喜歡就充值下載吧。。資源目錄里展示的文件全都有，，請(qǐng)放心下載，，有疑問咨詢QQ:414951605或者1304139763 ======================== 喜歡就充值下載吧。。資源目錄里展示的文件全都有，，請(qǐng)放心下載，，有疑問咨詢QQ:414951605或者1304139763 ======================== 1.在哪種情況下需對(duì)沖孔凸模采取保護(hù)措施？ 沖小孔凸模是需對(duì)對(duì)沖孔凸模采取保護(hù)措施。小孔沖裁通常是指沖孔直徑小于板料厚度，凸模顯得很細(xì)長，沖裁時(shí)容易彎曲而折斷。因此小孔沖裁結(jié)構(gòu)必須對(duì)凸模采取保護(hù)措施。但有時(shí)，雖沖孔直徑大于板厚，但由于凸模直徑較小，沖裁時(shí)稍受側(cè)向力，就可能引起凸模折斷，這時(shí)也應(yīng)對(duì)凸模采取保護(hù)措施。 2..怎樣安排排樣方法？ 排樣方法分為有廢料、少廢料和無廢料排樣。有廢料排樣法：是沿制件的全部外形輪廓沖裁，在制件之間及制料側(cè)邊之間都有工藝余料（搭邊）。少廢料排樣方法：沿制件的部分外形輪廓切斷或沖裁，只在制件之間（或制件與條料側(cè)邊之間）留有搭邊。無廢料排樣法：無廢料排樣法就是無工藝搭邊的排樣，制件直接由切斷條料獲得。 3.怎樣確定沖裁模刃口尺寸？ 落料尺寸由凹模尺寸決定，沖孔時(shí)孔的尺寸由凸模尺寸決定。設(shè)計(jì)落料模時(shí)，以凹模為基準(zhǔn)，間隙取在凸模上；設(shè)計(jì)沖孔模時(shí)，以凸模為基準(zhǔn)，間隙取在凹模上?？紤]到?jīng)_裁中凸模、凹模的磨損，設(shè)計(jì)落料模時(shí)，凹模基本尺寸應(yīng)取尺寸公差范圍較??；設(shè)計(jì)沖孔模時(shí)凸模基本尺寸應(yīng)取工件尺寸公差范圍內(nèi)較大尺寸；確定沖模刃口制造公差時(shí)應(yīng)考慮制件的公差要求。 4.設(shè)計(jì)排樣時(shí)應(yīng)考慮哪些因素？ （1）提高材料的利用率； （2）模具結(jié)構(gòu)簡單，能提高模具壽命； （3）排樣方法應(yīng)時(shí)沖壓操作方便，減小勞動(dòng)強(qiáng)度且保證安全； （4）保證制件質(zhì)量和制件板料對(duì)纖維方向的要求。 5.怎樣降低沖裁力？ 凸模的階梯布置：凸模階梯布置時(shí)由于凸模工作端面不在一個(gè)平面，各凸模沖裁力的最大值不同時(shí)出現(xiàn)，從而達(dá)到降低沖裁力的目的，凸模直徑有較大差異時(shí)，一般把小直徑凸模做短一些。斜刃沖裁：斜刃時(shí)將沖孔凸?；蚵淞习寄５墓ぷ魅锌谥瞥尚比?，沖裁時(shí)刃口不是全部同時(shí)切入，而是逐步地將材料分離，能顯著降低沖裁力，但斜刃口制造和刃磨都比較困難，刃口容易磨損，沖裁也不夠平整，為了能得到較平整的工件，落料時(shí)斜刃做在凹模上；沖孔時(shí)斜刃做在凸模上。加熱沖裁使金屬抗剪強(qiáng)度，也能降低沖裁力。 第 26 頁 共 27 頁 e pos 模具工業(yè)現(xiàn)狀Process simulation in stamping – recent applications for product and process design Abstract Process simulation for product and process design is currently being practiced in industry. However, a number of input variables have a significant effect on the accuracy and reliability of computer predictions. A study was conducted to evaluate the capability of FE-simulations for predicting part characteristics and process conditions in forming complex-shaped, industrial parts. In industrial applications, there are two objectives for conducting FE-simulations of the stamping process; (1) to optimize the product design by analyzing formability at the product design stage and (2) to reduce the tryout time and cost in process design by predicting the deformation process in advance during the die design stage. For each of these objectives, two kinds of FE-simulations are applied. Pam-Stamp, an incremental dynamic-explicit FEM code released by Engineering Systems Int'l, matches the second objective well because it can deal with most of the practical stamping parameters. FAST_FORM3D, a one-step FEM code released by Forming Technologies, matches the first objective because it only requires the part geometry and not the complex process information. In a previous study, these two FE codes were applied to complex-shaped parts used in manufacturing automobiles and construction machinery. Their capabilities in predicting formability issues in stamping were evaluated. This paper reviews the results of this study and summarizes the recommended procedures for obtaining accurate and reliable results from FE simulations. In another study, the effect of controlling the blank holder force (BHF) during the deep drawing of hemispherical, dome-bottomed cups was investigated. The standard automotive aluminum-killed, drawing-quality (AKDQ) steel was used as well as high performance materials such as high strength steel, bake hard steel, and aluminum 6111. It was determined that varying the BHF as a function of stroke improved the strain distributions in the domed cups. Keywords: Stamping; Process ;stimulation; Process design 1. Introduction The design process of complex shaped sheet metal stampings such as automotive panels, consists of many stages of decision making and is a very expensive and time consuming process. Currently in industry, many engineering decisions are made based on the knowledge of experienced personnel and these decisions are typically validated during the soft tooling and prototyping stage and during hard die tryouts. Very often the soft and hard tools must be reworked or even redesigned and remanufactured to provide parts with acceptable levels of quality. The best case scenario would consist of the process outlined in Fig. 1. In this design process, the experienced product designer would have immediate feedback using a specially design software called one-step FEM to estimate the formability of their design. This would allow the product designer to make necessary changes up front as opposed to down the line after expensive tooling has been manufactured. One-step FEM is particularly suited for product analysis since it does not require binder, addendum, or even most process conditions. Typically this information is not available during the product design phase. One-step FEM is also easy to use and computationally fast, which allows the designer to play “what if” without much time investment. Fig. 1. Proposed design process for sheet metal stampings. Once the product has been designed and validated, the development project would enter the “time zero” phase and be passed onto the die designer. The die designer would validate his/her design with an incremental FEM code and make necessary design changes and perhaps even optimize the process parameters to ensure not just minimum acceptability of part quality, but maximum achievable quality. This increases product quality but also increase process robustness. Incremental FEM is particularly suited for die design analysis since it does require binder, addendum, and process conditions which are either known during die design or desired to be known. The validated die design would then be manufactured directly into the hard production tooling and be validated with physical tryouts during which the prototype parts would be made. Tryout time should be decreased due to the earlier numerical validations. Redesign and remanufacturing of the tooling due to unforeseen forming problems should be a thing of the past. The decrease in tryout time and elimination of redesign/remanufacturing should more than make up for the time used to numerically validate the part, die, and process. Optimization of the stamping process is also of great importance to producers of sheet stampings. By modestly increasing one's investment in presses, equipment, and tooling used in sheet forming, one may increase one's control over the stamping process tremendously. It has been well documented that blank holder force is one of the most sensitive process parameters in sheet forming and therefore can be used to precisely control the deformation process. By controlling the blank holder force as a function of press stroke AND position around the binder periphery, one can improve the strain distribution of the panel providing increased panel strength and stiffness, reduced springback and residual stresses, increased product quality and process robustness. An inexpensive, but industrial quality system is currently being developed at the ERC/NSM using a combination of hydraulics and nitrogen and is shown in Fig. 2. Using BHF control can also allow engineers to design more aggressive panels to take advantage the increased formability window provided by BHF control. Fig. 2. Blank holder force control system and tooling being developed at the ERC/NSM labs. Three separate studies were undertaken to study the various stages of the design process. The next section describes a study of the product design phase in which the one-step FEM code FAST_FORM3D (Forming Technologies) was validated with a laboratory and industrial part and used to predict optimal blank shapes. Section 4 summarizes a study of the die design stage in which an actual industrial panel was used to validate the incremental FEM code Pam-Stamp (Engineering Systems Int'l). Section 5 covers a laboratory study of the effect of blank holder force control on the strain distributions in deep drawn, hemispherical, dome-bottomed cups. 2. Product simulation – applications The objective of this investigation was to validate FAST_FORM3D, to determine FAST_FORM3D's blank shape prediction capability, and to determine how one-step FEM can be implemented into the product design process. Forming Technologies has provided their one-step FEM code FAST_FORM3D and training to the ERC/NSM for the purpose of benchmarking and research. FAST_FORM3D does not simulate the deformation history. Instead it projects the final part geometry onto a flat plane or developable surface and repositions the nodes and elements until a minimum energy state is reached. This process is computationally faster than incremental simulations like Pam-Stamp, but also makes more assumptions. FAST_FORM3D can evaluate formability and estimate optimal blank geometries and is a strong tool for product designers due to its speed and ease of use particularly during the stage when the die geometry is not available. In order to validate FAST_FORM3D, we compared its blank shape prediction with analytical blank shape prediction methods. The part geometry used was a 5?in. deep 12?in. by 15?in. rectangular pan with a 1?in. flange as shown in Fig. 3. Table 1 lists the process conditions used. Romanovski's empirical blank shape method and the slip line field method was used to predict blank shapes for this part which are shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 3. Rectangular pan geometry used for FAST_FORM3D validation. Table 1. Process parameters used for FAST_FORM3D rectangular pan validation Fig. 4. Blank shape design for rectangular pans using hand calculations. (a) Romanovski's empirical method; (b) slip line field analytical method. Fig. 5(a) shows the predicted blank geometries from the Romanovski method, slip line field method, and FAST_FORM3D. The blank shapes agree in the corner area, but differ greatly in the side regions. Fig. 5(b)–(c) show the draw-in pattern after the drawing process of the rectangular pan as simulated by Pam-Stamp for each of the predicted blank shapes. The draw-in patterns for all three rectangular pans matched in the corners regions quite well. The slip line field method, though, did not achieve the objective 1?in. flange in the side region, while the Romanovski and FAST_FORM3D methods achieved the 1?in. flange in the side regions relatively well. Further, only the FAST_FORM3D blank agrees in the corner/side transition regions. Moreover, the FAST_FORM3D blank has a better strain distribution and lower peak strain than Romanovski as can be seen in Fig. 6. Fig. 5. Various blank shape predictions and Pam-Stamp simulation results for the rectangular pan. (a) Three predicted blank shapes; (b) deformed slip line field blank; (c) deformed Romanovski blank; (d) deformed FAST_FORM3D blank. Fig. 6. Comparison of strain distribution of various blank shapes using Pam-Stamp for the rectangular pan. (a) Deformed Romanovski blank; (b) deformed FAST_FORM3D blank. To continue this validation study, an industrial part from the Komatsu Ltd. was chosen and is shown in Fig. 7(a). We predicted an optimal blank geometry with FAST_FORM3D and compared it with the experimentally developed blank shape as shown in Fig. 7(b). As seen, the blanks are similar but have some differences. Fig. 7. FAST_FORM3D simulation results for instrument cover validation. (a) FAST_FORM3D's formability evaluation; (b) comparison of predicted and experimental blank geometries. Next we simulated the stamping of the FAST_FORM3D blank and the experimental blank using Pam-Stamp. We compared both predicted geometries to the nominal CAD geometry (Fig. 8) and found that the FAST_FORM3D geometry was much more accurate. A nice feature of FAST_FORM3D is that it can show a “failure” contour plot of the part with respect to a failure limit curve which is shown in Fig. 7(a). In conclusion, FAST_FORM3D was successful at predicting optimal blank shapes for a laboratory and industrial parts. This indicates that FAST_FORM3D can be successfully used to assess formability issues of product designs. In the case of the instrument cover, many hours of trial and error experimentation could have been eliminated by using FAST_FORM3D and a better blank shape could have been developed. Fig. 8. Comparison of FAST_FORM3D and experimental blank shapes for the instrument cover. (a) Experimentally developed blank shape and the nominal CAD geometry; (b) FAST_FORM3D optimal blank shape and the nominal CAD geometry. 3. Die and process simulation – applications In order to study the die design process closely, a cooperative study was conducted by Komatsu Ltd. of Japan and the ERC/NSM. A production panel with forming problems was chosen by Komatsu. This panel was the excavator's cabin, left-hand inner panel shown in Fig. 9. The geometry was simplified into an experimental laboratory die, while maintaining the main features of the panel. Experiments were conducted at Komatsu using the process conditions shown in Table 2. A forming limit diagram (FLD) was developed for the drawing-quality steel using dome tests and a vision strain measurement system and is shown in Fig. 10. Three blank holder forces (10, 30, and 50?ton) were used in the experiments to determine its effect. Incremental simulations of each experimental condition was conducted at the ERC/NSM using Pam-Stamp. Fig. 9. Actual product – cabin inner panel. Table 2. Process conditions for the cabin inner investigation Fig. 10. Forming limit diagram for the drawing-quality steel used in the cabin inner investigation. At 10?ton, wrinkling occurred in the experimental parts as shown in Fig. 11. At 30?ton, the wrinkling was eliminated as shown in Fig. 12. These experimental observations were predicted with Pam-stamp simulations as shown in Fig. 13. The 30?ton panel was measured to determine the material draw-in pattern. These measurements are compared with the predicted material draw-in in Fig. 14. Agreement was very good, with a maximum error of only 10?mm. A slight neck was observed in the 30?ton panel as shown in Fig. 13. At 50?ton, an obvious fracture occurred in the panel. Fig. 11. Wrinkling in laboratory cabin inner panel, BHF=10?ton. Fig. 12. Deformation stages of the laboratory cabin inner and necking, BHF=30?ton. (a) Experimental blank; (b) experimental panel, 60% formed; (c) experimental panel, fully formed; (d) experimental panel, necking detail. Fig. 13. Predication and elimination of wrinkling in the laboratory cabin inner. (a) Predicted geometry, BHF=10?ton; (b) predicted geometry, BHF=30?ton. Fig. 14. Comparison of predicted and measured material draw-in for lab cabin inner, BHF=30?ton. Strains were measured with the vision strain measurement system for each panel, and the results are shown in Fig. 15. The predicted strains from FEM simulations for each panel are shown in Fig. 16. The predictions and measurements agree well regarding the strain distributions, but differ slightly on the effect of BHF. Although the trends are represented, the BHF tends to effect the strains in a more localized manner in the simulations when compared to the measurements. Nevertheless, these strain prediction show that Pam-Stamp correctly predicted the necking and fracture which occurs at 30 and 50?ton. The effect of friction on strain distribution was also investigated with simulations and is shown in Fig. 17. Fig. 15. Experimental strain measurements for the laboratory cabin inner. (a) measured strain, BHF=10?ton (panel wrinkled); (b) measured strain, BHF=30?ton (panel necked); (c) measured strain, BHF =50?ton (panel fractured). Fig. 16. FEM strain predictions for the laboratory cabin inner. (a) Predicted strain, BHF=10?ton; (b) predicted strain, BHF=30?ton; (c) predicted strain, BHF=50?ton. Fig. 17. Predicted effect of friction for the laboratory cabin inner, BHF=30?ton. (a) Predicted strain, μ=0.06; (b) predicted strain, μ=0.10. A summary of the results of the comparisons is included in Table 3. This table shows that the simulations predicted the experimental observations at least as well as the strain measurement system at each of the experimental conditions. This indicates that Pam-Stamp can be used to assess formability issues associated with the die design. Table 3. Summary results of cabin inner study 4. Blank holder force control – applications The objective of this investigation was to determine the drawability of various, high performance materials using a hemispherical, dome-bottomed, deep drawn cup (see Fig. 18) and to investigate various time variable blank holder force profiles. The materials that were investigated included AKDQ steel, high strength steel, bake hard steel, and aluminum 6111 (see Table 4). Tensile tests were performed on these materials to determine flow stress and anisotropy characteristics for analysis and for input into the simulations (see Fig. 19 and Table 5). Fig. 18. Dome cup tooling geometry. Table 4. Material used for the dome cup study Fig. 19. Results of tensile tests of aluminum 6111, AKDQ, high strength, and bake hard steels. (a) Fractured tensile specimens; (b) Stress/strain curves. Table 5. Tensile test data for aluminum 6111, AKDQ, high strength, and bake hard steels It is interesting to note that the flow stress curves for bake hard steel and AKDQ steel were very similar except for a 5% reduction in elongation for bake hard. Although, the elongations for high strength steel and aluminum 6111 were similar, the n-value for aluminum 6111 was twice as large. Also, the r-value for AKDQ was much bigger than 1, while bake hard was nearly 1, and aluminum 6111 was much less than 1. The time variable BHF profiles used in this investigation included constant, linearly decreasing, and pulsating (see Fig. 20). The experimental conditions for AKDQ steel were simulated using the incremental code Pam-Stamp. Examples of wrinkled, fractured, and good laboratory cups are shown in Fig. 21 as well as an image of a simulated wrinkled cup. Fig. 20. BHF time-profiles used for the dome cup study. (a) Constant BHF; (b) ramp BHF; (c) pulsating BHF. Fig. 21. Experimental and simulated dome cups. (a) Experimental good cup; (b) experimental fractured cup; (c) experimental wrinkled cup; (d) simulated wrinkled cup. Limits of drawability were experimentally investigated using constant BHF. The results of this study are shown in Table 6. This table indicates that AKDQ had the largest drawability window while aluminum had the smallest and bake hard and high strength steels were in the middle. The strain distributions for constant, ramp, and pulsating BHF are compared experimentally in Fig. 22 and are compared with simulations in Fig. 23 for AKDQ. In both simulations and experiments, it was found that the ramp BHF trajectory improved the strain distribution the best. Not only were peak strains reduced by up to 5% thereby reducing the possibility of fracture, but low strain regions were increased. This improvement in strain distribution can increase product stiffness and strength, decrease springback and residual stresses, increase product quality and process robustness. Table 6. Limits of drawability for dome cup with constant BHF Fig. 22. Experimental effect of time variable BHF on engineering strain in an AKDQ steel dome cup. Fig. 23. Simulated effect of time variable BHF on true strain in an AKDQ steel dome cup. Pulsating BHF, at the frequency range investigated, was not found to have an effect on strain distribution. This was likely due to the fact the frequency of pulsation that was tested was only 1?Hz. It is known from previous experiments of other researchers that proper frequencies range from 5 to 25?Hz [3]. A comparison of load-stroke curves from simulation and experiments are shown in Fig. 24 for AKDQ. Good agreement was found for the case where μ=0.08. This indicates that FEM simulations can be used to assess the formability improvements that can be obtained by using BHF control techniques. Fig. 24. Comparison of experimental and simulated load-stroke curves for an AKDQ steel dome cup. 5 Conclusions and future work In this paper, we evaluated an improved design process for complex stampings which involved eliminating the soft tooling phase and incorporated the validation of product and process using one-step and incremental FEM simulations. Also, process improvements were proposed consisting of the implementation of blank holder force control to increase product quality and process robustness. Three separate investigations were summarized which analyzed various stages in the design process. First, the product design phase was investigated with a laboratory and industrial validation of the one-step FEM code FAST_FORM3D and its ability to assess formability issues involved in product design. FAST_FORM3D was successful at predicting optimal blank shapes for a rectangular pan and an industrial instrument cover. In the case of the instrument cover, many hours of trial and error experimentation could have been eliminated by using FAST_FORM3D and a better blank shape could have been developed. Second, the die design