4.6 Article

Hot stamping of AA6082 tailor welded blanks: Experiments and knowledgebased cloud - finite element (KBC-FE) simulation

期刊

JOURNAL OF MATERIALS PROCESSING TECHNOLOGY
卷 250, 期 -, 页码 228-238

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2017.07.025

关键词

Tailor welded blanks; High strength aluminium alloys; Formability; Hot stamping; KBC-FE; Knowledge-based cloud-FE simulation

资金

  1. Innovate UK [131818]
  2. European Commission [H2020-NMBP-GV-2016 (723517)]
  3. Open Research Fund of Key Laboratory of High Performance Complex Manufacturing, Central South University [Kfkt2016-02]
  4. Innovate UK [131818] Funding Source: UKRI

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel hot stamping technique known as 'Solution Heat treatment, Forming and in-die Quenching (HFQ)' was employed to manufacture lightweight structural components from AA6082 tailor-welded blanks (TWBs) of different thickness combinations: 1.5-1.5 and 2.0-1.0 mm. A finite element (FE) model was built to study the deformation characteristics during the hot stamping process. The FE model was successfully validated by comparing simulation results with experimental ones. Subsequently, the verified simulation results were analysed through a novel multi-objective FE platform known as 'Knowledge-Based Cloud Finite Element (KBC-FE)'. KBC-FE operates in a cloud environment and offers various advanced unique functions via functional modules. The 'formability' module was implemented in the current study to predict the limiting dome height and failure mode during the hot stamping process. Good agreements were achieved between the predicted and experimental results, from which studies were extended to predict the forming features of 2.0-1.5 mm TWBs. The 'formability' module has successfully captured the complex nature of a hot stamping process, featuring a non-isothermal and non-linear loading path. The formability of TWBs was found to be dependent on forming speed and blank thickness, out of which the latter has a dominant effect.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据