Remapping Algorithms for Sheet Metal Forming

Centro de Engenharia Mecnica
Universidade de Coimbra da Universidade de Coimbra
Remapping algorithms: application to trimming

operations in sheet metal forming
D.M. Neto1 C.M.A. Diogo1 T.F. Neves1 M.C. Oliveira1 J.L. Alves2
L.F. Menezes1
1CEMUC, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Coimbra, Portugal
2CMEMS, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Minho, Portugal
NUMISHEET 2016
The 10th International Conference and Workshop on 4 9 September 2016
Numerical Simulation of 3D Sheet Metal Forming Processes Marriott Bristol City Centre Hotel, Bristol, UK
2
Sheet metal forming processes
Multi-step sheet metal forming process

Commonly adopted in the production of complex automotive structural
components
Trimming process
Front fender
Forming process (Benchmark C - Numisheet 2002)
M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Marta.oliveira@dem.uc.pt Marriott Bristol City Centre Hotel, Bristol, UK
3
Numerical simulation
Numerical simulation is an indispensable tool in the development of new

automotive components manufactured by forming
Finite element modelling of sheet metal forming processes is very complex
due to the highly non-linear material behavior, large strains and frictional
contact conditions
Intermediate stages for trimming
Aluminium Panel
(Benchmark 2 - Numisheet 2016)

4
Trimming
S(u,v)
Region to keep
n
Region to eliminate

5
Trimming
S(u,v)
Initial mesh First selection Second selection
Final mesh A A B Final mesh B
Correction

6
Trimming
Implies the definition of trimming surfaces properly aligned with the thickness
direction
Aluminium Panel

7
Remapping
Donor mesh
Target mesh
Remapping in the Nodes

(Nodal Variables: Force, displacement, etc.)
Remapping in the Gauss Points
(State Variables: Stress, density, etc. )

Transfer Operator

8
Remapping
APPLICATION FIELDS NECESSITY

Solid Mechanics Adaptive mesh operations
Fluid Dynamics Multigrid methods
Combustion Texture mapping
Multidisciplinary subjects Trimming operations
REMAPPING
OPERATION REQUIREMENTS
Keep the equilibrium state

Minimize the transfer error
Overall accuracy of the simulations

9
Remapping methodologies
Original meshes Extrapolation Interpolation I Interpolation II

n n
j Ni j , , i ig N j ig , , j
i 1 j 1
Finite element shape functions

ng
1
i Nig i , , ig
ig 1
Minimum least square
2
I xi w x ig xi ig
N
ig

10
Remapping Incremental Volumetric Remapping
(v)
Direct transfer weighted with volume averaging
INCREMENTAL VOLUMETRIC REMAPPING IVR

11
i) Step 1 Divide all donor elements in Gauss Volumes
Gauss point
Gauss volume
Homogeneous
properties

12
ii) Step 2 Divide all target elements in Gauss Volumes

13
iii) Step 3 Intersect each target Gauss volume with the donor Gauss volumes
Intersection Gauss volumes

14
v)
iv)Step
Step54Find the donor
Volume Gauss
division volume
of each that
target encloses
Gauss each target Gauss volume part
volume
centroid
NL
Weighted volume
average
NL3
Gauss volume part NG V i
j
j 1
i
i 1 V jtotal
(v)

15
Remapping operation: Comparison of methods
Stage 2
Original Remap 1 Remeshed

Mesh Mesh
Remap 2
Test methodology
Standard extrapolation-interpolation
Incremental Volumetric Remapping
State variable analysed: sxx stress
Channel draw/Cylindrical Cup 2-stage test


16
Remapping operation
Initial state Extrapolation-Interpolation IVR ( NL = 15 )

17
Remapping Dual Kriging
For the target Gauss point (GP), xt x y z , the interpolation function can
T
be decomposed in two terms

( xt ) d ( xt ) f ( xt )
Drift Fluctuation
n n
1 f ( xt ) i K (hti ) i K (| xt xi |)
d ( x t ) d d1 d 2 x d 3 y d 4 z
xt i 1 i 1
To obtain the value of this function, it is necessary to solve a system of linear

equations: 1 x1T 1 f1

K xi x j

K 11 K 12 1 x n n f n
T
K u f
21 K 22 0 0 d1 0
1 1
x1 xn
0 0 d s 0

18
For each target GP:

Select a set of neighbour donor GPs;
Evaluate the kriging coefficients and weighting factors;
Evaluate the state variable value in the target GP.
Several selection algorithms for choosing the set of donor GPs were tested,
based on the definition:
Name Definition
Master Node Closest node from the donor mesh to the target GP
Master Element Donor meshs element partially defined by the Master Node, containing the
target GP
Master GPs Donor meshs GPs belonging to the Master Element
Slave Elements Donor meshs elements that share the Master Node, but do not contain the
target GP
Slave GPs Donor meshs GPs that belong to any Slave Element, which will be
considered in the Dual Kriging process.

19
Master-Slave method Planar selection
Set of donor GPs (n=27): Set of donor GPs (n=9):

(i) 8 of the omitted Master Element; (i) 4 of the Master Element located in the same
(ii) 4 of each Slave Element with only one shared reference face (in blue);
face (in blue); (ii) 2 of each Element with one shared edge with
(iii) 2 of each Slave Element with only one shared Slave the reference face (in green);
edge (in green); (iii) 1 of each Slave Element with one shared vertex
(iv) 1 of each Slave Element with only one shared with the reference face (in red).
vertex (in red).

20
Remapping Dual Kriging accuracy
The remapping is carried out in two stages, first, from the structured to the
unstructured mesh (called stage 1) and afterwards, back to the structured
mesh (called stage 2).
x2 y2
Analytical function: T ( r, ) 20r ( r 1) cos(2 ), r
2 2
a2
Two FE layers through-thickness, from the top to the bottom layer, equal to: T,
0.1 T, -0.1 T, and - T.
21
Remapping Dual Kriging accuracy
Absolute error associated with the remapping method: E (r, ) T (r , ) ( xt )

Stage 1 Stage 2
The distribution obtained with the Master-Slave method has the highest
spread and error value, particularly for Stage 2.
22
Springback DEMERI TEST
Stage I Forming of the cup Stage II Cut the ring
Stage III Split the ring Stage IV Open the ring

23
AA5754-O aluminum alloy

Blank with 60 mm and 1 mm thickness
1/2 of the model (symmetry conditions)
Isotropic work hardening (voce law) and
isotropic yield criterion (von Mises)
s [MPa]

24
IVR NL=4 Dual Krigging

s [MPa]
Ring opening
4.3 mm 4.3 mm

25
Conclusions
This work presents the application of the Dual Kriging interpolation method
as remapping scheme for FEM state variables between different finite element
meshes.
When considering a state variable distribution with gradient in all directions,
combined with a small thickness dimension, a decrease of accuracy is observed
for the Master-Slave method, due to an overweighting of the through-thickness
component, while the Planar method kept its level of accuracy.
The computational cost incurred for the Dual Kriging is significantly lower
than the IVR method.
All remapping methods can provide results with a good level of accuracy.

26
Acknowledgements
This research work was sponsored by national funds from the Portuguese
Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) under the projects with reference
P2020-PTDC/EMS-TEC/0702/2014 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016779) and P2020-
PTDC/EMS-TEC/6400/2014 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-016876) by UE/FEDER
through the program COMPETE 2020

27
Thank you for your attention!


Remapping Algorithms for Sheet Metal Forming

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Remapping Algorithms for Sheet Metal Forming

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Centro de Engenharia Mecnica

Universidade de Coimbra da Universidade de Coimbra

Remapping algorithms: application to trimming

Multi-step sheet metal forming process

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Numerical simulation is an indispensable tool in the development of new

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Initial mesh First selection Second selection

Final mesh A A B Final mesh B

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Remapping in the Nodes

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

APPLICATION FIELDS NECESSITY

Keep the equilibrium state

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Original meshes Extrapolation Interpolation I Interpolation II

Finite element shape functions

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

INCREMENTAL VOLUMETRIC REMAPPING IVR

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

i) Step 1 Divide all donor elements in Gauss Volumes

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

ii) Step 2 Divide all target elements in Gauss Volumes

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Intersection Gauss volumes

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Original Remap 1 Remeshed

Channel draw/Cylindrical Cup 2-stage test

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Initial state Extrapolation-Interpolation IVR ( NL = 15 )

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

be decomposed in two terms

To obtain the value of this function, it is necessary to solve a system of linear

For each target GP:

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Master-Slave method Planar selection

Set of donor GPs (n=27): Set of donor GPs (n=9):

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Absolute error associated with the remapping method: E (r, ) T (r , ) ( xt )

Stage I Forming of the cup Stage II Cut the ring

Stage III Split the ring Stage IV Open the ring

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

AA5754-O aluminum alloy

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

IVR NL=4 Dual Krigging

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

Thank you for your attention!

M.C. Oliveira NUMISHEET 2016

You might also like