Yayın:
Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

dc.contributor.authorHabraken, Anne Marie
dc.contributor.authorAksen, Toros Arda
dc.contributor.authorAlves, Jose L.
dc.contributor.authorAmaral, Rui L.
dc.contributor.authorBetaieb, Ehssen
dc.contributor.authorChandola, Nitin
dc.contributor.authorCorallo, Luca
dc.contributor.authorCruz, Daniel J.
dc.contributor.authorDuchene, Laurent
dc.contributor.authorEngel, Bernd
dc.contributor.authorEsener, Emre
dc.contributor.authorFirat, Mehmet
dc.contributor.authorFrohn-Soerensen, Peter
dc.contributor.authorGalan-Lopez, Jesus
dc.contributor.authorGhiabakloo, Hadi
dc.contributor.authorKestens, Leo A., I
dc.contributor.authorLian, Junhe
dc.contributor.authorLingam, Rakesh
dc.contributor.authorLiu, Wencheng
dc.contributor.authorMa, Jun
dc.contributor.authorMenezes, Luis F.
dc.contributor.authorTuan Nguyen-Minh
dc.contributor.authorMiranda, Sara S.
dc.contributor.authorNeto, Diogo M.
dc.contributor.authorPereira, Andre F. G.
dc.contributor.authorPrates, Pedro A.
dc.contributor.authorReuter, Jonas
dc.contributor.authorRevil-Baudard, Benoit
dc.contributor.authorRojas-Ulloa, Carlos
dc.contributor.authorSener, Bora
dc.contributor.authorShen, Fuhui
dc.contributor.authorVan Bael, Albert
dc.contributor.authorVerleysen, Patricia
dc.contributor.authorBarlat, Frederic
dc.contributor.authorCazacu, Oana
dc.contributor.authorKuwabara, Toshihiko
dc.contributor.authorLopes, Augusto
dc.contributor.authorOliveira, Marta C.
dc.contributor.authorSantos, Abel D.
dc.contributor.authorVincze, Gabriela
dc.date.accessioned2026-06-27T14:43:08Z
dc.date.issued2022
dc.description.abstractThis article details the ESAFORM Benchmark 2021. The deep drawing cup of a 1 mm thick, AA 6016-T4 sheet with a strong cube texture was simulated by 11 teams relying on phenomenological or crystal plasticity approaches, using commercial or self-developed Finite Element (FE) codes, with solid, continuum or classical shell elements and different contact models. The material characterization (tensile tests, biaxial tensile tests, monotonic and reverse shear tests, EBSD measurements) and the cup forming steps were performed with care (redundancy of measurements). The Benchmark organizers identified some constitutive laws but each team could perform its own identification. The methodology to reach material data is systematically described as well as the final data set. The ability of the constitutive law and of the FE model to predict Lankford and yield stress in different directions is verified. Then, the simulation results such as the earing (number and average height and amplitude), the punch force evolution and thickness in the cup wall are evaluated and analysed. The CPU time, the manpower for each step as well as the required tests versus the final prediction accuracy of more than 20 FE simulations are commented. The article aims to guide students and engineers in their choice of a constitutive law (yield locus, hardening law or plasticity approach) and data set used in the identification, without neglecting the other FE features, such as software, explicit or implicit strategy, element type and contact model.en
dc.description.sponsorshipESAFORM
dc.description.sponsorshipFund for Scientific Research (F. R.S.-FNRS) of Wallonia-Brussels Federation
dc.description.sponsorshipOperational Program for Competitiveness and Internationalization, in its FEDER/FNR component
dc.description.sponsorshipPortuguese Foundation of Science and Technology (FCT)
dc.description.sponsorshipFCT [SFRH/BD/146083/2019]
dc.description.sponsorshipDommaco project [WBI/AGCID SUB2019/419031 (DIE19-0005)]
dc.description.sponsorshipFWO [K801421N]
dc.description.sponsorship[POCI-01-0145-FEDER-032362 (PTDC/EME-ESP/32362/2017)]
dc.description.sponsorship[POCI-01-0145-FEDER-030592 (PTDC/EME-EME/30592/2017)]
dc.description.sponsorship[UIDB/00285/2020]
dc.description.sponsorship[PTDC/EMEEME/31216/2017 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-031216)]
dc.description.sponsorshipFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/146083/2019] Funding Source: FCT
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w
dc.identifier.eissn1960-6214
dc.identifier.issn1960-6206
dc.identifier.issue5
dc.identifier.pubmed35855077
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14981/63894
dc.identifier.volume15
dc.identifier.wos000825990100001
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherSPRINGER FRANCE
dc.relation.ispartofINTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MATERIAL FORMING
dc.rightsopenAccess
dc.subjectBenchmark
dc.subject6016-T4 aluminium alloy
dc.subjectDeep drawing modelling
dc.subjectModel comparisons
dc.subjectEaring profile prediction
dc.subjectForce prediction
dc.subjectThickness prediction
dc.subjectANISOTROPIC YIELD FUNCTIONS
dc.subjectPLASTIC ANISOTROPY
dc.subjectTEXTURE DEVELOPMENT
dc.subjectSHEET METALS
dc.subjectPART I
dc.subjectSTRAIN
dc.subjectDEFORMATION
dc.subjectCRITERION
dc.subjectFRICTION
dc.subjectBEHAVIOR
dc.subjectEngineering
dc.subjectMaterials Science
dc.subjectMetallurgy & Metallurgical Engineering
dc.titleAnalysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations
dc.typeArticle
dspace.entity.typePublication
local.import.sourceWOS

Dosyalar

Koleksiyonlar