DYNAFORM 练习.pdfVIP

2005 NUMISHEET BENCHMARK 1 Springback Prediction of Decklid Inner Panel The obj ective of this study is to benchmark springback prediction capability of various software and skills of users on a complex inner body panel. This benchmark is provided by the Metal Fabrication Division, General Motors Corporation (GM) in Pontiac, Michigan. GM provided the math model, technical support and maj or funding for this benchmark. The following organizations also contributed to this benchmark. Troy Design and Manufacturing in Redford, Michigan conducted tool construction, tryout, and test panel production for both steel and aluminum. The US Steel Corporation in Troy, Michigan provided steel material and conducted data (strain/thickness) measurement. Alcan provided the aluminum material for the benchmark. TOOL GEOMETRY The simulation process of stamping a deck lid inner panel consists of three operations: forming, trimming and springback. Participants should not move the tooling position in the x-y plane. 1. Forming Lower punch, binder and upper die are illustrated in Figure 1. This tooling geometry has a symmetry plane at x=0. The process is a three-piece air draw. The punch is stationary. The upper die is a solid one-piece tool. The binder is supported by hydraulic cylinders, which provide binder holding force. The tooling model with and without bead geometry is provided. Two blank materials are used for stamping: a 0.9 mm AL 6 111-T4P aluminum alloy and a 0.8 mm BH 180 bake-hardenable steel. The die clearance is 0.9 mm for both cases. Total blank holding force: 1334 kN (150 English Ton) for both materials. Participants need to use half of the specified holding force if only half the tooling geometry is used in the simulation. However, a one metal thickness equalizer, or kiss block, is used to provide a constant binder gap. This means that the binder gap will remain the same unless the metal thickens above the ini