In this study, the effect of a compressive normal stress has been considered in the determination of forming limit diagrams and forming limit stress diagrams to predict neck initiation failure in tube hydroforming of T-shaped parts. Computation of the forming limit diagrams and FLSDs is based on the generalized Marciniak and Kuczynski method to consider the existence of through-thickness compressive normal stress. The proposed forming limit diagrams and FLSDs were used in conjunction with ABAQUS/EXPLICIT finite element simulations to predict the onset of necking in tube hydroforming of T-shaped part. The amount of calibration pressure and axial feeding required to produce an acceptable part in finite element method was compared to published experimental data, and a satisfactory agreement between the FEM and test results has been achieved. Therefore, the present approach can be used as a reliable criterion to design tube hydroforming processes and reduce the number of costly trials.
AssempourANejadkhakiHKHashemiR. Forming limit diagrams with the existence of through-thickness normal stress. Comput Mater Sci2010; 48: 504–508S.
2.
Del PreteAAnglaniAPrimoT. Computer aided simulation as valid tool for sheet hydroforming process development. Int J Mater Forming2008; 1: 317–322.
3.
TolazziM. Hydroforming applications in automotive: a review. Int J Mater Forming2010; 3: 307–310.
4.
CherouatAAyadiMMezghaniN. Experimental and finite element modelling of thin sheet hydroforming processes. Int J Mater Forming2008; 1: 313–316.
5.
BrunetMBoumaizaSNefussiG. Unified failure analysis for tubular hydroforming. J Mater Process Technol2004; 148: 269–277.
6.
JanssonMNilssonLSimonssonK. On strain localisation in tube hydroforming of aluminium extrusions. J Mater Process Technol2008; 195: 3–14.
7.
AsnafiNSkogsgardhAnders. Theoretical and experimental analysis of stroke-controlled tube hydroforming. Mater Sci Eng A2000; 279: 95–110.
8.
ElyasiMBakhshi-JooybariMGorjiA. A new die design for the hydroforming of stepped tubes. Int J Mater Forming2010; 3: 71–75.
9.
KimJKimSang-WooSongWoo-Jin. Analytical approach to bursting in tube hydroforming using diffuse plastic instability. Int J Mech Sci2004; 46: 1535–1547.
10.
KimJSongWJKangBS. Probabilistic modeling of stress-based FLD in tube hydroforming process. J Mech Sci Technol2009; 23: 2891–2902.
11.
FarajiGh.HashemiRMosavi MashhadiM. Hydroforming limits in metal bellows forming process. Mater Manufac Process2010; 25: 1413–1417.
12.
SorninDFayolleSBouchardP-O. Plastic instabilities analysis during T-shaped tubes hydro-forming process. Int J Mater Forming2009; 2: 131–144.
13.
AsnafiN. Analytical modelling of tube hydroforming. Thin-Walled Struct1999; 34: 295–330.
14.
NikhareCWeissMHodgsonPD. FEA comparison of high and low pressure tube hydroforming of TRIP steel. Comput Mater Sci2009; 47: 146–152.
15.
YuanSJHanCWangXS. Hydroforming of automotive structural components with rectangular-sections. Int J Mach Tools Manuf2006; 46: 1201–1206.
16.
HashemiRAssempourAMasoumi Khalil AbadE. Implementation of the forming limit stress diagram to obtain suitable load path in tube hydroforming considering M–K model. Mater Design2009; 30: 3545–3553.
17.
HashemiRFarajiGhAbriniaK. Application of the hydroforming strain- and stress-limit diagrams to predict necking in metal bellows forming process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2010; 46: 551–561.
18.
AllwoodJMShoulerDR. Generalised forming limit diagrams showing increased forming limits with non-planar stress states. Int. J. Plast2009; 25: 1207–1230.
19.
SimhaCHMGholipourJBardelcikA. Prediction of necking in tubular hydroforming using an extended stress-based flc. ASME J Eng Mater Technol2007; 129: 136–147.
20.
SmithLMAverillRCLucasJP. Influence of transverse normal stress on sheet metal formability. Int J Plast2003; 19: 1567–1583.
21.
NurcheshmehMGreenDE. Influence of out-of-plane compression stress on limit strains in sheet metals. Int J Mater Form2012; 5: 213–226.
22.
MarciniakZKuczynskiK. Limit strains in the processes of stretch forming sheet metal. Int J Mech Sci1967; 9: 609–620.
23.
HashemiRGhazanfariAAbriniaK. Forming limit diagrams of ground St14 steel sheets with different thicknesses. SAE Int J Mater Manufac2012; 5: 60–64.
24.
HillR. A theory of the yielding and plastic flow of anisotropic metals. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A1948; 193: 281–297.
25.
AnHGreenDJohrendtJ. Multi-objective optimization of loading path design in multi-stage tube forming using MOGA. Int J Mater Form2013; 6: 125–135.
26.
HashemiRMamusiHMasoumiA. Simulation-based approach to the determination of forming limit diagrams. Proc IMechE Part B. J Engineering Manufacture2014; 228(12): 1582–1591.
27.
Kashani ZadehHMashhadiMM. Finite element simulation and experiment in tube hydroforming of unequal T shapes. J Mater Process Technol2006; 177: 684–687.
28.
RayPMac DonaldBJ. Experimental study and finite element analysis of simple X- and T-branch tube hydroforming processes. Int J Mech Sci2005; 47: 1498–1518.
29.
KimJKangSung-JongKangBeom-Soo. A prediction of bursting failure in tube hydroforming processes based on ductile fracture criterion. Int J Adv Manuf Technol2003; 22: 357–362.
30.
KimJeongKimSang-WooParkHoon-Jae. A prediction of bursting failure in tube hydroforming process based on plastic instability. Int J Adv Manufac Technol2006; 27: 518–524.
31.
Kashani zadeh H. Finite element modeling in tube hydroforming. MSc Thesis, University of Tehran, 2005.
32.
NurcheshmehMGreenDE. Investigation on the strain-path dependency of stress-based forming limit curves. Int J Mater Forming2011; 4: 25–37.
33.
AssempourAHashemiRAbriniaK. A methodology for prediction of forming limit stress diagrams considering the strain path effect. Comput Mater Sci2009; 45: 195–204.
34.
HashemiRAbriniaKAssempourA. The strain gradient approach to predict necking in tube hydroforming. J Manufac Process2013; 15: 51–55.
35.
GhazanfariAAssempourA. Calibration of forming limit diagrams using a modified Marciniak–Kuczynski model and an empirical law. Mater Design2012; 34: 185–191.
36.
HashemiRGhazanfariAAbriniaK. The effect of the imposed boundary rate on the formability of strain rate sensitive sheets using the M-K method. J Mater Eng Perform2013; 22(9): 2522–2527.
37.
GronostajskiJZZimniakZ. The effect of changing of heterogeneity with strain on the forming limit diagram. J Mater Proc Tech1992; 34: 457–464.
38.
AssempourASafikhaniARHashemiR. An improved strain gradient approach for determination of deformation localization and forming limit diagrams. J Mater Proc Tech2009; 209: 1758–1769.
39.
SafikhaniARHashemiRAssempourA. The strain gradient approach for determination of forming limit stress and strain diagrams. Proc Inst Mech Eng, Part B: J Eng Manuf2008; 222: 467–483.
40.
SimhaHMGrantabRWorswickMJ. Computational analysis of stress-based forming limit curves. Int J Solids Struct2007; 44: 8663–8684.
