Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Yield criterion influence on the formability prediction of SS 304 by tensile tests and bulge tests during tube hydroforming process

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Multiscale and Multidisciplinary Modeling, Experiments and Design Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Finite element (FE) simulation of sheet/tube forming precision depends mainly on the accuracy of the yield surface shape used in mechanical modeling. The yield surface mainly depends on the number of input variables used to define the yield surface. The present paper's aim is to compare the constitutive models to fit the hardening laws. The accurate deformation behavior of the SS 304 tubes depends on the constitutive modeling of hardening behavior. Deformation data of the tubular samples were collected by conducting uniaxial tensile tests and tube bulge test. The best fitted constitutive hardening model was utilized on both Hills 1948 and Hills 1990 yield criteria and the accuracy of the simulations was predicted. Thickness and strain distributions, as well as the geometry of the bulged specimen, were taken as comparison parameters. Experimental validation was performed on all the available predicted data and was observed to be best for the Hills 1990 yield criteria.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Banabic D, Balan T, Comsa DS (2000) A new yield criterion for orthotropic sheet metals under plane stress condition, TPR 2000. Cluj-Napoca, Romania

    Google Scholar 

  • Banabic D, Lazarescu L, Paraianu L, Ciobanu I, Nicodim I, Comsa DS (2013) Development of a new procedure for the experimental determination of the forming limit curves. CIRP Ann 62(1):255–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlat F, Lian K (1989) Plastic behavior and stretchability of sheet metals. Part I: a yield function for orthotropic sheets under plane stress conditions. Int J Plast 5(1):51–66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlat F, Lege DJ, Brem JC (1991) A six-component yield function for anisotropic materials. Int J Plast 7(7):693–712

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barlat F, Yoon JW, Cazacu O (2007) On linear transformations of stress tensors for the description of plastic anisotropy. Int J Plast 23(5):876–896

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruschi S, Altan T, Banabic D, Bariani PF, Brosius A et al (2014) Testing and modelling of material behaviour and formability in sheet metal forming. CIRP Ann 63(2):727–749

  • Çavuşoğlu O, Sürücü Hİ, Toros S, Alkan M (2020) Thickness dependent yielding behavior and formability of AA6082-T6 alloy: experimental observation and modeling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 106(9):4083–4091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker DC (1949) Relation of experiments to mathematical theories of plasticity. J Appl Mech Trans ASME 16(4):349–357

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Fuchizawa S, Narazaki M, Yuki H (1993) Bulge test for determining stress-strain characteristics of thin tubes. Adv Technol Plast 1:488–493

    Google Scholar 

  • Hershey AV (1954) The plasticity of an isotropic aggregate of anisotropic face-centered cubic crystals. J Appl Mech Trans ASME 21(3):241–249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill R (1948) A theory of the yielding and plastic flow of anisotropic metals. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A Math Phys Sci 193(1033):281–297

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Hill R (1990) Constitutive modelling of orthotropic plasticity in sheet metals. J Mech Phys Solids 38(3):405–417

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Hosford WF (1972) A generalized isotropic yield criterion. J Appl Mech 39(2):607–609

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huber MT (1904) Przyczynek do podstaw wytorymalosci. Czasop Techn 22:81

    Google Scholar 

  • Ikegami K (1982) Experimental plasticity on the anisotropy of metals. Mechanical behavior of anisotropic solids/comportment méchanique des solides anisotropes. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 201–242

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Karafillis AP, Boyce MC (1993) A general anisotropic yield criterion using bounds and a transformation weighting tensor. J Mech Phys Solids 41(12):1859–1886

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Khalfallah A, Alves JL, Oliveira MC, Menezes LF (2015) Influence of the characteristics of the experimental data set used to identify anisotropy parameters. Simul Model Pract Theory 53:15–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lianfa Y, Cheng G (2008) Determination of stress–strain relationship of tubular material with hydraulic bulge test. Thin Walled Struct 46(2):147–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Logan RW, Hosford WF (1980) Upper-bound anisotropic yield locus calculations assuming <111> pencil glide. Int J Mech Sci 22(7):419–430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mises RV (1913) Mechanics of solid bodies in the plastically-deformable state. Göttin Nachr Math Phys 1:582–592

    Google Scholar 

  • Msolli S, Labergere C, Martiny M, Jrad M, Robin G, Kim HS, Choquart F (2018) Mechanical behavior of embossed AA1050-O sheets subjected to tension and forming. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 19(10):1545–1551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulidrán P, Šiser M, Slota J, Spišák E, Sleziak T (2018) Numerical prediction of forming car body parts with emphasis on springback. Metals 8(6):435

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parmar A, Mellor PB (1978) Predictions of limit strains in sheet metal using a more general yield criterion. Int J Mech Sci 20(6):385–391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy PV, Reddy BV (2020) Effect of tube material and heat treatment temperatures on tube formability during tube hydroforming process. J Inst Eng Ser C. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40032-020-00614-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reddy PV, Reddy BV, Ramulu PJ (2019) An investigation on tube hydroforming process considering the effect of frictional coefficient and corner radius. Adv Mater Process Technol:1–20

  • Reddy PV, Reddy BV, Ramulu PJ (2020) Effect of heat treatment temperatures on formability of SS 304 during tube hydroforming process. SN Appl Sci 2(2):205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saka K, Painter MJ, Pearce R (1979) The uniaxial strain-hardening behaviour of sheet metal from zero strain to failure. J Mech Work Technol 3(1):17–30

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shichen L, Lihui L, Shiwei G (2019) An investigation into the formability and processes of GLARE materials using hydro-bulging Test. Int J Precis Eng Manuf 20(1):121–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sing WM, Rao KP (1997) Role of strain-hardening laws in the prediction of forming limit curves. J Mater Process Technol 63(1–3):105–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajally M, Emadoddin E (2011) Mechanical and anisotropic behaviors of 7075 aluminum alloy sheets. Mater Des 32(3):1594–1599

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tresca H (1864) On the yield of solids at high pressures. Comptes Rendus Acad des Sci 59:754

    Google Scholar 

  • Woodthorpe J, Pearce R (1970) The anomalous behaviour of aluminium sheet under balanced biaxial tension. Int J Mech Sci 12(4):341–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang L, Fu Y, He Y, Ma J, Guo J (2020) Determination of constitutive relationships of tubular materials at various strain rates using hydro-bulging experiments. Exp Tech 44(1):127–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zribi T, Khalfallah A, BelHadjSalah H (2013) Experimental characterization and inverse constitutive parameters identification of tubular materials for tube hydroforming process. Mater Des 49:866–877

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would sincerely like to thank the department of metallurgical engineering and material science at IIT Bombay for providing research facilities and also the management of G Pulla Reddy Engineering College (Autonomous), Kurnool for providing the testing facilities and their constant support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, G Pulla Reddy Engineering College, Kurnool, Andhra Pradesh, 518007, India

    B. Veerabhadra Reddy & E. Venugopal Goud

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Srinidhi Institute of Science and Technology, Ghatkesar, Hyderabad, 501301, India

    D. Kondayya

  3. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Vardhaman College of Engineering, Shamshabad, Telangana, 501218, India

    P. Venkateshwar Reddy

Authors
  1. B. Veerabhadra Reddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. D. Kondayya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. E. Venugopal Goud
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. P. Venkateshwar Reddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Venkateshwar Reddy.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Reddy, B.V., Kondayya, D., Goud, E.V. et al. Yield criterion influence on the formability prediction of SS 304 by tensile tests and bulge tests during tube hydroforming process. Multiscale and Multidiscip. Model. Exp. and Des. 4, 293–302 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-021-00096-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-021-00096-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation