Technol 2002; 123:20911. [4] Cho J R , Moon S J, Moon Y H, Kang SS. Finite element investigation on spring- back characteristics in sheet metal U-die bending process. J Mater Process Technol 2003; 141:10916. [5] Xu W L, Ma CH, Li CH, Feng WJ. Sensitive factors in spring-back simulation for sheet metal forming. J Mater Process Technol 2004; 151:21722. [6] Gomes C, Onipede O, Lovell M. Investigation of springback in high strength anisotropic steels. J Mater Process Technol 2005; 159:918. [7] Papeleux L, Ponthot J P. Finite element simulation of spring-back in sheet metal forming. J Mater Process Technol 2002; 125126:78591. [8] Thipprakmas S, Rojananan S. Investigation of s p r i n g-go phenomenon using nite element method. J Mater Des 2 0 0 8 ; 29:152632. [9] ASTM. Die design handbook. 3rd ed. Mc Graw-Hill [10] Marciniak Z, Duncan JL, Hu SJ.Mechanicsof sheet metal forming. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann; 2002. [11] Hamed adibi, spring back in sheet metal laminates in U die bending; metal 2010.

Fig. 15 Simulated model.