Professional Documents
Culture Documents
org/sas
Abstract
A three-step computational approach is proposed to help
establish the effect of various self-piercing riveting (SPR)
process and material parameters on the quality and the
mechanical performance of the resulting SPR joints. Using
the results of a virtual-testing procedure, the constitutive
relations for the simplified SPR connectors are determined,
parameterized and validated. The availability of such
connectors is mandatory in large-scale computational
analyses of whole-vehicle crash.
Keywords
Self-Piercing Riveting; Process Modeling; Virtual Testing; Joint
Connectors
Introduction
Self-piercing riveting falls into the category of fast,
spot-type, sheet-metal mechanical-fastening processes.
In contrast to traditional riveting, self-piercing riveting
does not require pre-drilled or pre-punched holes and,
therefore, no alignment between the rivet-setting
machine and the sheets to be joined is required.
Consequently, self-piercing riveting is typically a highspeed, one-step joining process. The results of the SPRprocess modeling displayed in Figures 1(a)(d) reveal
the four basic stages (i.e. clamping, piercing, flaring
and releasing) of this process.
A comprehensive list of the main advantages and few
limitations of SPR relative to the alternative
joining/fastening technologies can be found in Abe et
al. (2006). In the same reference, a brief overview of the
main areas of application of SPR can also be found.
A review of the open-domain literature carried out as
part of the present work revealed a number of
experimental studies of the SPR process [Abe et al.
20
www.seipub.org/sas
Geometrical Model
Meshed Model
Computational Algorithm
21
www.seipub.org/sas
4)
Initial Conditions
Boundary Conditions
Contact Interactions
Material Models
Since the punch, pad and die are all treated as rigid
bodies, and a dynamic analysis was carried out, the
only material property required for these
components is their mass density.
The mechanical response of the rivet and sheets is
assumed to be governed by the same isotropic
(linearly) elastic, and (strain-hardenable, strain-rate
sensitive, thermally-softenable) plastic constitutive
model
(with
different
parameterizations).
Furthermore, it is assumed that this response can
be mathematically represented using the JohnsonCook material-model formulation.
To enable piercing of the top and bottom sheets by
the rivet, in addition to the deformation model, a
progressive damage model had to be defined for
22
Punch Stroke
-1
-2
Clamping force
Punch Stroke, mm
-4
-2
-6
-3
-8
-4
-10
Clamping Force, kN
-5
-12
-6
-14
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
Time, s
www.seipub.org/sas
Punch force, kN
-10
-20
2)
-30
-40
-50
-7
-6
-5
-4
-3
-2
-1
Punch stroke, mm
Problem Definition
The problem analyzed in this portion of the work
deals with virtual mechanical testing of the SPR joints.
Four types of virtual mechanical tests are used: (a)
normal-pull test; (b) shear test; (c) 45 oblique-pull test;
and (d) peel test.
Modeling and Computational Analysis
The virtual mechanical-testing procedure employed in
the present work utilizes the same type of finiteelement formalism as the one described in the
previous section.
1)
Geometrical Model
Meshed Model
Computational Algorithm
Initial Conditions
Boundary Conditions
23
www.seipub.org/sas
Contact Interactions
Material Models
24
www.seipub.org/sas
Elastic behavior
Plastic behavior
F F
=
P N + S
RN RS
(1)
FN =+
f3
=
FS
K
m12 + m22
r
(2)
(3)
f12 + f 22
( )
= P ( f1 , f 2 , f 3 , m1 , m2 ) F 0 u pl 0
(4)
pl
of
the
plastic
T
u1pl , u2pl , u3pl , urpl1 , urpl2
relative
(where
motion
subscript
www.seipub.org/sas
u pl = u pl .
f
(5)
f = [ f1 , f 2 , f 3 , m1 , m2 ]T
(u ) .(u )
pl T
u pl =
t
u pl = u pl dt
0
pl
.
f T f
(6)
(7)
functional relationship.
FIG. 6. A COMPARISON OF THE LOAD VS. DISPLACEMENT RESULTS OBTAINED IN THE VIRTUAL TESTING OF SOLID SPR-JOINTS
AND SHELL-SECTIONS RIVETED BY SPR-JOINT CONNECTORS: (A) NORMAL-PULL; (B) SHEAR;
(C) 45 OBLIQUE-PULL; AND (D) PEEL TESTS.
26
3)
www.seipub.org/sas
2)
Plastic Behavior
pl
and
0
same (maximum) level of its strength, Fmax
; and (c)
m = tan
FS
2
1 FN
(8)
pl
evolution is fully defined by a u fpl u DI
vs. m
relation.
relation:
is
Elastic Behavior
27
www.seipub.org/sas
3)
pl
To define the u DI
vs. m functional relationship, it
was first assumed that damage initiates at the point
of maximum load. Then the sought-after functional
relationship is obtained by simply determining the
equivalent plastic relative displacement associated
with the corresponding peak loading for different
tests, each corresponding to a different value of m .
1.2
3.9
1.1
3.8
3.7
3.6
0.9
3.5
0
0.25
0.5
0.75
pl
The resulting u DI
vs. m functional relationship is
depicted in Figure 8.
0.8
Mode Mixity
To calibrate the
(u
pl
f
pl
u DI
pl
f
pl
vs. m functional relationship depicted
u DI
in Figure 8 is obtained.
4)
28
Validation Procedure
To validate the fidelity of the derived and
parameterized constitutive relations for the SPR-joint
connectors (described above), virtual (normal-pull,
shear, 45 oblique-pull and peel) tests of riveted shelltype specimens are carried out. In these simulations,
the riveted connections between the sheets are
represented using the just-derived SPR-joint
connectors. Temporal evolution of the material within
the two riveted shells during the pull test is depicted
in Figures 9(a)(b). A comparison of these results with
their counterparts in Figures 5(b)(d) reveals that in
both cases, the ultimate failure of the SPR joint takes
place by the degradation and fracture of the (mainly
bottom) sheet material surrounding the rivet. This was
an expected outcome since the bottom sheet has
acquired the largest extent of damage during the SPR
process.
(a)
vs. m functional
relationship, it is first recognized that in the postdamage-initiation portion of the load vs.
displacement curves, the mixity ratio changes
during loading (except for the cases of pure normal
and pure shear loading). Taking this into account,
combining all the post-damage-initiation force vs.
displacement data, and utilizing a linear regression
analysis, the piecewise linear form of the
(u
(b)
www.seipub.org/sas
(LFW)."
Journal
of
Materials
S.
Multi-Physics
Modeling
of
the
Stainless
Steel.
Journal
of
REFERENCES
Alumina/S-2
Welding
and
Friction
B.A.
Ballistic
Glass-Reinforced
Performance
of
Polymer-Matrix
29