Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Institute of Ferrous Metallurgy, Aachen Uni6ersity of Technology, Intzestr. 1, D-52072 Aachen, Germany
Department of Metal Forming, Uni6ersity of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing 100083, Peoples Republic of China
c
Preussag Stahl AG, Eisenhuttenstr. 99, D-38223 Salzgitter, Germany
Received 6 May 1997
Abstract
In this paper, a comparative investigation of two forming-limit diagram (FLD) models based on the Swift and Hill instability
criterion as well as on an empirical model proposed by the North American Deep Drawing Research Group (NADDRG) and
experimental FLDs has been carried out for different mild and high-strength sheet steels, such as transformation-induced plasticity
(TRIP), dual-phase (DP), austenitic stainless, bake-hardening and interstitial-free (IF) steels. The emphasis of this investigation is
to consider these different approaches to predicting the FLD. In addition, the influence of differences in strain-hardening have
been estimated and the difference between the FLDs for different steel sheets has been analysed from the point of view of metal
physics. 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Cold-rolled steels; Formability; Forming-limit diagram; High-strength steel; Tensile instability; Transformation-induced plasticity
1. Introduction
The concept of the forming-limit diagram introduced
by Keeler [1] and Goodwin [2] can represent comprehensively sheet metal formability and has been used widely
as one of the criteria for optimizing stamping processes
and in the designing of dies. Such diagrams indicate both
of the principal strains o1 and o2 at diffuse or localized
instability in the plane-stress state for different strain
paths. Because of the complexity of the experimental
determination of the FLD, a number of theoretical
calculating models have been set up on the basis of the
classical or modified Swift and Hill instability criteria
[3 18]. In recent years, the knowledge and principles of
damage mechanics, plastic mechanics of porous materials, and microscopic materials science combined with the
finite-element method (FEM) have also been introduced
into the theoretical predictions of the FLD [1927].
These results have significantly enriched and improved
the understanding and application of the FLD. However, there has not been a general model that can be
applied for various steel sheets until now and, furthermore, the still-too-complex calculations for predicting
the FLD will limit their use in practical applications.
Another important aspect of investigations of the
FLD is the assessment of sheet metal formability. Recently developed high-strength steels such as bake-hardening grades, high-strength interstitial-free (IF) grades
and multi-phase steels offer a very good combination of
strength and ductility. In particular, newly developed
triple-phase steels associated with the TRIP effect
(TRansformation Induced Plasticity) can further improve formability accompanied by the enhancement of
strength due to the transformation of retained austenite
to martensite during deformation. It may be considered
that TRIP steels have the best strengthductility balance
amongst formable high-strength steels so far and thus
provide the chance of applying steels of very high
strength level in automotive production. This investigation was carried out for a better understanding of the
forming behaviour of high-strength steel by means of the
experimental determination and theoretical predication
of the FLD for a variety of different steels as well as
comparison with other formable or deep-drawable steels.
224
2. Theoretical analysis
'
'
3(1+ r)
2(2+ r)
doi =
'
s 21 +s 22
2(1+ r)(2+ r)
3(1+ 2r)
'
2r
s1s2
1 +r
do 21 +do 22 +
2r
do1 do2
1 +r
(1)
(2)
&
oi = doi
(4)
1 +(1 a)r
n
1 +a
(5)
oj2 =
a (1 a)r
n
1+a
(6)
For o2 \0:
2r
a+ a 2
1+ r
of1 =
n
1+ 4r + 2r 2
2
(1+a)(1+ r) 1
a+ a
(1+r)2
2r
[(1+ r)a r] 1
a+ a 2
1+ r
of2 =
n
1+ 4r+ 2r 2
2
(1+a)(1+ r) 1
a+ a
(1+r)2
si =
(7)
(8)
(9)
si = a+uIVoi
(10)
Both assumptions are based on basic physical considerations of dislocation movement and interaction and
fit well to experimental results for b.c.c. steels. Eq. (9)
represents stage III strain-hardening of the basic dislocation theory, whilst Eq. (10) describes strain-hardening
in stage IV. In Eqs. (9) and (10): ss and s0 are the
saturation and yield stress respectively; kv is the slope
of dynamic annihilation, which relates to temperature
and stacking fault energy; a is a parameter of the
material; and uIV is the average work-hardening rate for
higher deformation.
In a previous work, a theoretical model for determining the FLD based on the stressstrain relationship
mentioned above and combined with the Swift and Hill
instability criterion was set up [32]. The associated
formulae for calculating the forming-limit strains can
be given in the form:
o1 max =
o2 max =
'
'
oi
2 2+ r
3 r
oi
2 2+ r
3 r
n
n
1+ r
a 1
r
1+ r
(a 2 + 1) 2a
r
1+ r
a
r
1+ r
(a 2 + 1) 2a
r
(11)
(12)
oi = ln
sskv
(ss s0)(Z + kv)
(13)
225
Table 1
Mechanical properties, thickness and flow-curve parameters of the materials studied
Steel
Thickness
(mm)
YS
(MPa)
UTS
(MPa)
d
(%)
ss
(MPa)
s0
(MPa)
kv
UIV
(MPa)
a
(MPa)
TRIP
DP
IF
IFHS
A0
A3
ZStE 180 BH
1.00
1.50
1.01
0.84
0.82
0.80
0.77
422
269
124
204
290
305
246
730
496
311
368
598
653
343
35.1
27.2
44.1
36.8
38.6
46.2
38.9
0.90
0.83
1.88
1.86
0.85
0.91
1.40
0.27
0.19
0.27
0.23
0.37
0.35
0.19
1222.7
582.8
380.5
481.2
920.0
1735.0
395.6
420.6
291.5
129.8
213.8
251.0
140.0
203.0
0.2442
0.0681
0.0818
0.0866
0.2305
0.3900
0.0795
1081
610
408
488
727
810
408
665
460
279
361
514
250
307
uIV a
uIV
(14)
'
Z=
2 2+r
3
r
1 +r
(a 2 +1) 2a
r
1
(a +1)
r
(15)
n
'
3/2
1
(a 2 +1) 2a
r
2 2+r
1 2 3
2
3
r
1+
(a +1) 1 + (a 2 +a)
r
r
(16)
1+
Z=
(17)
where t0 0.125 is the sheet thickness in inches. According to this model, the FLD is composed of two lines
through the point e10 in the plane-strain state. The
slopes of the lines located respectively on the left- and
right-side of the FLD are about 45 and 20.
A comparison between the experimental forminglimit curves for TRIP and IF steel is shown in Fig. 1.
226
Table 2
Chemical composition of the materials studied (mass%)
Steel
Si
Mn
Al
Nb
Ti
Cr
Ni
TRIP
DP
IF
IFHS
A0
A3
ZStE 180 BH
0.170
0.110
0.004
0.003
0.052
0.024
0.010
1.04
0.33
0.04
0.04
0.27
0.27
0.01
1.33
1.28
0.20
0.35
0.17
1.25
0.19
0.003
0.014
0.012
0.010
0.270
0.270
0.015
0.006
0.013
0.015
0.050
0.029
0.025
0.040
0.060
0.030
0.030
0.010
0.010
0.060
0.005
0.003
0.003
0.005
0.005
0.005
0.035
0.024
0.066
0.06
0.02
0.014
0.012
16.4
16.67
11.57
7.60
These two steels represent the softest and the hardest steel
grade in this study. The limit strains in the plane-strain
state and the nearby region for TRIP steel are much
lower than for IF steel, which may be associated with its
much higher strength (Table 1). However, TRIP steel
displays comparable formability in the stretching (tension tension) region with higher strain and extremely
higher limit strains in the drawing (tension compression) region with higher strain, in particular near to
uniaxial tension. This is similar to previously reported
results [34]. Fig. 1 also displays the extreme differences
between TRIP and IF steel in strain path, which may
contribute to differences in forming behaviour.
Fig. 2 illustrates the relationship between the forminglimit strains in the plane-strain state FLD0 and the tensile
strength for different sheet steels, in which the scatter
band of the ferritic steels includes mild, micro-alloyed
and dual-phase steels with a thickness of 0.7 0.9 mm.
Generally speaking, FLD0 values decrease with the
increase of tensile strength. The DP steel investigated
here as well as mild and high-strength IF steels are near
to the upper boundary of this scatter band, taken from
the literature [36]. TRIP steel and austenitic stainless
steels are all superior to ferritic steels with regard to the
combination of FLD0-value and tensile strength. It may
227
228
229
References
[1] S.P. Keeler, Circular grid systems: A valuable aid for evaluation
sheet forming, Sheet Met. Ind. 45 (1969) 633 640.
[2] G.M. Goodwin, Application of strain analysis to sheet metal
forming problems, Metall. Ital. 60 (1968) 767 771.
[3] H.W. Swift, Plastic instability under plane stress, J. Mech. Phys.
Solids 1 (1952) 1 18.
[4] R. Hill, On discontinuous plastic states with special reference to
localized necking in thin sheets, J. Mech. Phys. Solids 1 (1952)
19 30.
[5] Z. Marciniak, K. Kuczynski, Limit strains in the processes of
stretch-forming sheet metal, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 9 (1967) 609620.
[6] Z. Marciniak, K. Kuczynski, T. Pokora, Influence of the plastic
properties of material on the forming limit diagram for sheet
metal in tension, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 15 (1973) 789 805.
[7] K. Yamaguchi, P.B. Mellor, Thickness and grain size dependence of limit strains in sheet metal stretching, Int. J. Mech. Sci.
18 (1976) 85 90.
[8] H. Moritoki, Criterion and mode of the forming limit in sheet
forming, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 3 (1992) 363 378.
[9] J.Z. Gronostajski, Z. Zimniak, Theoretical simulation of sheet
behaviour in forming processes, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 31
(1992) 57 63.
[10] D. Banabic, S. Valasutean, The effect of vibratory straining
upon forming limit diagrams, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 34
(1992) 431 437.
[11] D. Banabic, I.R. Dorr, Prediction of the forming limit diagrams
in pulsatory straining, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 45 (1-4) (1994)
551 556.
[12] J.W. Hutchinson, K.W. Neale, Sheet necking: I. Validity of
plane stress assumptions of the long wavelength approximation,
in: D.P. Koistinen, N.M. Wang (Eds.), Mechanics of Sheet
Metal Forming, Plenum Press, New York, 1978, pp. 111126.
[13] J.W. Hutchinson, K.W. Neale, Sheet necking: III. Strain rate
effects, in: D.P. Koistinen, N.M. Wang (Eds.), Mechanics of
Sheet Metal Forming, Plenum Press, New York, 1978, pp.
269 282.
[14] A. Barata Da Rocha, J.M. Jalinier, Plastic instability of sheet
metal under simple and complex strain paths, Trans. Iron Steel
Inst. 24 (1984) 32 40.
[15] A. Barata Da Rocha, F. Barlat, J.M. Jalinier, Prediction of the
forming limit diagrams of anisotropic sheets in linear and nonlinear loading, Mater. Sci. Eng. 68 (1985) 151 164.
[16] A. Barata Da Rocha, J.M. Jalinier, The development of strain
gradients in sheet metal forming processes, in: Proc. Int. Symp.
Plastic Instability, Paris, France, 1983, pp. 35 47.
[17] J.V. Laukonis, A.K. Ghosh, Effects of strain path changes on
the formability of sheet metals, Metall. Trans. A 9 (1978)
1849 1856.
[18] J. Lian, B. Baudelet, Forming limit diagram of sheet metal in the
negative minor strain region, Mater. Sci. Eng. 86 (1987) 137
144.
[19] F. Barlat, A. Barata Da Rocha, J.M. Jalinier, Influence of
damage on the plastic instability of sheet metals under complex
strain paths, J. Mater. Sci. 19 (1984) 4133 4137.
[20] A. Melander, E. Schedin, S. Karlsson, J. Steninger, A theoretical
and experimental study of the forming limit diagrams of deep
drawing steels, dual phase steels, austenitic and ferritic stainless
steels and titanium, Scand. J. Metall. 14 (1985) 127 148.
[21] A. Melander, A new model of the forming limit diagram applied
to experiments on four copper base alloys, Mater. Sci. Eng. 58
(1983) 63 88.
[22] D.V. Wilson, W.T. Roberts, P.M.B. Rodriques, Effects of grain
anisotropy on limit strains in biaxial stretching. Part I: Influence
of sheet thickness and grain size in weakly texture sheets, Metall.
Trans. A 12 (1981) 1595 1602.
230