Strojniški vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 61(2015)11, 651-662 © 2015 Journal of Mechanical Engineering. All rights reserved. D0l:10.5545/sv-jme.2015.2562 Original Scientific Paper Received for review: 2015-03-18 Received revised form: 2015-07-31 Accepted for publication: 2015-10-01 The Experimental Investigation of Effects of Multiple Parameters on the Formability of the DC01 Sheet Metal Hakan Gurun* - ibrahim Karaagag Gazi University Faculty of Technology, Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Turkey The formability of sheet metal materials through the deep drawing process is affected by various parameters, such as die chamber pressure, die radius and sheet thickness, all of which directly influence the product's quality. This paper investigates the formability of the DC01 sheet metal material. DC01 is a carbon steel sheet, which has a wide range of usages from the automotive industry to the manufacture of radiators by means of hydro-mechanical and conventional deep deep drawing methods. This study, for the first time, empirically investigates the effects of die chamber pressure, die radius and sheet thickness on the formability of DC01 sheet metal material through hydro-mechanical and conventional deep deep drawing methods. The study also helps to determine the forming parameters for this material. With regard to the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process, the drawing ratio increased from 2.16 to 2.33, solely due to an increase in die chamber pressure. The results of the experiment revealed suitable forming parameters through hydro-mechanical and conventional deep drawing methods for samples of DC01 material having a cylindrical geometry. Keywords: deep drawing, hydro-mechanical deep drawing, conventional deep drawing Highlights • The effects of die chamber pressure, die radius, and sheet thickness on the formability of DC01 sheet metal material were empirically investigated. • The formability properties of DC01 sheet material were compared using conventional and hydro-mechanical deep drawing processes. • The effect of each parameter and suitable parameter values were empirically identified and evaluated. • The biggest drawing ratio in the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process was obtained as 2.33. • The biggest drawing ratio in the conventional deep drawing process was obtained as 2.16. • The maximum thickness change in the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process was observed to be a 12 % decrease. 0 INTRODUCTION The deep drawing process is widely used for forming sheet metal products. Medication and perfume tubes, pots and pans, household appliances, automotive parts and defence industry products are examples of the different applications of this process. In products formed using deep drawing, homogenous sheet thickness distribution and achievement of the highest drawing ratio is expected. Conventional deep drawing is one of the most widely used sheet metal-forming methods for turning blank sheets into hollow pieces. The process includes forming the sheet metal with compression and tensile forces. In the process, the punch pulls the sheet material through the space between the punch and the die ring and shapes it [1]. In this process, the blankholding slide transfers the blank-holding force via the blank holder onto the blank and the draw die. The die and the ejector are located in the lower die on the press bed. During forming, the blank holder brings the sheet metal into contact with the die, the punch descends from above into the die and shapes the part, while the sheet metal can flow without any wrinkling of the blank-holding area. In this case, the drawing process is carried out with a fixed blank holder and moving punch. The conventional deep drawing process is shown schematically, in Fig. 1. When analysing previously performed studies, it was found that there are experimental-analytical and numerical research results. Through the finite element method (FEM), which is a numerical method, Volk et al. attempted to determine the optimal blankholding force, through the finite element method, by changing the geometry and the structure of the blank holder. The best results were obtained with flexible, segmented blank holders [2]. Trzepiecinski and Lemu worked on the effect of sheet metal surface roughness, lubricant conditions and sample orientation on the value of the friction coefficient in the draw-bead region of the sheet metal-forming processes. They ascertained several relationships showing the effect of surface profile and lubrication on the value of the friction coefficient. Simulations have been performed to study the stress/strain state in the stretched sample during draw-bead simulator tests [3]. Assempour and *Corr. Author's Address: Gazi University Faculty of Technology, Department of Manufacturing Engineering, Turkey, hgurun@gazi.edu.tr 651 Strojniski vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 61(2015)11, 651-662 Taghipour worked to evaluate the effect of normal stress in the hydromechanical deep drawing (HDD) process. Analyses were carried out for axisymmetric elements of the formed cup-shaped part for increments of the punch travel. They found some differences between thickness values, radial and circumferential strains and stresses, and punch force under plane stress and three-dimensional stress conditions [4]. Numerical simulation methods were also used to aid in the development of the forming tool and the determination of the process parameter. Jurendic and Gaiani developed a numerical simulation method to aid in forming tool development and process parameter determination. They used the Barlat 1989 material model and employed an experimental strain-hardening curve to consider the anisotropic hardening of the material [5]. Garcia et al. used a Hill-48 associate plasticity model to analyse the modelling and experimental validation of the Erichsen test, a cylindrical cup test, and an industrial sheet metal-forming process [6]. The hydro-mechanical deep drawing process is forming using liquid pressure. Hydromechanical deep drawing (HDD), as a combination of conventional deep drawing with sheet hydroforming, has been widely used in the forming of complex-shaped sheet materials [7]. Onder and Tekkaya worked to determinate the optimum sheet metal-forming process and process parameters for various cross-sectional workpieces by comparing the numerical results of high-pressure sheet metal forming, hydromechanical deep drawing and conventional deep drawing simulations. The analyses revealed that certain processes are preferable for obtaining satisfactory products depending on the workpiece geometry and dimensional properties. Furthermore, it has been found that hydromechanical deep drawing is mostly suitable for deeper products where the flange is large [8]. Khandeparkar and Liewald worked on the advantages of hydro-mechanical deep drawing, such as increased deep drawing ratio, transfer of complex contours from a punch to the blank surface, reduction of drawing stages and better part quality. The process was simulated using the LS-DYNA FEM solver [9]. Sharma and Rout developed a finite element (FE) model for simulating the sheet hydromechanical forming process using LS-DYNA dynamic explicit commercial code. The analysis revealed that higher cup depth with minimum thinning, for forming dominated by stretching mode, can be achieved with material of a higher anisotropy ratio and strain hardening exponent by using a rough punch and ** ml U UrU D jnk \ [ ■ BlankHI j \ 30 MPa), the sheet material could be drawn to the end without any wrinkles on it. In the conventional forming methods, however, scratches appearing on the punch along with the scratches and burrs on the sheet material are among the factors that decrease formability and surface quality. The thickness of sheet material is an important parameter in the drawing and forming processes. Die chamber pressure and sheet material thickness are closely related parameters, and die chamber pressure must be specified according to sheet material thickness during the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process. Die chamber pressure in the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process must have a value that will uniformly press the sheet material on the punch and decrease its contact with the die radius. Otherwise, the impact of the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process could not be notably observed. In empirical studies, the biggest drawing ratio, 2.16, was obtained in 0.8 mm thick sheet material and at a die radius of 4 mm under 20 MPa of die chamber pressure, while a drawing ratio of 2.33 was obtained in the 0.5 mm thick sheet material under the same conditions. It was due to the fact that the effect of die chamber pressure increases as the sheet material thickness decreases. As the value of the die radius increases, the formability of the sheet material also increases. However, the impact of the die radius may decrease in the hydro-mechanical deep drawing method under high die chamber pressure in case of elimination of the contact between the die radius and the sheet material due to the pressure. In the empirical studies, the effect of the die radius was fully observed in both methods. It was also observed that as the die radius increases, the drawing ratio increases in both methods, while the forming force decreases. The desired end product cannot be obtained taking into account a single parameter in the forming processes through hydro-mechanical and conventional deep drawing methods. As indicated by the empirical studies, die chamber pressure, die radius and sheet material thickness parameters are interrelated and cannot be considered separately. In the forming processes in which all these parameters are taken into account, the biggest drawing ratio, 2.33, in the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process, and the biggest drawing ratio, 2.16, in the conventional deep drawing process were obtained in a pressure range of 0 to 30 MPa for DC01 sheet material. 4 CONCLUSIONS The following shows the results obtained from the experimental study. • Die chamber pressure, die radius and sheet material thickness parameters are interrelated parameters, and cannot be considered separately. • The biggest drawing ratio, 2.33, in the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process was obtained in a pressure range of 0 MPa to 30 MPa for DC01 sheet material. • The biggest drawing ratio, 2.16, in the conventional deep drawing process was obtained. • In the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process, the forming force rises with increasing chamber pressure. • An increase in the die radius causes a decrease in the forming force. • In the hydro-mechanical deep drawing method, the forming environment is very efficiently lubricated. This situation allows the sheet material to be drawn to the end without any wrinkling. • Die chamber pressure and sheet material thickness are closely related parameters, and die chamber pressure must be specified according to sheet material thickness during a hydro-mechanical deep drawing process. • The thickness change in the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process was observed as a maximum 12 % decrease. This phenomenon has a lower value than thickness decreases in parts formed by the conventional deep drawing method. 5 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The present work is supported by the Gazi University Scientific Research Department with project number 07/2010-31. 6 REFERENCES [1] Tschaetsch, H. (2006). Metal Forming Practise. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg. [2] Volk, M., Nardin, B., Dolšak, B. (2011). Application of numerical simulations in the deep drawing process and the holding system with segments' inserts. Strojniški vestnik -Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 57, no. 9, p. 697-703, DOI:10.5545/sv-jme.2010.258. [3] Trzepiecinski, T., Lemu, H.G. (2014). Frictional conditions of AA5251 aluminium alloy sheets using drawbead simulator tests and numerical methods. Strojniški vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 60, no. 1, p. 51-60, DOI:10.5545/sv-jme.2013.1310. The Experimental Investigation of Effects of Multiple Parameters on the Formability of the DC01 Sheet Metal 661 Strojniski vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering 61(2015)11, 651-662 [4] Assempour, A., Taghipour, E. (2011). The effect of normal stress on hydro-mechanical deep drawing process. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences, vol. 53, no. 6, p. 407-416, DOI:10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2011.03.003. [5] Jurendic, S., Gaiani, S. (2013). Numerical simulation of cold forming of a-titanium alloy sheets. Strojniški vestnik - Journal of Mechanical Engineering, vol. 59, no. 3, p. 148-155, DOI:10.5545/sv-jme.2012.415. [6] Garcia, C., Celentano, D., Flores, F., Ponthot, J .-P., (2006). Numerical modelling and experimental validation of steel deep drawing processes. Part I. Material characterization. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 172, no. 3, p. 451-460, DOI:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.11.015. [7] Janbakhsh, M., Riahi, M., Djavanroodi, F. (2013). A practical approach to analysis of hydro-mechanical deep drawing of superalloy sheet metals using finite element method. International Journal of Advanced Design and Manufacturing Technology, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 1-7. [8] Onder, E., Tekkaya, A.E. (2008). Numerical simulation of various cross sectional workpieces using conventional deep drawing and hydroforming technologies. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, vol. 48, no. 5, p. 532-542, DOI:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2007.06.012. [9] Khandeparkar, T., Liewald, M. (2008). Hydromechanical deep drawing of cups with stepped geometries. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 202, no. 1-3, p. 246-254, DOI:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2007.08.072. [10] Sharma, A.K., Rout, D.K. (2009). Finite element analysis of sheet Hydromechanical forming of circular cup. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 209, no. 3, p. 14451453. DOI:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2008.03.070. [11] Consulting editor: Altan, T. (1998). Metal Forming Handbook, Schuler Springer Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. [12] Zhang, S.H., Wang, Z.R., Xu, Y., Wang, Z.T., Zhou, L.X. (2004). Recent developments in sheet hydroforming technology. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 151, no. 1-3, p. 237-241, DOI:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.04.054. [13] Banablc, D., Bunge, H.-J., Pohlandt, K., Tekkaya, A.E. (2000). Formability of Metallic Materials. Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, DOI 10.1007/978-3-662-04013-3. [14] Choi, H., Ni, J., Koc, M. (2007). A study on the analytical modelling for warm hydro-mechanical deep drawing of lightweight materials. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, vol. 47, p. 1752-1766, DOI:10.1016/j. ijmachtools.2006.12.005. [15] Zhang, S.H., Lang, L.H., Kang, D.C., Danckert, J., Nielsen, K.B. (2000). Hydromechanical deep drawing of aluminium parabolic workpieces-experiments and numerical simulation. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, vol. 40, no. 10, p. 1479-1492, DOI:10.1016/S0890-6955(00)00006-7. [16] Zhang, S.H., Jensen, M.R., Nielsen, K.B., Danckert, J., Lang, L.H., Kang, D.C. (2003). Effect of anisotropy and prebulging on hydro-mechanical deep drawing of mild steel cups. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 142, no. 2, p. 544-550, DOI:10.1016/S0924-0136(03)00656-3. [17] Dachang, K., Yu, C., Yongchao, X. (2005). Hydromechanical deep drawing of superalloy cups. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 166 no. 2, p. 243-246, DOI:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2004.08.024. [18] Zhang, S.H., Nielsen, K.B., Danckert, J., Kang, D.C., Lang, L.H. (2000). Finite element analysis of the hydro-mechanical deep drawing process of tapered rectangular boxes. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol. 102, no- 1-3, p. 1-8, DOI:10.1016/S0924-0136(99)00446-X. [19] Hezam, L.M.A., Hassan, M.A., Hassab-Allah, I.M., El-Sebaie, M.G. (2009). Development of a new process for producing deep square cups through conical dies. International Journal of Machine Tools & Manufacture, vol.49, no. 10, p. 773-780, DOI:10.1016/j.ijmachtools.2009.04.001. 662 Gurun, H. - Karaagaq, i.