Scribd
Upload
13 views7 pages

Optimizing Drawbeads in Metal Forming

1) The document discusses using finite element analysis to simulate sheet metal deep drawing processes to study the effects of drawbead position and size on formability. 2) Three drawbead patterns with different heights were examined, and the simulation was run for each combination to count failure elements indicating wrinkles and ruptures. 3) The results showed that increasing drawbead height increased failure elements, and the first drawbead pattern with heights of 3, 4, and 6 mm resulted in the fewest failure elements, suggesting it provided the best formability.

Uploaded by

Mostafa Crespo
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
13 views7 pages

Optimizing Drawbeads in Metal Forming

1) The document discusses using finite element analysis to simulate sheet metal deep drawing processes to study the effects of drawbead position and size on formability. 2) Three drawbead patterns with different heights were examined, and the simulation was run for each combination to count failure elements indicating wrinkles and ruptures. 3) The results showed that increasing drawbead height increased failure elements, and the first drawbead pattern with heights of 3, 4, and 6 mm resulted in the fewest failure elements, suggesting it provided the best formability.

Uploaded by

Mostafa Crespo
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Applied Mechanics and Materials Online: 2014-07-28

ISSN: 1662-7482, Vol. 607, pp 112-117


doi:10.4028/[Link]/AMM.607.112
© 2014 Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland

Position and the Size of Drawbeads for Sheet Metal Forming with the
Finite Element Method

Khemajit Sena1, a *, Surasith Piyasin2, b


1,2
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Khon Kaen University,
Khon Kaen, Thailand
a
skhema@[Link], bsurasith@[Link]

Keywords: drawbead, sheet metal forming, formability, Finite Element Method

Abstract. This study aims to find a solution to improve the formability in a deep drawing process.
For this purpose drawbeads were used to avoid wrinkles and ruptures. The finite element method
was applied to simulate the 3D metal forming process using a die and drawbead. The drawbead
amount, position, size and form were studied for their affects on the formability. 3 drawbead
patterns with 3 different heights were examined. The simulation was performed for each drawbead
pattern and each drawbead geometrical parameter and the failure elements were counted. The best
pattern chosen was the pattern that resulted in the least failure elements.

Introduction

Drawbeads have the purpose to protect or prevent wrinkles and ruptures to the lowest condition.
They limit the movement of the material into the die or control the amount of material to be drawn
into the die. As the material moves through the drawbead , bending in one direction occurs, then it
is bent again in the opposite direction and once more in the initial direction, finally it is bent to the
straight direction before the entering the die cavity. There are two forces involved in this process:
the first is the bending or back-bending force when passing the drawbead, the other is the friction
force.

Drawbeads can normally be installed at two positions; on the binder surface of the die or on
the blankholder, depending on the kind of work and suitability. The placement of the drawbeads
must not obstruct the following work steps. Penetration of the drawbeads can be performed in 1, 2,
3 rows or more depending on the depth of the workpiece and the thickness and areas for the
material flow, with particular attention at round corners.

There are many methods beside the use of drawbeads that are used to control the metal flow
or the resistance force (the restraining force) e.g. blankholder, binder surface or other processes [1].
In 1985, Yellup and Painter [2] investigated the importance of the restraining force and the
prediction of the form of the blank sheet thoroughly.

During the growth of advance computer technology, the finite element method (FEM) is
often used at the beginning of the product design stage or the manufacturing process design stage to
avoid using a process based on trial and error. Demeri [3] identified the material properties, the
penetration of drawbeads and the lubrication with FEM. Cao and Boyce [4] learned, with the use of
FEM, that the restraining force to control the movement of material would be higher and reach a
steady state when the metal sheet is totally drawn through the drawbead. Later, Makinouchi [5]
successfully reduced prototype tests using the finite element method to predict the wrinkles,

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of Trans
Tech Publications, [Link]. (ID: [Link], Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA-09/05/16,13:36:59)
Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 607 113

ruptures and spring-back of sheet metal. Again in 1996 Sunaga et al. [6] reported that a 2D finite
element model can be used to sufficiently predict the restraining force. Thereafter, Sheriff [7] found
a numerical analysis method of drawbeads on a die surface with rectangular cross section to draw a
cylinder cup. The distribution of strain and metal sheet thinning in the deformation areas was
investigated in his study. Furthermore, he conducted a comparison and validation between the
experiment and the result from the numerical model, which satisfied and matched each other.

In this study, the finite element method was used to investigate the position and size of
drawbeads that produce the best workpiece condition for an excellent and proper sheet metal
forming process with good quality and low cost.

Materials and Methods

A CAD file of the workpiece was imported into a FEA (Finite Element Analysis) program to
perform the forming simulation. The punch, die and blankholder were then created in this FEA
program. From the One-Step analysis, which is a common simulation process, the calculation of the
blank sheet and the prediction of the formability were obtained. At this step, the material properties,
the load boundary conditions and the tool motions were defined. The process parameters, such as
the deep drawing force, the blankholder force, the punch velocity and the friction were adjusted to
obtain minimum wrinkles and ruptures. Afterwards, the sizes of the drawbeads and the positions of
the drawbead penetration were studied. The drawbead parameters used to analyse the metal flow
were the drawbead height, radius and the shoulder radius as shown in Fig.1.

Fig.1 Geometrical parameters of drawbead

In this study, 3 patterns of penetration with 8 positions around the die cavity were used
(Fig.2). Furthermore, the simulations were designed for 3 different drawbead heights (see Table 1).
The blankholder force was initiated at 140 tonnage and the friction coefficient was set to 0.125,
constant for all surfaces. Finally, the formability represented by the forming limit diagram (FLD)
was inspected to compare the amount of failure elements owing to wrinkles and ruptures for all
cases.
114 Machine Design and Manufacturing Engineering III

Fig.2 Patterns of the penetration around the die cavities

Table 1: Parameter with different drawbead heights

Drawbead Height [mm] Drawbead Radius [mm] Shoulder Radius [mm]


3 6 6
4 6 6
6 6 6

Results

The results of the formability can be presented as the forming limit diagrams (FLD), which indicate
the amount of the failure elements. Fig.3 shows the forming limit diagrams for the first pattern of
drawbead penetration and the formability before and after the penetration. From the study, the
number of the failure elements increases when the drawbead height increases. The first drawbead
pattern, with different drawbead heights has 2, 6 and 18 failure elements, the second pattern has 16,
26 and 51 failure elements and the third pattern has 20, 33 and 62 failure elements, respectively.
The quantity of the failure elements with increasing drawbead height are summarized in Fig.4.
From the graph, it can be concluded that the first drawbead pattern (1. penetration) has fewer failure
elements than the second and third patterns.
Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 607 115

Fig.3 The simulations and the forming limit diagrams (FLD) of the workpieces before and after the
penetration of the drawbeads

Fig.4 The failure elements for each drawbead height

Discussion

In this study, we only propose the advantage of the FEM simulation with drawbeads to reduce the
wrinkles and ruptures in the mold design process without involving the validation by experiment.

Wrinkles and ruptures in sheet metal forming have many effects on the quality of the
workpieces. They can be avoided by increasing the punch and die radius to support the flow of
material into the die or by choosing the appropriate lubricants with properties to reduce the friction
116 Machine Design and Manufacturing Engineering III

between the contact surfaces of the blanksheet and die. Furthermore, the use of drawbeads
facilitates the flow of material to be slower which can successfully solve the problem of wrinkles
and ruptures. Moreover, the quality of the workpieces can be influenced by the thickness, shape and
surface of the initial blank sheet and other significant process parameters, e.g. the holding force, the
draw velocity, the boundary condition and many more [8].

During the design process the restraining force and the drawbead exit thickness are 2 main
factors in the sheet metal forming process [9], which are results from the selection and positioning
of the drawbead lines. Simulations using the finite element method to design drawbeads can reduce
unexpected cost and time during the experimental phase of the real forming process.

Conclusion

The penetration of drawbeads has many effects on the success of sheet metal forming. Beside the
drawbead position, an unsuitable geometry, such as the drawbead height, can also lead to
unacceptable failure. Failures can be avoided and corrected before the real construction of the
drawing mold by the use of a forming simulation based on the finite element method. This can
significantly diminish cost and time consumption; therefore, this study introduced the simulation of
mold design with drawbeads to support a better material flow into the die and to clearly improve
workpiece quality.

Acknowledgement

The authors are grateful the supports from the Research and Technology Transfer Affairs Division,
Khon Kaen University.

References

[1] [Link], Numerical and experimental investigations of forming limit diagrams in metal
sheets, J. Mater. [Link]. 153-154 (2004) 424–431.

[2] J.M. Yellup, M.J. Painter, The prediction of strip shape and restraining force for shallow
drawbead, J. Appl. Met. Work 4 (1985) 30–38.

[3] M.Y. Demeri, Drawbeads in sheet metal forming, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2 (1993) 863.

[4] J. Cao, M.C. Boyce, Drawbead penetration as a control element of material flow, SAE paper
No. 930517 (1993), Sheet Metal and Stamping Symposium, Detroit, USA.
[5] A. Makinouchi, Sheet metal forming simulation in industry, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 60(1–4)
(1996) 19–26.

[6] H. Sunaga, K. Yoneda, A. Makinouchi, Finite element modeling of drawbead in sheet metal
forming, Numerical Simulations of 3-D Sheet Metal Forming Process (NUMISHEET’96)
Michigan, USA, (1996) 186.
Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 607 117

[7] N. Sheriff, M. Mohamed Ismail, Numerical design optimisation of drawbead position and
experimental validation of cup drawing process, J. of Mater. Process. Technol. 206 (2008) 83-91.

[8] T. Jansson, L. Nilsson, Optimizing sheet metal forming processes – using a design hierarchy and
response surface methodology, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 178(1–3) (2006) 218–33.

[9] M. Firat, An analysis of sheet drawing characteristics with drawbead elements, Computational
Materials Science 41 (2008) 266-274.
Machine Design and Manufacturing Engineering III
10.4028/[Link]/AMM.607

Position and the Size of Drawbeads for Sheet Metal Forming with the Finite Element Method
10.4028/[Link]/AMM.607.112

DOI References
[3] M.Y. Demeri, Drawbeads in sheet metal forming, J. Mater. Eng. Perform. 2 (1993) 863.
10.1007/BF02645686
[7] N. Sheriff, M. Mohamed Ismail, Numerical design optimisation of drawbead position and experimental
validation of cup drawing process, J. of Mater. Process. Technol. 206 (2008) 83-91.
10.1016/[Link].2007.12.017

Common questions

Powered by AI

To optimize drawbead placement, the beads must be positioned such that they do not obstruct subsequent manufacturing steps. This can be achieved by strategically placing them on either the binder surface of the die or the blankholder, considering the type of work and suitability for the specific forming process. Placement should also account for areas that require controlled material flow, especially at round corners, to avoid excessive material accumulation or thinning, thus integrating seamlessly into the overall manufacturing workflow without causing downstream issues .

The primary purpose of drawbeads in sheet metal forming is to prevent wrinkles and ruptures by controlling the movement of the material into the die. They achieve this by introducing a series of bends in the material as it passes through, which creates bending or back-bending forces and friction forces that regulate material flow. The material is bent multiple times in opposing directions before straightening, which helps in managing material distribution and avoiding excessive thinning or thickening in the formed part .

Experimental strategies to validate drawbead effectiveness include comparing the results of numerical simulations with actual physical experiments, such as drawing a cylinder cup. Numerical strategies involve using finite element models to predict strain distribution and sheet thinning, and comparing these predictions against experimental measurements to validate accuracy. Successful validation occurs when numerical and experimental results align, confirming the drawbead design's effectiveness in achieving desired material flow and reducing defects .

Besides drawbeads, several other methods can be employed to control metal flow in sheet metal forming. These include using blankholders, adjusting the binder surface, and employing lubricants to reduce friction between the metal sheet and forming tools. Each method aims to manage the resistance force or restraining force effectively, ensuring proper material distribution into the die without causing defects like wrinkles or excessive thinning .

Forming limit diagrams (FLDs) are used to evaluate the formability outcomes of different drawbead designs by visually representing the amount of failure elements, such as strains leading to wrinkles or ruptures. FLDs help in comparing various drawbead configurations and their impacts on the material's stretchability and safety margins. By showing the strain states, engineers can adjust parameters to minimize failures and improve the overall robustness of the metal forming process .

Finite element method (FEM) simulations can reduce costs and time in sheet metal forming by providing an effective means to test and optimize drawbead designs virtually, before physical experimentation or production begins. By predicting potential defects and evaluating various forming scenarios, FEM reduces the reliance on costly trial-and-error in the manufacturing process. This foresight allows for rapid iterations and refinements at a lower expense, ensuring that the first manufacturing cycle is closer to the ideal conditions, minimizing material waste and production downtime .

The finite element method (FEM) aids in optimizing drawbead design by allowing for the simulation of various parameters such as drawbead patterns, positions, and sizes to predict their effects on formability. FEM helps identify the best configurations that minimize failure elements like wrinkles or ruptures. This predictive capability reduces the need for physical prototype tests, thereby saving on costs and time while enhancing the quality of the sheet metal forming process .

The height of drawbeads significantly impacts the formability of sheet metal in die cavity simulations. Higher drawbead heights tend to increase the number of failure elements, such as wrinkles and ruptures, as they exert more restraining force on the material. The study found that as the height increased across different drawbead patterns, the number of failure elements increased, with the first pattern having the least number of failures. This indicates that careful selection of drawbead height is crucial for optimal material flow and reduced defects in the final product .

Material properties and lubrication significantly affect drawbead performance by influencing the friction and flow characteristics of the sheet metal. Appropriate material choice ensures compatibility with drawbead forces, reducing the risk of tears and excessive thinning. Lubrication decreases friction, allowing for smoother material movement through drawbeads, which helps in achieving more uniform material flow and reducing defects such as wrinkles and ruptures in the final product .

The restraining force is critical in the performance of drawbeads as it controls the movement of the material being formed. A higher restraining force, achieved through proper drawbead design, can reach a steady state and effectively manage material flow, thus minimizing defects such as wrinkles and ruptures. This force helps in achieving a balanced distribution of strain and thickness throughout the deformation areas of the sheet metal, which enhances the quality of the formed product .

You might also like