Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 227 233

Determination of ow curves by means of a compression test under sticking friction conditions using an iterative nite-element procedure
Erik Parteder a,*, Rolf Bunten b
b a Technology Center, Numerical Simulation, Plansee AG, A-6600 Reutte, Austria Institute for Metal Forming, Aachen Uni6ersity of Technology, Intzestrae 10, D-52056 Aachen, Germany

Received 29 November 1996

Abstract A common method for the determination of ow curves is the application of a compression test. Using this method, friction in the interface between the die and the specimen leads to a bulging of the sample and thereby to an inhomogeneous stress and strain state. The calculation of the ow stress from experimentally determined force displacement curves implies a uniaxial stress state, but this will produce an error because of the above-mentioned bulging, when friction occurs. One method of avoiding these sources of error is to minimize friction, e.g. by the use of lubricants together with useful geometries of the samples. Another strategy, described in this paper, applies sticking friction conditions during the testing, the calculation of the ow curve being done by the use of an iterative procedure, applying a corrective function. This corrective function can be calculated by a nite element (FE) analysis of the upsetting test. It will be shown that the rst iteration gives adequate results, that the corrective function itself depends on the shape of the specimen and that the corrective function is not dependent on the hardening behaviour of the material, which means that if one sample geometry is used, the corrective function itself need not be calculated for every test. 1998 Elsevier Science S.A.
Keywords: Flow curve; Refractory metals; Powder metallurgy; Finite-element simulation

1. Introduction The simulation and optimization of the metal forming processes demands an accurate knowledge of data that describes the plastic material behavior and the boundary conditions. The material behaviour can be introduced to the simulation by stress strain curves, which are also called ow curves. These are not only essential for the determination of the force and energy requirements during the metal forming process, but can also give additional information about changes in microstructure [13]. For metals manufactured by means of powder metallurgy (PM), an understanding of the densication behaviour of the sintered product during the deformation process is of great importance. This basic information,
* Corresponding author. Tel.: + 43 5672 6002750; fax: + 43 5672 600514; e-mail: erik.parteder@plansee.at 0924-0136/98/$19.00 1998 Elsevier Science S.A. All rights reserved. PII S 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 9 7 ) 0 0 2 7 5 - 6

together with the determination of the ow stress, can be gained by experiments. Both data are necessary to calculate the parameters for the application of a porous plasticity model to predict the local density distribution of PM parts [46]. This paper deals with the development of an accurate method for obtaining the ow curves of refractory metals under high temperature and large plastic strains, using a compression test and an inverse strategy, coupled with an iterative nite-element simulation. The ow stress |y is dened as the magnitude of stress required to cause yielding of a specimen in a uniaxial state of stress. It depends on the process parameters plastic strain mpl, the strain rate m; pl and the temperature T, as well as on the history of the material (e.g. heat treatment). For porous metals of course, the ow stress is also dependent on the relative density R, because the stress is interpreted as an average stress of the porous continuum.

228

E. Parteder, R. Bunten / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 227233

There are several methods for determining the relationship between ow stress and plastic strain (when all of the other parameters are kept constant), e.g. the tension test, the torsion test and the compression test. The choice of experimental procedure depends on the material to be investigated, as well as on the deformation process for which the ow curves are required [7,8]. All deformation processes of powder metallurgical parts are aimed at eliminating porosity and at achieving a particular microstructure having the required mechanical properties. Due to this, an experimental procedure must be selected where a compressive hydrostatic stress is applied, so that the porosity of the sintered metal decreases during the experiment. This favours the application of a compression test. A further advantage of the compression test is the simple geometry of the samples as well as of the tools. In addition, the strain achieved at fracture is greater than that when a tension test is used. The main problem with the compression test is the occurrence of friction on the interface between the sample and the tool. Due to the inuence of friction, barrelling of the sample takes place and the deformation, as well as the stress, becomes inhomogeneous. There are two methods of treating this problem. 1. The rst method is to try to minimize friction, which can be achieved by using a lubricant together with the geometry proposed by Rastegaev [7]. This treatment will lead to a single stress state, which can be converted easily into a ow curve, for high deformation of the sample also. 2. The second method is to perform a compression test under friction conditions and calculate the ow stress using a yield criterion, or to use a relationship for correcting the ow stress, e.g. the function dened by Siebel [9]. These strategies can be divided into two variations, where one is a corrective function that can be interpreted as physical and the other being an iterative procedure, which depends on the accuracy of the simulation model encountered. The advantage of the rst method is the possibility of calculating the ow stress directly from the force measured during the compression test. Especially during hot-forming processes, friction is never zero and therefore, the accuracy of this method will be relatively low. The main advantage of the second method, even when sticking-friction conditions occur, is that the test can be performed with a high level or reproducibility [10]. The inuence of friction on the deformation process during the compression test can be determined by the initial geometry of the sample, especially by the ratio of the initial diameter d0 to the initial height h0: this was the main topic of some previous research studies [11,12]. The importance of the ratio d0/h0 is reduced

with decreasing equivalent strain. The signicance of the ratio d0/h0 disappears if only the initial yield stress is determined. This behaviour can also be seen from experimental results by Wiegels et al. [10], who compared the force of compression tests under sticking-friction behaviour with those of frictionless tests. At mpl =0 for both situations, the same force for yielding is needed. The sensitivity of the determined yield stress value to errors in all of the important parameters was investigated by Kopp et al. [13]. Compression testing of refractory metals such as molybdenum, tungsten and tantalum at high temperatures is usually carried out in a vacuum to prevent oxidation, lubrication is therefore not possible. The capability of the rst variation using Rastegaev geometry was evaluated, in this case, the tests being carried out in an inert atmosphere. At high temperatures T] 1200C no sliding motion in the interface could be obtained. The application of ceramic tools causes sticking friction between the sample and the tool surface, so that the second method of gaining the ow curves must be applied. The rst studies using a yield criterion for the determination of the ow stress from upsetting tests under friction conditions were carried out by Wiegels [10]. The distribution of plastic strain and thereby the pattern of the yield strength in the cross-section within the sample was calculated by solving the velocity eld of the specimen. In the work presented in this paper, the nite-element method for calculating the inhomogeneous stress strain state is used to identify the ow curve. It will be shown that this method leads to accurate results simply and quickly.

2. Theoretical background In the following, an iterative procedure will be described to gain the ow stress versus plastic strain curve, when the force versus displacement relationship as an experimental results is known. This procedure is also known as inverse modelling or parameter identication, more general information on which can be found in [14,15]. When only one process parameter is unknown, as in this case of the ow stress, the solution achieved with an iterative method leads to a correct result. For the investigated upsetting test the following three conditions must be satised. 1. The strain-rate dependence of the material must be negligible, since due to the inhomogeneous distribution of plastic strain within the sample, the plastic strain rate is not constant and may affect the yield stress. 2. Isothermal conditions must be in effect, so that there is no inuence of temperature on the ow

E. Parteder, R. Bunten / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 227233

229

elastic deformation of the rod as well as of the sample, must be eliminated from the curve. The result is the relationship Fm = Fm(u) (Fig. 2(a)). This curve begins with an initial offset uoff, because it is not possible to determine the force needed for rst yielding due to the mild steel used, as well as to molybdenum not indicating an upper or lower yield point. The iteration procedure begins with a rst estimation of the ow stress versus plastic strain. This can be done by assuming that the upsetting test was carried out without friction, but with constant volume. Then the relationship is given by: | 0 (mpl)= y 4Fme mpl yd 2 0 mpl off 5 mpl 5 m max pl (1)

see Fig. 2b, with the plastic strain mpl dened as:
Fig. 1. Sketch of the undeformed and deformed FE-mesh, the boundary conditions and the initial dimensions of the sample.

mpl = ln

h0 u h0

uoff 5 u5 u max

(2)

stress value. At low strain rates, this assumption can be satised because of the equilibrium of the generation of dissipation energy and the loss of heat by radiation and heat transfer. 3. Sticking behaviour between the specimen and the dies must be predominant. Whether this has been realized in the test can be checked by examination of a micrograph of the face of the sample after testing. The procedure starts with the plot of Fm =Fm(u%) as the result from the compression test, where Fm denotes the measured force and u% is the displacement of the crossheads of the test equipment. Fig. 1 shows the undeformed, as well as the deformed, shape of the sample. First, the elastic deection, consisting of the

where d0 and h0 denote the initial diameter and the initial height of the specimen, respectively. The initial yield stress | 0 = | 0(mpl = 0) can be estimated using a t y0 y function: | 0 t(mpl)= C (mpl + mpl 0)n y mpl off 5 mpl 5 0.1 (3)

For mpl = 0 the initial yield stress | 0 is given by: y0 m0 =C mn 0 y0 pl (4) Note that for this description of the ow curve, mpl denotes the plastic strain as an averaged strain for the pl sample, whereas | ij and m ij dene the local stress and local plastic strain tensor within the sample (Fig. 1). The next step is to carry out an FE-simulation of the compression test under sticking friction conditions, using the stressstrain relationship | 0(mpl). The boundary y

Fig. 2. Schematic representation of: (a) the measured forcedisplacement relationship Fm(u%) and ltering of the elastic deection Fm(u); and (b) determination of the ow curves |y (mpl) with extrapolation of the initial ow stress | 0 . y0

230

E. Parteder, R. Bunten / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 227233 Table 1 Sample dimensions d0 and h0 and maximum plastic strain of the steel samples h0 d0 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 d0 (mm) 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 h0 (mm) 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 u max (mm) 2.40 3.27 4.04 4.83 m max pl 0.916 1.061 1.119 1.171

conditions in the simulation for a quarter section of the specimen are also depicted in Fig. 1. The ow rule used for the description of the material behaviour in the FE-analysis is known as the Prandtl Reuss equation, taking into account elastic, as well as plastic deformation [16]. The inhomogeneous deformation state, caused by sticking friction, will lead to local plastic strains that are greater than the maximum value m max, pl which can be measured by the upsetting test. Therefore the ow curve has to be extrapolated using the hardening coefcient H 0(mpl): d| 0 y H (mpl)= dpl
0

(5)

It will be shown by the following examples that the rst iteration leads to virtually accurate results, so that the ow curve may be dened as: |y (mpl): | 1 (mpl) y (11)

The yield stress is then dened as: | (mpl) = H (m

0 y 0 max pl

) (mpl m

max pl

) + | (m
0 y

max pl

mpl ]m

max pl

(6) The result deduced from the rst simulation is the force versus displacement curve F 0 =F 0(u), which may be s s used for the denition of a corrective term: c i(u) =1 Fm(u) F is(u) i=0, 1, 2, (7) 3. Experiments and result The compression tests are carried out using electromechanic testing equipment, with a maximum force of 100 kN. The maximum temperature for testing is 1280C. The specimens are heated by radiation, which ensures a homogeneous temperature eld within the whole sample after a particular time. Tests at high temperatures are carried out in a vacuum to prevent oxidation (p5 10 3 mbar). In a rst study, the inuence of the ratio h0/d0 on the relationships c 0 (u) and c 0 (mpl) was investigated. For t t this purpose, a set of samples of a mild steel was tested at room temperature. Table 1 shows the initial dimensions d0 and h0, as well as the ratio h0/d0 and the maximum deformation of each sample. The constant velocity of the die was 6= 5 mm min 1. Fig. 3 shows the plot of Fm = Fm(u) for all four samples, where the elastic deections are almost ltered out and the calculated force F 0 = F 0(u) as the result of the rst FE-simus s lation using Eq. (1) to calculate the ow stress. It can be seen that the force increases due to the work harden-

The simulated force displacement relation Fs(u) cannot be differentiated continuously, due to the compressed area being dened by nodes. Therefore, the contact area increases by a discrete number if a new node from the side area of the cylinder comes into contact with the tool. To protect the solution from the effects of discretization, the relationship c(u) will be tted by a function of the form: c 0 (u) =au s exp( bu s) +du t t (8) for the zero-iteration. The parameters a, b, d, s and t can be evaluated with the least-square method using PC software with non-linear curve-tting capability [17]. It should be mentioned that the maximum value for the corrective term equals c imax(u) = 2.0. Quantity c 0 (u) t can be transformed easily with Eq. (2) to c 0 (mpl). The t new stressstrain curve can be calculated as: | iy+ 1 (mpl)= | iy (mpl) 1+ c it(mpl) i =0, 1, 2, (9)

For mpl = 0 the relationship c 0 (mpl) becomes zero, which t means that the relationship expresses the same initial yield stress value with and without sticking. The next iteration step from the next simulation of the upsetting test with the ow curve | 1(mpl) gives the y result F 1 = F 1(u) and can be compared with the meas s sured curve Fm =Fm(u), dening the error: f 1(u) = 1 Fm(u) =c 1(u) F 1(u) s (10)

The denition of the deviation takes the same form as the corrective term and may be used for the next iteration.

Fig. 3. Force displacement relationships Fm(u) and F 0(u) for steel s with different initial sample dimensions.

E. Parteder, R. Bunten / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 227233

231

Fig. 4. Corrective function c 0 (mpl) compared with the function prot posed by Siebel cSiebel(mpl) for different initial sample dimensions.

Fig. 5. Flow curves | 0(mpl) and | 1(mpl) of steel for different initial y y sample dimensions.

ing of the material and the growth of the compressed area of the sample, as well as the growing inuence of friction on the necessary deformation energy. Fig. 4 shows the relationship c 0 (mpl) for all four samples, t giving the parameters of Eq. (8) in Table 2. The correction exhibits a local maximum at plastic strains within the range 0.045 mpl 50.07, they then decrease to a local minimum. Plastic strains mpl ] 0.3, dependent on the initial ratio of h0/d0, the corrective functions increase. Wiegels [10] has carried out some frictionless tests and some with sticking friction, pointing out the same tendency as observed in the corrective functions. A comparison of the experimentally measured ow curves and the corrective functions can be made, because the ow curve | 1(mpl) may be interpreted y as the result from a frictionless test, whereas the curve | 0(mpl) represents the result from a test under sticking y friction conditions, but using Eq. (1) for calculating the ow stress. The curves can be compared with the correction proposed by Siebel, given as: cSiebel(u)= vd(u) vd0
h0 = 3h(u) 3(h0 u)3/2 vd0
h0 3(h0 exp( mpl))3/2 (12) (12a)

ues for small plastic strains will be corrected. For high plastic strains mpl and low values of h0/d0, the corrective function cSiebel(mpl) becomes too small, which means that the yield stress calculated will be too high, whereas for high values of h0/d0, cSiebel(mpl) becomes too low. Therefore, the application of the correction given by Siebel is only recommended for simple estimations of ow stress [18]. The ow curves | 0(mpl) and | 1(mpl) for all samples are y y shown in Fig. 5. This diagram clearly represents the accurate calculation of the ow curves with the iterative method, even after the rst iteration. The curves | 1(mpl) y for the geometries h0/d0 = 1.4 and h0/d0 = 1.2 are almost identical, with the curves for h0/d0 = 1.0 and h0/d0 =0.8 showing only small deviations. This can also be seen from the error f 1(mpl), which is equal to c 1(mpl) dened by Eq. (10) for all four samples. It can be seen in Fig. 6 that the maximum error for h0/d0 = 1.4 and h0/d0 = 1.2 is less than 1% and the maximum error for h0/d0 = 0.8 is in the range of 4%. This result clearly shows that generally a high value of h0/d0 for compression tests is recommended to minimize the inuence of friction. It can also be seen from these results that for high values

cSiebel(mpl)=

It is obvious from the graph in Fig. 4 that the correction proposed by Siebel for v =0.2 has the deciency that cSiebel(0)" 0, which is inconsistent with the observations mentioned above, as even ow-stress valTable 2 Parameters of the corrective term c 0 (u) for the steel samples t h0 d0 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 a 0.8441 0.4196 0.3725 0.2780 b 3.7244 2.9082 3.1526 2.7632 d 0.0782 0.0175 0.0045 0.0005 s 2.1404 2.6709 3.1274 3.8485 t 0.8270 0.8348 1.1417 1.3297

Fig. 6. Corrective function c 1 (mpl) for different sample dimensions, t and comparison of | 1(mpl) with | 2(mpl) for h0/d0 =0.8. y y

232

E. Parteder, R. Bunten / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 227233

Fig. 7. Deviation f i i (mpl) of the force F 0(u) for different mesh mesh s densities relating to the density 60 60 elements.

Fig. 8. Corrective function c 0 (mpl) of molybdenum for different t temperatures.

of h0/d0, one iteration is sufcient to achieve an accurate ow curve. The relationship c 1(mpl) is approximated with a polynomial of the third order. The function c 1(mpl) was applied to | 1(mpl) using Eq. y (9) for the dimension h0/d0 =0.8. The ow curve | 1(mpl) y together with the result | 2(mpl) is also depicted in Fig. 6. y The inuence of the mesh density on the calculated force was checked using different meshes. The number of elements used is given in Fig. 7. The results F 1 = s F 1(u) for the sample geometry h0/d0 =1.0 for the differs ent meshes were approximated with a suitable function. The deviation dened in relation to the mesh density of 60 60 elements can be given as:
i f imesh(mpl)=

F is i(mpl)F 60 60(mpl) s F 60 60(mpl) s

(13)

Fig. 7 shows the results of Eq. (13), from which it can be seen that the maximum error of the 2020 mesh is less than 1%. This conguration was therefore chosen for all calculations. Due to the excessive distortion of the elements existing in the region of the former edge of the sample, the results in this region may be subject to error. The inuence of this error on the determination of the ow curve can be checked by the application of automatic remeshing techniques during the simulation [19]. Some comparisons of simulative results carried out with and without remeshing show a maximum difference in the calculated force of less than 1%, not dependent on the number of elements used for simulation. On average, the number of remeshings was about three times. Considering that the error in the calculation of the upsetting load caused by local mesh distortions is smaller than 1%, remeshing is not necessary at all. The second series of samples made of sintered molybdenum was tested at the two different temperatures, T= 800C and T= 1000C, but with identical sample dimensions of h0/d0 =1 and h0 =5 mm. One can see two different hardening behaviours at these temperatures. Two samples for each parameter were tested in a

vacuum under constant velocity of the tool of 6=15 mm min 1. Fig. 8 shows the corrective functions c 0 (mpl) for all four samples. It can be seen that the t correction is almost independent of the temperature, i.e. independent of the hardening behaviour of the material. One ow curve per temperature | 1(mpl) with the y corresponding curve | 0(mpl) is represented in Fig. 9. The y maximum deviation after Eq. (8) is in the range of 1%. This is again an improvement for achieving adequate results after just one iteration step. In conclusion, the corrective function c 0 (mpl) presented above can be used t for a given sample geometry d0/h0, without the necessity to determine the function itself for every test. Fig. 10 shows the distribution of the equivalent plastic strain m eq in the cross-section of the deformed sam pl ple. The local equivalent plastic strain value, calculated by the FE-analysis, lies in the range of about 0.025 m eq 5 2.95, when the global strain can be determined as pl mpl = 1.0. The micrograph of the tested sample (T= 800C) can be used for comparison with the equivalent plastic strain (Fig. 11). The inhomogeneous deformation leads to an inhomogeneous grain structure and porosity distribution. In the central region, where the

Fig. 9. Flow curves | 0(mpl) and | 1(mpl) of molybdenum for different y y temperatures.

E. Parteder, R. Bunten / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 74 (1998) 227233

233

Fig. 10. Contour plot of the equivalent plastic strain m eq of one pl molybdenum sample tested at T= 800C.

highest value of m eq occurs, the material is fully dense pl and the grains are elongated (Fig. 11; A), whereas in the outer region (Fig. 11; B), less plastic deformation was calculated and the shape of the grains remains nearly unchanged, the porosity being high in these areas. These observations can also be made in the area directly under the die (Fig. 11; C). The former edge of the specimen is shown in Fig. 11; D.

Fig. 11. Micrograph of the deformed molybdenum sample tested at T =800C. [10] H. Wiegels, R. Herbertz, Der Zylinderstauchversuch mit groer Reibung zur Bestimmung der Fliespannung, Stahl Eisen 99 (1979) 1380 1390. [11] G. Sachs, Einu der Probenhohe auf den Stauchversuch, Z. Metallkd. 16 (1924) 55 58. [12] R. Herbertz, R. Hergemoller, H. Wiegels, Zum Einu der absoluten Probengroe bei der Ermittlung der Fliekurven in Zylinderstauchversuchen, Draht 32 (1981) 493 495. [13] R. Kopp, J.M.M. Heuen, F.D. Philipp, K. Karhausen, Improvement of accuracy in determining ow stress in hot upsetting tests, Steel Res., 64 (1993) 377 384. [14] A. Gavrus, E. Massoni, J.L. Chenot, An inverse analysis using a nite element model for identication of rheological parameters, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 60 (1996) 447 454. [15] A. Tarantola, Inverse Problem Theory, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1987. [16] J. Lubliner, Plasticity Theory, Macmillan, New York, 1990. [17] Origin Users Manual, Microcal, Northampton, MA 01060, 1995. [18] E. Parteder, J.M.M. Heuen, J. Resch, Fliekurven von hochschmelzenden Metallen als Grundlage zur Simulation von Umformprozessen, Metall 49 (1995) 714 720. [19] R. Schneiders, Remeshing Algorithmen fur dreidimensionale Finite-Element-Simulation von Umformprozessen, Diss. RWTH, Aachen, 1993.

References
[1] K. Karhausen, Integrierte Proze und Gefugesimulation bei der Warmumformung, Diss. IBF/RWTH Aachen, 1994. [2] A.J. Brand, J.M.M. Heuen, R. Kopp, Gefugesimulation fur Inconel-Schmiedeteile, Umformtechnik 30 (1996) 102108. [3] E. Doege, H. Dohrmann, I. Neubauer, Numerische Simulation von Gefugeumwandlung, Blech Rohre Prole 42 (1995) 698 701. [4] S. Shima, M. Oyane, Plasticity theory for porous metals, Int. J. Mech. Sci. 18 (1976) 285291. [5] D.N. Lee, H.S. Kim, Plastic yield behaviour of porous metals, Powder Metall. 35 (1992) 275279. [6] H.N. Han, H.S. Kim, K.H. Oh, D.N. Lee, Elastoplastic nite element analysis for porous metals, Powder Metall. 37 (1994) 140 146. [7] E. Doege, H.Meyer-Nolkemper, I. Saeed, Fliekurven Metallischer Wekstoffe, Hanser, Munich, 1986. [8] F.D. Philipp, Physikalische Prozedaten fur die numerische Simulation von Warmumformverfahren, Diss. IBF/RWTH Aachen, 1993. [9] E. Siebel, Die Bedeutung der Fliekurve bei der Kaltumformung, VDI-Z. 98 (1956) 133134.