In the superplastic forming process, the die–sheet interface friction distribution affects the required forming time and thickness uniformity of the formed part. This study undertakes the numerical investigation of applying variable interfacial friction distribution in superplastic forming of AA5083 aluminum alloy into a vehicle closure component using the commercial software, ABAQUS/Implicit. The die surface is divided into seven regions and a set of finite element simulations of the hot gas-pressure forming process are performed with focus on the effects of applying different friction coefficients at those regions on the forming time and thinning factor. For selecting the trade-off optimum friction distribution, forming time and thinning factor are calculated for each friction condition to form an evaluation matrix. Finally, TOPSIS as a multi-criteria decision making method is employed to select the best compromise friction distribution.
LuckeySG JrFriedmanPWeinmannK. Design and experimental validation of a two-stage superplastic forming die. J Mater Process Technol2009; 209: 2152–2160.
2.
KrajewskiPEThe effect of lubrication on QPF formability. In: BielerTRCarsleyJEFraserHL (eds). Trends in materials and manufacturing technologies for transportation industries and powder metallurgy research and development in the transportation, Warrendale, PA: TMS, 2007, pp. 127–133.
3.
HarrisonNRLuckeySGFriedmanPAInfluence of friction and die geometry on simulation of superplastic forming of Al–Mg alloys. In: TaleffEMFriedmanPAKrajewskiPE (eds). Advances in superplasticity and superplastic forming, Warrendale, PA: TMS, 2004, pp. 301–309.
4.
Verma R and Carter JT. Quick plastic forming of a decklid inner panel with commercial AZ31 magnesium sheet. SAE 2006-06-0525, 2006.
5.
TaleffEMHectorLG JrBradleyJR. Local thinning at a die entry radius during hot gas-pressure forming of an AA5083 sheet. J Manuf Sci Eng2010; 132(1): 011016–011016. (7 pp).
6.
CarrinoLGiulianoGPalmieriC. On the optimization of superplastic forming processes by the finite-element method. J Mater Process Technol2003; 143–144: 373–377.
7.
NazzalMAKhraishehMKDarrasBM. Finite element modeling and optimization of superplastic forming using variable strain rate approach. J Mater Eng Perform2004; 13: 691–699.
8.
KhraishehMKZbibHM. Optimum forming loading paths for Pb-Sn superplastic sheet materials. ASME J Eng Mater Technol1999; 121: 341–345.
9.
AlbakriMIKhraishehMK. Optimization of superplastic forming: Effects of interfacial friction on variable strain rate forming paths. Adv Sustain Manuf2011, pp. 121–126.
10.
GhoshAKHamiltonCH. Superplastic forming of a long rectangular box section–analysis and experiment. Mater Process Congr1980; 1978–1979: 303–331.
11.
KhaleelMAJohnsonKISmithMT. On the thinning profiles in superplastic forming of a modified 5083 aluminum alloy. Mater Sci Forum1997; 243–245: 739–744.
12.
LuckeySGJrFriedmanPAWeinmannKJ. Correlation of finite element analysis to superplastic forming experiments. J Mater Process Technol2007; 194: 30–37.
13.
Balasubramanian M, Ramanathan K and Sentil Kumar VS. Mathematical modeling and finite element analysis of superplastic forming of Ti-6Al-4 V alloy in a stepped rectangular die. In: International conference on design and manufacturing (IConDM2013), Chennai, India, vol. 64, 2013, pp. 1209–1218.
14.
JarrarFSLiewaldMSchmidP. Superplastic forming of triangular channels with sharp radii. J Mater Eng Perform2014; 23(4): 1313–1320.
15.
LinJ. Selection of material models for predicting necking in superplastic forming. Int J Plasticity2003; 19: 469–481.
16.
ChenZPThomsonPF. A study of post-form static and fatigue properties of superplastic 7475-SPF and 5083-SPF aluminium alloys. J Mater Process Technol2004; 148: 204–219.
17.
Verma R and Carter J. Quick plastic forming of a decklid inner panel with commercial AZ31 magnesium sheet. SAE Technical Paper 2006-01-0525, 2006.
18.
HectorLG JrKrajewskiPETaleffEM. High-temperature forming of a vehicle closure component in fine-grained aluminum alloy AA5083: Finite element simulations and experiments. Key Eng Mater2010; 433: 197–209.
19.
JarrarFSHectorLG JrKhraishehMK. New approach to gas pressure profile prediction for high temperature AA5083 sheet forming. J Mater Process Technol2010; 210: 825–834.
20.
VermaRHectorLGKrajewskiPE. The finite element simulation of high-temperature magnesium AZ31 sheet forming. J Miner Met Mater Soc2009; 61: 29–37.
21.
KrajewskiPEMoralesAT. Tribological issues during quick plastic forming. J Mater Eng Perform2004; 13: 700–709.
22.
AlbakriMIJarrarFSKhraishehMK. Effects of interfacial friction distribution on the superplastic forming of AA5083. Eng Mater Technol2011; 133(3): 031008–031008. (6 pp).
23.
Roy B. Classementetchoix en présence de points de vue multiples (la méthode ELECTRE). La Revue d'Informatiqueet de RechercheOpérationelle (RIRO) (8), 1968, pp.57–75.
SaatyTL. Decision making with dependence and feedback: The analytic network process, Pittsburgh, PA: RWS Publications, 1996.
26.
YuPL. A class of solutions for group decision problems. Manage Sci1973; 19(8): 936–946.
27.
ZelenyMCompromise programming. In: CochraneJLZelenyM (eds). Multiple criteria decision making, Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 1973, pp. 262–301.
28.
OpricovicS. Multicriteria optimization of civil engineering systems, Belgrade: Faculty of Civil Engineering, 1998.
29.
HwangCLYoonKP. Multiple attribute decision making methods and applications, New York: Springer, 1981.
30.
LuckeySG JrFriedmanPAXiaZCAspects of element formulation and strain rate control in the numerical modeling of superplastic forming. In: TaleffEMFriedmanPAKrajewskiPE (eds). Proceedings of advances in superplasticity and superplastic forming, TMS (The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society), 2004, pp. 371–380.
31.
ABAQUS analysis user’s manual, Version 6.12, vol. 3, pp. 23.2.4–10–23.2.4–11.
