A technique for FEM optimization under reliability constraint of process variables in sheet metal forming

Original Research

Abstract

A method is proposed for the optimization, by finite element analysis, of design variables of sheet metal forming processes. The method is useful when the non-controllable process parameters (e.g. the coefficient of friction or the material properties) can be modelled as random variables, introducing a degree of uncertainty into any process solution. The method is suited for problems with large FEM computational times and small process window. The problem is formulated as the minimization of a cost function, subject to a reliability constraint. The cost function is indirectly optimized through a “metamodel”, built by “Kriging” interpolation. The reliability, i.e. the failure probability, is assessed by a binary logistic regression analysis of the simulation results. The method is applied to the u-channel forming and springback problem presented in Numisheet 1993, modified by handling the blankholder force as a time-dependent variable.

Keywords

Kriging Metamodel Binary logistic regression Reliability 

Abbreviation

BHFi

values of the blankholder force vs. time curve

E

operator of expectation

K

hardening coefficient

m

number of components of deterministic vector \(\underline x \)

n

hardening exponent

p

number of components of vector \(\underline \xi \)

pdf

probability density function

PF

probability of failure

q

number of components of vector \(\underline z \)

t%

maximum thinning of the initial sheet thickness t 0

w%

percentage increment of the initial channel width w 0 after springback

\(\underline w \)

vector of Kriging input variables

\(\underline x \)

vector of deterministic control variables

y

objective function

Y

Young’s modulus

\(\underline z \)

vector of output variables of interest

α

maximum tolerable probability of failure

\(\bar \varepsilon \)

effective strain

\(\underline \varphi \)

mean square error of the Kriging predictor

λ

weights of the objective function

μ

expected value

\(\bar \sigma \)

flow stress

σ

standard deviation

Σ

covariance matrix

Ωs

feasibility window

\(\underline \xi \)

vector of random process variables

References

  1. 1.
    Majeske KD, Hammett PC (2003) Identifying sources of variation in sheet metal stamping. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 15(5–18):5–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Simpson TW, Peplinski JD, Koch PN, Allen JK (1997) On the use of statistics in design and the implications for deterministic computer experiments. Proceedings of the DETCGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bonte MHA, Van den Boogaard AH, Huétink J (2005) Metamodelling techniques for the optimisation of metal forming processes. Proceedings of the Esaform’05, Cluj-Napoca, pp 155–158Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kleiber M, Rojek J, Stocki R (2002) Reliability assessment for sheet metal forming operations. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng 191:4511–4532MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Li YQ, Cui ZS, Ruan XY, Zhang DJ (2005) Application of six sigma robust optimization in sheet metal forming. Proceedings of Numisheet, vol. A, Detroit, pp 819–824Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhang W, Sheng ZQ, Shivpuri R (2005) Probabilistic design of aluminum sheet drawing for reduced risk of wrinkling and fracture. Proceedings of Numisheet, vol. A, Detroit, pp 247–252Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Repalle J, Grandhi RV (2005) Reliability-based preform shape design in forging. Commun Numer Methods Eng 21:607–617MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sahai A, Schramm U, Buranathiti T, Chen W, Cao J, Xia C (2004) Sequential optimization and reliability assessment method for metal forming processes. In: Numiform’04, Columbus, pp 2009–2013Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buranathiti T, Cao J, Xia ZC, Chen W (2005) Probabilistic design in a sheet metal stamping process under failure analysis. Proceedings of Numisheet, vol. A, Detroit, pp 867–872Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sacks J, Welch WJ, Mitchell TJ, Wynn HP (1989) Design and analysis of computer experiments. Stat Sci 4(4):409–435MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Agresti A (1996) An introduction to categorical data analysis. Wiley, New YorkMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Booker AJ, Meckesheimer M (2004) Reliability based design optimization using design explorer. Optimization and Engineering 5:179–205MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rijpkema JJM, Etman LFP, Schoofs AJG (2001) Use of design sensitivity information in response, surface and Kriging metamodels. Optimization and Engineering 2:469–484MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer/ESAFORM 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Dipartimento di Ingegneria IndustrialeUniversità di CassinoCassino (FR)Italy

Personalised recommendations