Advertisement

Influence of die geometry on self-piercing riveting of aluminum alloy AA6061-T6 to mild steel SPFC340 sheets

  • Jiang-Hua Deng
  • Feng Lyu
  • Ru-Ming Chen
  • Zhi-Song FanEmail author
Article
  • 52 Downloads

Abstract

The self-piercing riveting (SPR) process was used to join 2.0-mm-thick aluminum alloy 6061-T6 and 1.2-mm-thick mild steel SPFC340 sheets. SPR joints produced with a conventional flat-bottom die and conical-section dies were investigated both experimentally and numerically. Lap shear tests were conducted under quasi-static conditions to evaluate the load-carrying capability of these SPR joints. The effect of variation in die geometry (such as variation in the die groove shape, cone height, and die radius) on the main mechanical response of the joints, namely the peak load and energy absorption, was discussed. The results showed that SPR joints produced with the conical-section dies exhibited a failure mode similar to those produced with a conventional die. All the joints failed by tearing of the top steel sheet. Cracks that occurred in the bottom aluminum alloy 6061-T6 sheet around the rivet leg were a result of tangential tensile stress. The cone height of a conical-section die is the most important parameter affecting the surface quality of Al/steel SPR joints. Conical-section dies with a moderate convex can ensure a good surface quality during the SPR process. In addition, SPR joints with single conical-section die allow higher tensile strength and energy absorption compared to those with double conical-section die.

Keywords

Self-piercing riveting (SPR) Aluminum/steel dissimilar sheet Conical-section die Lap shear test 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge both the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 51774097, 51705081) and Key Project of the Youth Natural Science Fund of Fujian Provincial University (Grant No. JZ160417) for their kindly financial supports of this work. Jiang-Hua Deng is grateful for the financial support from Program for New Century Excellent Talents in Fujian Province University (NCETFJ).

References

  1. 1.
    Hahn O, Dölle N, Rohde A (2001) An innovative concept for mixed-material construction in vehicle design: self-piercing riveting of aluminium and steel in combination. Atz Worldwide 103(2):15–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li D, Han L, Thornton M et al (2012) Influence of edge distance on quality and static behaviour of self-piercing riveted aluminium joints. Mater Des 34(34):22–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carle D, Blount G (1999) The suitability of aluminium as an alternative material for car bodies. Mater Des 20(5):267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Atzeni E, Ippolito R, Settineri L (2009) Experimental and numerical appraisal of self-piercing riveting. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 58(1):17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Han L, Thornton M, Shergold M (2010) A comparison of the mechanical behaviour of self-piercing riveted and resistance spot welded aluminium sheets for the automotive industry. Mater Des 31(3):1457–1467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Li D, Chrysanthou A, Patel I et al (2017) Self-piercing riveting: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 92:1777–1824CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bouchard PO, Laurent T, Tollier L (2008) Numerical modeling of self-pierce riveting—from riveting process modeling down to structural analysis. J Mater Process Technol 202(1–3):290–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mori K, Abe Y, Kato T (2014) Self-pierce riveting of multiple steel and aluminium alloy sheets. J Mater Process Technol 214(10):2002–2008CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hoang NH, Porcaro R, Langseth M et al (2010) Self-piercing riveting connections using aluminium rivets. Int J Solids Struct 47(3):427–439CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Porcaro R, Hanssen AG, Langseth M et al (2006) Self-piercing riveting process: an experimental and numerical investigation. J Mater Process Technol 171(1):10–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    He X, Zhao L, Deng C et al (2015) Self-piercing riveting of similar and dissimilar metal sheets of aluminum alloy and copper alloy. Mater Des 65:923–933CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhao L, He X, Xing B et al (2017) Fretting behavior of self-piercing riveted joints in titanium sheet materials. J Mater Process Technol 249:246–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Haque R, Durandet Y (2017) Investigation of self-pierce riveting (SPR) process data and specific joining events. J Manuf Process 30:148–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ma YW, Lou M, Li YB et al (2017) Effect of rivet and die on self-piercing rivetability of AA6061-T6 and mild steel CR4 of different gauges. J Mater Process Technol 251:282–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Abe Y, Kato T, Mori K (2009) Self-piercing riveting of high tensile strength steel and aluminium alloy sheets using conventional rivet and die. J Mater Process Technol 209(8):3914–3922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Franco GD, Fratini L, Pasta A et al (2010) On the self-piercing riveting of aluminium blanks and carbon fibre composite panels. Int J Mater Form 3(1):1035–1038CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Franco GD, Fratini L, Pasta A (2012) Influence of the distance between rivets in self-piercing riveting bonded joints made of carbon fiber panels and AA2024 blanks. Mater Des 35:342–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Mucha J (2011) A study of quality parameters and behaviour of self-piercing riveted aluminium sheets with different joining conditions. J Mech Eng 57(4):323–333CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Shanghai University and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jiang-Hua Deng
    • 1
  • Feng Lyu
    • 1
  • Ru-Ming Chen
    • 1
  • Zhi-Song Fan
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.School of Mechanical Engineering and AutomationFuzhou UniversityFuzhouPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations