Cross-rolling process for manufacturing lightweight hybrid components

Guilleaume, Christina; Brosius, Alexander

doi:10.1016/j.jajp.2021.100063

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The angle of loading and unloading must differ for spring-back to become evident. For specimens with various deformation speeds, the predicted values of spring-back and the calculated values of the springback factor (Ks) are displayed in Table (3). Figure ( 9), (10), and (11) show the effect of bending speed on the spring-back factor for each clock rolling direction and TSCR at perpendicular, with the roll direction cut, respectively.Therefore, it is evident that the cutting direction has a positive relationship with the spring-back factor.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, for cross-rolling process is severe plastic deformation, high stored energy realized in the materials, which can be seeds for granular and small sized grains by recrystallization at annealing states. As a result, plastic anisotropy is effectively suppressed by the cross-rolling process, offering great flexibility in manufacturing components [2,3]. The sample is rotated 90 degrees around the normal direction (ND) on the rolling plane.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effect of Cross- Rolling on Mechanical Properties and Spring - Back of Aluminum 6061 Alloy

Hussein,

Hussein

2023

AJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Cross- Rolling on Mechanical Properties and Spring - Back of Aluminum 6061 Alloy

Hussein,

Hussein

2023

AJES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This approach entails integrating lightweight materials like advanced high-strength steel (AHSS), aluminum alloys, magnesium alloys, and composites [1]. By combining these materials in a strategic manner, engineers can create a structure that is both lightweight and strong, while also meeting safety and comfort standards [2]. This approach allows for improved fuel efficiency and performance, while also addressing concerns related to passenger safety and comfort [3,4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ductile Fracture Prediction in Hole Hemming of Aluminum and Magnesium Sheets

Kasaei,

Pereira,

Carbas

et al. 2023

Metals

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present work proposes a suitable approach for predicting ductile fracture in a new joining process by plastic deformation called hole hemming. This process creates a combined form- and force-fit joint and enables the joining of lightweight materials with varying formability without requiring heating or auxiliary elements. In this process, the joinability of materials is limited by the occurrence of fracture in the outer sheet, highlighting the crucial need to accurately predict its damage during the process design phase. In this study, five different fracture criteria, including the McClintock, Rice–Tracey, Normalized Cockroft–Latham, and Brozzo and Modified Mohr–Coulomb (MMC) criteria, are examined during the joining of a challenging combination of lightweight materials (aluminum AA6082-T4 and magnesium AZ31). These criteria are calibrated by a hybrid experimental–numerical method using three tests with distinct stress states. These criteria are then implemented into the finite element model of the hole hemming process, utilizing an appropriate user subroutine. The results show that the flange edge of the outer sheet is the most prone region to fracture during the joining process, and a criterion must be able to model the fracture behavior of the material from uniaxial tension to shear to accurately predict fracture in this area. Among the examined criteria, only the MMC criterion was capable of such modeling and accurately predicted the critical displacement of the punch in the hemming stage with a negligible error (about 1%). On the other hand, the prediction accuracy of the other criteria varied significantly depending on the calibration test, resulting in errors ranging from 8.6% to 75.5%. The error of 8.6% was achieved with the Normalized Cockroft–Latham criterion calibrated by a uniaxial tension test. Thus, based on the results, the MMC criterion is recommended for ductile fracture prediction in the hole hemming process, offering valuable insights to assist in process design.

show abstract