On the Damage Criteria and their Critical Values for Flowforming of ELI Grade Ti64

Abstract:

Article Preview

Cold flowforming is a chipless forming process that deforms tubular parts by reducing theirouter diameter and thickness while increasing their length. It consists of a rotating mandrel and oneor more rollers that are translated along the tube axis, thus plastically deforming it. Flowforming ofTi-6Al-4V (also known as Ti64) is of great interest for improving the mechanical properties of thematerial, such as yield stress and fatigue strength. However this alloy is known to have poor ductilityat room temperature. Therefore, flowforming of Ti64 without failure or crack is a great challenge. Inthis present paper, the authors have attempted to predict the different failure modes occurring duringflowforming. An experimental machine has been built at the Center forMaterial Forming (CEMEF) inorder to monitor the force on the single roller, the torque on the mandrel and the actual rotation speedof the roller as well. Numerous flowforming tests have been performed using different processingparameters, such as working depth, roller feed and initial geometry, in order to investigate the criticalvalues which lead to the failure of the flowformed tube. In addition, numerical simulations of theprocess have been performed using the FORGE FEM solver. The results of the simulations have beenused to evaluate the relevance of usual failure criteria (Crockford-Latham, Rice-Tracey and Oyane).

Info:

Periodical:

Key Engineering Materials (Volumes 622-623)

Main Theme:

Edited by:

Fabrizio Micari and Livan Fratini

Pages:

1221-1227

Citation:

D. Depriester and E. Massoni, "On the Damage Criteria and their Critical Values for Flowforming of ELI Grade Ti64", Key Engineering Materials, Vols. 622-623, pp. 1221-1227, 2014

Online since:

September 2014

Export:

Price:

$38.00

* - Corresponding Author

[1] Chang, S. -C., Huang, C. -A., Yu, S. -Y., Chang, Y., Han, W. -C., Shieh, T. -S., Chung, H. -C., Yao, H. -T., Shyu, G. -D., Hou, H. -Y., Wang, C. -C., and Wang, W. -S. (1998) Journal of Materials Processing Technology 80-81(0), 676-682.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0924-0136(98)00174-5

[2] Davidson, M. J., Balasubramanian, K., and Tagore, G. (2008) Journal of Materials Processing Technology 200(1-3), 283-287.

[3] Roy, M., Klassen, R., and Wood, J. January 2009 Journal of Materials Processing Technology 209(2), 1018-1025.

[4] Haghshenas, M., Jhaver, M., Klassen, R., and Wood, J. (2011) Materials & Design 32(6), 3629- -3636.

[5] Gungor, M. N., Kramer, L. S., Ucok, I., Dong, H., and Tack, W. T. (2007) pp.37-45.

[6] Depriester, D. and Massoni, E. (2013) Key Engineering Materials 554, 157-168.

[7] Rajan, K. M. and Narasimhan, K. October 2001 Practical Failure Analysis 1(5), 69-76.

[8] Ko, D. -C. and Kim, B. -M. (2000) Journal of Materials Processing Technology 102(1-3), 19-24.

[9] Cockcroft, M. and Latham, D. (1968) J Inst Metals 96(1), 33-39.

[10] Gouveia, B., Rodrigues, J., and Martins, P. (2000) Journal of Materials Processing Technology 101(1-3), 52 - 63.

[11] Oyane, M. (1972) Bulletin of JSME 15(90), 1507-1513.

[12] Rice, J. R. and Tracey, D. M. (1969) Journal of the Mechanics and Physics of Solids 17(3), 201- -217.

[13] Stefanik, A., Dyja, H., and Mróz, S. (2011).