On the application of the forming limit diagrams for quality control of blanks for wheelbarrow of ASTM A1008 carbon steel

Celso  Cruz-González; Benjamín  Vargas-Arista; Iván  León-Méndez; Isidro  Guzmán-Flores

doi:10.3989/revmetalm.218

Authors

Celso Cruz-González Centro de Ingeniería y Desarrollo Industrial Gerencia de Construcción Mecánica. Ingeniería Mecánica https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7620-9052
Benjamín Vargas-Arista Tecnológico Nacional de México, Instituto Tecnológico de Tlalnepantla, Depto. Metal Mecánica https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8210-9186
Iván León-Méndez Centro de Ingeniería y Desarrollo Industrial Sede Querétaro https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4756-1246
Isidro Guzmán-Flores Facultad de Sistemas, Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1171-8291

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3989/revmetalm.218

Keywords:

ASTM A1008 carbon steel, Forming limit diagram, Plastic strain ratio, Quality control, Strain-hardening exponent

Abstract

The effectivity of the forming limit diagrams in manufacturing wheelbarrow by deep-drawing is shown because of the high material scrap rate which reduces productivity. Several chemical, mechanical testing and microstructural analysis were performed to examine sheet quality and their impact on these diagrams. Chemical analysis revealed that Steel 1 and Steel 3 sheets fulfilled the specification without assuring adequate forming process. However, the higher titanium content of Steel 2 improved its formability since it promoted the formation of fine precipitates, thus refining the grain size. This steel had the highest ASTM grain size number G (9.11), which is the lowest average grain size (13 µm) compared to the other steels, which had G values in the range 8.7 to 9.11. Moreover, Steel 2 sheets had the greatest plastic strain ratio (rm = 1.80), the highest strain-hardening exponent (n = 0.250), the lowest anisotropy ∆r = 0.31), yielding better results in deep-drawing strain distribution, the highest forming limit strain (28%) and the highest uniform elongation zone, favoring that failure sites did not occur.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ASTM E415 (1999). Standard test method for optical emission vacuum spectrometric analysis of carbon and low-alloy Steel. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 3-5.

ASTM E517 (2000). Standard test method for plastic strain ratio r for sheet metal. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 1-5.

ASTM A1008 (2010). Standard specification for steel, sheet, cold-rolled, carbon, structural, high-strength low-alloy, high-strength low-alloy with improved formability, solution hardened, and bake hardenable. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 1-9.

ASTM E643 (2015). Standard test method for ball punch deformation of metallic sheet material. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 1-4.

ASTM E2218 (2015). Standard test method for determining forming limit curves. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 1-10.

ASTM E646 (2016). Standard test method for tensile strain-hardening exponents (n-values) of metallic sheet materials. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 2-5.

ASTM E8 (2016). Standard test methods for tension testing of metallic materials. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 7-18.

ASTM E3-11 (2017). Standard guide for preparation of metallographic specimens. ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, USA, pp. 1-8.

Barbosa, J.E., García, I.H., Fuentes, J.J. (2009). Estimación vía experimental de la formabilidad de láminas de aluminio de pureza comercial. Rev. LatinAm. Metal. Mater. 29 (2), 128-134.

Davis, J.R. (2004). Tensile testing. Second Edition, ASM International, USA, pp. 251-257. https://doi.org/10.31399/asm.tb.tt2.9781627083553

Drittler, O.E., Gricus, F.V. (1978). Formability of aluminum alloys using cup tests. In Formability topics-metallic materials. ASTM STP 647, pp. 39-48.

Hosford, W.F., Caddell, R.M. (2011). Forming limit diagrams. In Metal forming, Mechanics and metallurgy. Cambridge University Press, Michigan, USA. pp. 245-262. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976940.017

Hursman, J. (1978). Development of forming limit curves for aerospace aluminum alloys. ASTM International, pp. 49-64. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP30049S

Kohara, S. (2005). Influence of strain path on the forming-limit curve in aluminum. Metall. Mater. Trans. A 36, 1033-1037. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11661-005-0296-8

Korhonen, A.S., Manninen, T., Yoon, J.W., Larkiola, J. (2009). Comparison of forming and fracture limits of an aluminum alloy and austenitic stainless steel. Int. J. Mater. Form. 2 (1), 431- 434. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-009-0489-6

Lege, D.J. (1978). Predicting sheet anisotropy from fracture angle of tension specimens. ASTM International, pp. 86-99. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP30047S

Newby, J.R. (1978). Formability testing and deformation analysis of steel sheet. Armco Steel Corporation, Middletown, Ohio, pp. 4-38. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP30043S

Pearce, R. (1982). 4000 years of sheet metal forming. In Formability of metallic materials. ASTM STP 753. Eds., American Society for Testing Materials, pp. 3-18. https://doi.org/10.1520/STP28384S

Semiatin, S.L. (2006). Metalworking: sheet forming (ASM Handbook). Volume 14B, ASM International, USA, pp. 524-560. https://doi.org/10.31399/asm.hb.v14b.9781627081863

Shinge, V.R., Dabade, U.A. (2018). Experimental investigation on forming limit diagram of mild carbon steel sheet. Procedia Manuf. 20, 141-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.02.020

Sipos, K., Martínez, J., Burgos, N., Pesenti, H. (1995). Aceros para embutido profundo: fabricación, caracterización, microestructura y texturas. Rev. Metal. 41 (Extra.) 58-63. https://doi.org/10.3989/revmetalm.2005.v41.iExtra.999

Tisza, M., Kovács, Z.P. (2012). New methods for predicting the formability of sheet metals. Production Process and Systems 5 (1), 45-54.