Focusing on upcoming challenges in lightweight design, such as increasing emission targets or novel multimaterial connections, versatile applicable and environmentally friendly production technologies are crucial. In this context, mechanical joining technology clinching offers a fast and energy-efficient procedure for assembling sheet metals, being a proper alternative to established joining methods, such as spot welding. However, the design of clinch points is a challenge, which is partly supported by numerical or data-based approaches for optimal tool dimensions assuring proper joint characteristics. While this is usually done for an ideal environment, real joining processes are characterized by multiple inevitably varying parameters, e.g. of the material, which have a significant impact on the quality of clinch points. Therefore, this contribution addresses the current gap by analyzing the effect of parameter variations or uncertainties on the resulting joint characteristics and studying the impact of the nominal tool design. Thus, an efficient meta-model-based variation simulation procedure is proposed and used for analyzing the effect of different tool design configurations and variation scenarios. Based on the results, it was found that varying process parameters have a strong impact on the resulting joint characteristics, whereby the effect significantly depends on the nominal tool design. This reveals the potential for a robust tool design and implies that the nominal tool design and the tolerancing of parameters should be done simultaneously for a reliable virtual joining point design without extensive iterations and physical tests.
MuchaJKaščákLSpišákE. Joining the car-body sheets using clinching process with various thickness and mechanical property arrangements. Arch Civ Mech Eng2011; 11: 135–148.
2.
RzasinskiRKochanskiL. Joining methods in car body construction. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng. 2018; 400: 22051.
3.
ChuMHeXZhangJ, et al. Clinching of similar and dissimilar sheet materials of galvanized steel, aluminium alloy and titanium alloy. Mater Trans. 2018; 59: 694–697.
4.
EshtayehMMHrairiMMohiuddinAKM. Clinching process for joining dissimilar materials: state of the art. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2016; 82: 179–195.
5.
WuJChenC. Investigation on clinch riveting process with different material combinations. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part L2022; 236: 2455–2466.
6.
GudeMLieberwirthHMeschutG, et al. FORELStudie - Chancen und Herausforderungen im ressourceneffizienten Leichtbau für die Elektromobilität. FOREL: Dresden, 2015.
7.
KascakLSpisakEMajernikovaJ. Clinching and clinch-riveting as a green alternative to resistance spot welding. In: International Council on Technologies of Environmental Protection2019.
SchrammBMartinSSteinfelderC, et al. A review on the modeling of the clinching process chain - part I: design phase. J Adv Join Process2022; 6: 100133.
10.
BredaACoppietersSDebruyneD. Equivalent modelling strategy for a clinched joint using a simple calibration method. Thin-Walled Struct2017; 113: 1–12.
11.
BielakCRBöhnkeMBobbertM, et al. Further development of a numerical method for analyzing the load capacity of clinched joints in versatile process chains. ESAFORM2021.
12.
DeanARolfesR. FE modeling and simulation framework for the forming of hybrid metal-composites clinching joints. Thin-Walled Struct2018; 133: 134–140.
13.
ZirngiblCSchleichBWartzackS. Estimation of clinch joint characteristics based on limited input data using pre-trained metamodels. AI2022; 3: 990–1006.
14.
LambiaseFDi IlioA. Optimization of the clinching tools by means of integrated FE modeling and artificial intelligence techniques. Procedia CIRP2013; 12: 163–168.
15.
LongJLanFChenJ, et al. Mechanical properties prediction of the mechanical clinching joints based on genetic algorithm and BP neural network. Chin J Mech Eng2009; 22: 36–41.
16.
NairVNAbrahamBMacKayJ, et al.Taguchi’s parameter design: a panel discussion. Technometrics1992; 34: 127–161.
17.
OudjeneMBen-AyedL. On the parametrical study of clinch joining of metallic sheets using the Taguchi method. Eng Struct2008; 30: 1782–1788.
18.
MŞAdin. Machining aerospace aluminium alloy with cryo-treated and untreated HSS cutting tools. Adv Mater Process Technol2023; 1: 1–26.
19.
ÇiçekAKıvakTEkiciE. Optimization of drilling parameters using Taguchi technique and response surface methodology (RSM) in drilling of AISI 304 steel with cryogenically treated HSS drills. J Intell Manuf2015; 26: 295–305.
20.
SkowronskiVJTurnerJU. Using Monte-Carlo variance reduction in statistical tolerance synthesis. Computer-Aided Design1997; 29: 63–69.
21.
ZirngiblCSchleichBWartzackS. Robust estimation of clinch joint characteristics based on data-driven methods. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2023; 124: 833–845.
22.
ColA. Investigation on press forming scatter origin. Proceedings of the 6th International ESAFORM Conference on Material Forming2003, pp. 183–186.
23.
BielakCRBöhnkeMBeckR, et al. Numerical analysis of the robustness of clinching process considering the pre-forming of the parts. J Adv Join Process2021; 3: 100038.
24.
OudjeneMBen-AyedLDelamézièreA, et al. Shape optimization of clinching tools using the response surface methodology with moving least-square approximation. J Mater Process Technol2009; 209: 289–296.
25.
LebaalNOudjeneMRothS. The optimal design of sheet metal forming processes: application to the clinching of thin sheets. Int J Comput Appl Technol2012; 43: 110.
26.
RouxEBouchardP-O. Kriging metamodel global optimization of clinching joining processes accounting for ductile damage. J Mater Process Technol2013; 213: 1038–1047.
27.
SchrammBFriedleinJGrögerB, et al. A review on the modeling of the clinching process chain—part II: joining process. J Adv Join Process2022; 6: 100134.
28.
WangXLiXShenZ, et al. Finite element simulation on investigations, modeling, and multiobjective optimization for clinch joining process design accounting for process parameters and design constraints. Int J Adv Manuf Tech2018; 96: 3481–3501.
29.
DrosselW-GIsraelMFalkT. Robustness evaluation and tool optimization in forming applications. 9th Weimar Optimization and Stochastic Days, 29-30.11.2012, Weimar2012.
30.
DrosselWGFalkTIsraelM, et al. Unerring planning of clinching processes through the use of mathematical methods. Key Eng Mater2014; 611–612: 1437–1444.
31.
KestelPKüglerPZirngiblC, et al. Ontology-based approach for the provision of simulation knowledge acquired by data and text mining processes. Adv Eng Inf2019; 39: 292–305.
32.
NelliF. The NumPy library. In: NelliF (ed.) Python data analytics. Berkeley, CA: Apress, 2015, pp. 35–61.
33.
SaltelliARattoMAndresT, et al. Global sensitivity analysis. The Primer. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, 2007.
34.
BorgonovoEPlischkeE. Sensitivity analysis: a review of recent advances. Eur J Oper Res2016; 248: 869–887.
35.
KupferRKöhlerDRömischD, et al. Clinching of aluminum materials – methods for the continuous characterization of process, microstructure and properties. J Adv Join Process2022; 5: 100108.
36.
MartinSBielakCRBobbertM, et al. Numerical investigation of the clinched joint loadings considering the initial pre-strain in the joining area. Prod Eng Res Devel. 2022; 16: 261–273.
37.
ZirngiblCSchleichBWartzackS. Approach for the automated and data-based design of mechanical joints. Proc Des Soc. 2021; 1: 521–530.
38.
ZirngiblCSchleichB. Approach for the automated analysis of geometrical clinch joint characteristics. Key Eng Mater2021; 883: 105–110.
39.
MontgomeryDC. Design and analysis of experiments. 8th ed. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
40.
FisherRA. The design of experiments. 9th ed. New York: Hafner Press, 1974.
41.
OwenAB. Monte carlo, quasi-Monte Carlo, and randomized quasi-Monte Carlo. In: NiederreiterHSpanierJ (eds) Monte-Carlo and quasi-Monte Carlo methods 1998. Berlin: Springer, 2000, pp. 86–97.
42.
McKayMDBeckmanRJConoverWJ. A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics1979; 21: 55–61.
43.
FowlkesWYCrevelingCM. Engineering methods for robust product design: Using Taguchi methods in technology and product development. Reading: Addison-Wesley, 1995.
44.
SchrammBHarzheimSWeißD, et al. A review on the modeling of the clinching process chain - part III: operational phase. J Adv Join Process2022; 6: 100135.
45.
TaguchiGChowdhurySWuY, et al. (eds). Taguchi's quality engineering Handbook. Hoboken, N.J.: John Wiley & Sons, 2005, pp. 318–339.
