TY - JOUR
T1 - Forming Limit Differences in Hemispherical Dome and Biaxial Test during Equibiaxial Tension on Cruciform
AU - Nikhare, Chetan P.
AU - Vorisek, Emmett
AU - Nolan, John R.
AU - Roth, John T.
N1 - Funding Information:
Author would like to thank Penn State Erie, The Behrend College for research facilities and resources and Mr. Glenn Craig for specimen fabrication. National Science Foundation (CMMI-1100356).
Publisher Copyright:
Copyright © 2017 by ASME.
PY - 2017/10/1
Y1 - 2017/10/1
N2 - Traditionally, the mechanical properties of materials have been characterized using the uniaxial tension test. This test is considered adequate for simple forming operations where single axis loading is dominant. Previous studies, however, have noted that the data acquired from this type of testing are not enough and additional details in other axes under simultaneous deformation conditions are important. To analyze the biaxial strain, some studies have suggested using the limiting dome height test and bulge test. However, these tests limit the extent of using multi-axial loading and the resulting stress pattern due to contact surfaces. Therefore, researchers devised the biaxial machine which is designed specifically to provide biaxial stress components using multiple and varying loading conditions. The idea of this work is to evaluate the relationship between the dome test data and the biaxial test data. For this comparison, cruciform specimens with a diamond shaped thinner gage in the center were deformed with biaxial stretching on the biaxial testing machine. In addition, the cruciform specimens were biaxially stretched with a hemispherical punch in a conventional die-punch setting. Furthermore, in each case, the process was simulated using a three-dimensional (3D) model generated on ABAQUS. These models were then compared with the experimental results. The forces on each arm, strain path, forming, and formability were analyzed. The differences between the processes were detailed. It was found that biaxial tests eliminated the pressurization effect which could be found in hemispherical dome tests.
AB - Traditionally, the mechanical properties of materials have been characterized using the uniaxial tension test. This test is considered adequate for simple forming operations where single axis loading is dominant. Previous studies, however, have noted that the data acquired from this type of testing are not enough and additional details in other axes under simultaneous deformation conditions are important. To analyze the biaxial strain, some studies have suggested using the limiting dome height test and bulge test. However, these tests limit the extent of using multi-axial loading and the resulting stress pattern due to contact surfaces. Therefore, researchers devised the biaxial machine which is designed specifically to provide biaxial stress components using multiple and varying loading conditions. The idea of this work is to evaluate the relationship between the dome test data and the biaxial test data. For this comparison, cruciform specimens with a diamond shaped thinner gage in the center were deformed with biaxial stretching on the biaxial testing machine. In addition, the cruciform specimens were biaxially stretched with a hemispherical punch in a conventional die-punch setting. Furthermore, in each case, the process was simulated using a three-dimensional (3D) model generated on ABAQUS. These models were then compared with the experimental results. The forces on each arm, strain path, forming, and formability were analyzed. The differences between the processes were detailed. It was found that biaxial tests eliminated the pressurization effect which could be found in hemispherical dome tests.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85022200526&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85022200526&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1115/1.4037020
DO - 10.1115/1.4037020
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85022200526
SN - 0094-4289
VL - 139
JO - Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, Transactions of the ASME
JF - Journal of Engineering Materials and Technology, Transactions of the ASME
IS - 4
M1 - 041011
ER -