Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A constitutive model for cracking prediction of steel/aluminum thin-walled tubes during plastic joining

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

An accurate constitutive model lays an analytical foundation for the thin-walled tube plastic joining process. This study obtained the best-fitted constitutive model to accurately simulate the steel/aluminum thin-walled tubes cracking during plastic joining. The process of establishing the constitutive model comprises three parts: 1) The flow stress model of AA6061 was determined by comparing the fit of seven flow stress models and experiments, and the model parameters were calibrated using a genetic algorithm. 2) A method combined with experiment and simulation was adopted to obtain the failure parameters in the ductile fracture criterion. 3) Combinations of different ductile fracture criteria and yield criteria were implemented into the VUMAT subroutine to simulate uniaxial tension. The constitutive model of AA6061 was determined based on the comparison of simulation and experiment. Subsequently, the constitutive model was applied to the cracking prediction of the steel/aluminum thin-walled tube plastic joining process. The predicted cracking was compared with the experimental cracking. Finally, the cracking risk areas were evaluated by the forming limit diagram. The results indicated that the Voce-Swift model could better reflect the trend of AA6061 flow stress and the genetic algorithm could effectively improve the Voce-Swift model fitting accuracy. The uniaxial tensile simulation suggested that the Cockcroft-Latham criterion combined with the Hill48 anisotropic criterion could accurately predict the fracture of AA6061. Moreover, the steel/aluminum joint simulation cracking matched very well with the experiment, which verified the validity of the constitutive model in predicting cracking during the plastic joining process. Finally, the aluminum/aluminum joint simulation result proved that the risk of cracking in the upper tube was more significant than in the lower tube. The AA6061 tube with poor plasticity should be the lower tube to improve the formability of the steel/aluminum joint.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19
Fig. 20
Fig. 21

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Czerwinski F (2021) Current trends in automotive lightweighting strategies and materials. Materials (Basel) 14(21):6631–6657. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14216631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ma QH, Sun JR, Gan XH, Sun ZY (2020) Experiment and modified model for CFRP/steel hybrid tubes under the quasi-static transverse loading. Int J Crashworthiness 26(3):343–353. https://doi.org/10.1080/13588265.2020.1717918

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Liu QXX, Yao YH, Xia ZH, Li GY, Cui JJ, Jiang H (2021) A novel method for joining steel/Al tube parts based on electromagnetic force by flat coil. Coatings 11(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/coatings11111356

  4. Ivanjko M, Meschut G (2018) Innovative joining technology for multi-material applications with high manganese steels in lightweight car body structures. Weld World 63(1):97–106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40194-018-0648-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Li H, Yang JC, Chen GY, Liu X, Zhang Z, Li GJ, Liu WH (2021) Towards intelligent design optimization: Progress and challenge of design optimization theories and technologies for plastic forming. Chin J Aeronaut 34(2):104–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2020.09.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Alves LM, Silva CMA, Martins PAF (2014) End-to-end joining of tubes by plastic instability. J Mater Process Technol 214(9):1954–1961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2014.04.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Alves LM, Nielsen CV, Silva CMA, Martins PAF (2017) Joining end-to-end tubing of dissimilar materials by forming. Int J Press Vessels Pip 149:24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpvp.2016.11.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Alves LM, Afonso RM, Martins PAF (2021) A new deformation assisted tube-to-tubesheet joining process. Thin-Walled Struct 163:107784–107791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2021.107784

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Alves LM, Reis TJ, Afonso RM, Martins PAF (2021) Singlestroke attachment of sheets to tube ends made from dissimilar materials. Materials (Basel) 14(4):815–828. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma14040815

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Alves LM, Afonso RM, Silva FLR, Martins PAF (2019) Deformation-assisted joining of sheets to tubes by annular sheet squeezing. Materials (Basel) 12(23):3909–3921. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma12233909

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Silva CMA, Nielsen CV, Alves LM, Martins PAF (2015) Environmentally friendly joining of tubes by their ends. J Clean Prod 87:777–786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Yu HY, Li JX, He ZZ (2018) Formability assessment of plastic joining by compression instability for thin-walled tubes. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 97(9–12):3423–3430. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-018-2128-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Agrawal AK, Narayanan RG (2020) Experimental and numerical studies on joining steel tubes by end forming. J Constr Steel Res 167:105792–105805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcsr.2019.105792

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Haley JA, Kyriakides S (2020) Bending induced wrinkling and creasing in axially crushed aluminum tubes. Int J Solids Struct 202:368–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsolstr.2020.06.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Ablat MA, Qattawi A (2016) Numerical simulation of sheet metal forming: a review. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89(1–4):1235–1250. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9103-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Rotpai U, Arlai T, Nusen S, Juijerm P (2022) Novel flow stress prediction and work hardening behavior of aluminium alloy AA7075 at room and elevated temperatures. J Alloys Compd 891. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jallcom.2021.162013

  17. Joun MS, Razali MK, Jee CW, Byun JB, Kim MC, Kim KM (2022) A review of flow characterization of metallic materials in the cold forming temperature range and its major issues. Materials 15(8):2751–2782. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15082751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Reddy BV, Kondayya D, Goud EV, Reddy PV (2021) Yield criterion influence on the formability prediction of SS 304 by tensile tests and bulge tests during tube hydroforming process. Multiscale Multidiscip Model Exp Des 4(4):293–302. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41939-021-00096-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hu GL, Pan CR (2020) Investigation of the plastic hardening of metal thin-walled tube under pulsating hydraulic loading condition. J Mech Sci Technol 34(11):4743–4751. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-020-1031-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Omer K, Butcher C, Worswick M (2020) Characterization and application of a constitutive model for two 7000-series aluminum alloys subjected to hot forming. Int J Mech Sci 165:105218–105236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2019.105218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ibáñez R, Abisset-Chavanne E, González D, Duval JL, Cueto E, Chinesta F (2018) Hybrid constitutive modeling: data-driven learning of corrections to plasticity models. IntJ Mater Form 12(4):717–725. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12289-018-1448-x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yao D, Duan YC, Li MY, Guan YP (2021) Hybrid identification method of coupled viscoplastic-damage constitutive parameters based on BP neural network and genetic algorithm. Eng Fract Mech 257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfracmech.2021.108027

  23. Pourhamid R, Shirazi A (2020) A comprehensive damage criterion in tube hydroforming. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part B J Eng Manuf 235(3):417–430. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954405420962968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Ai S, Long H (2019) A review on material fracture mechanism in incremental sheet forming. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 104(1–4):33–61. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-019-03682-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Park N, Stoughton TB, Yoon JW (2020) A new approach for fracture prediction considering general anisotropy of metal sheets. Int J Plast 124:199–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijplas.2019.08.011

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chang ZD, Chen J (2021) Analytical modeling of fracture strain and experimental validation in incremental sheet forming. J Mater Process Technol 294:117118–117127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2021.117118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Quach H, Kim YS (2021) Effect of non-associated flow rule on fracture prediction of metal sheets using a novel anisotropic ductile fracture criterion. Int J Mech Sci 195:106224–106244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2020.106224

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Wu RH, Hu Q, Li M, Cai S, Chen J (2021) Evaluation of the forming limit of incremental sheet forming based on ductile damage. J Mater Process Technol 287:116497–116504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2019.116497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Li R, Zheng ZB, Zhan M, Zhang HR, Lei YD (2021) A comparative study of three forms of an uncoupled damage model as fracture judgment for thin-walled metal sheets. Thin-Walled Struct 169:108321–108335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tws.2021.108321

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Li R, Zheng ZB, Zhan M, Zhang HR, Cui XL, Lei YD (2022) Fracture prediction for metal sheet deformation under different stress states with uncoupled ductile fracture criteria. J Manuf Process 73:531–543. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmapro.2021.11.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Ju K, Zhu FH, Li XF, Hu Q, Chen J (2020) Development of uncoupled anisotropic ductile fracture criteria. J Mater Eng Perform 29(2):1282–1295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11665-020-04592-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Barnwal VK, Lee SY, Choi J, Kim JH, Barlat F (2021) Performance review of various uncoupled fracture criteria for TRIP steel sheet. Int J Mech Sci 195:106269–106288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmecsci.2021.106269

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Swift HW (1952) Plastic instability under plane stress. J Mech Phys Solids 1(1):1–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(52)90002-1

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  34. Ghosh AK (1980) A physically-based constitutive model for metal deformation. Acta Metall 28(11):1443–1465. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(80)90046-2

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Voce E (1955) Empirical formulae for the determination of stress curves. J R Aeronaut Soc 59(533):362–364. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0368393100117626

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Tome C, Canova GR, Kocks UF, Christodoulou N, Jonas JJ (1984) The relation between macroscopic and microscopic strain hardening in F.C.C. polycrystals. Acta Metall 32(10):1637–1653. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-6160(84)90222-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Hockett JE, Sherby OD (1975) Large strain deformation of polycrystalline metals at low homologous temperatures. J Mech Phys Solids 23(2):87–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(75)90018-6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Koc P, Štok B (2004) Computer-aided identification of the yield curve of a sheet metal after onset of necking. Comput Mater Sci 31(1):155–168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.commatsci.2004.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Banabic D, Sester M (2012) Influence of material models on the accuracy of the sheet forming simulation. Mater Manuf Process 27(3):273–277. https://doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2011.578005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Hill R (1948) A theory of the yielding and plastic flow of anisotropic metals. Proc R Soc Lond Ser A Math Phys Sci 193(1033):281–297. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1948.0045

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  41. Cockcroft MG, Latham DJ (1966) A simple criterion of fracture for ductile metals

  42. Clift SE, Hartley P, Sturgess CEN, Rowe GW (1990) Fracture prediction in plastic deformation processes. Int J Mech Sci 32(1):1–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-7403(90)90148-C

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Muiruri A, Maringa M, du Preez W (2022) Development of VUMAT and VUHARD Subroutines for simulating the dynamic mechanical properties of additively manufactured parts. Materials (Basel) 15(1):372–403. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma15010372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Hill R (1952) On discontinuous plastic states, with special reference to localized necking in thin sheets. J Mech Phys Solids 1(1):19–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5096(52)90003-3

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The authors appreciated the financial support from the Natural Science Foundation of Shanghai, China(19ZR1460100).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Automotive Studies, Tongji University, Shanghai, 201804, China

    Hangyu Wu & Haiyan Yu

Authors
  1. Hangyu Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Haiyan Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed to the study conception and design. Experiments and simulation analysis were performed by Hangyu Wu. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Hangyu Wu and Haiyan Yu reviewed and edited the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Haiyan Yu.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

The research does not involve human participants or animals and the authors warrant that the paper fulfills the ethical standards of the journal.

Consent to participate

All the authors listed have approved the manuscript and consented to participate.

Consent for publication

All the authors consented for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wu, H., Yu, H. A constitutive model for cracking prediction of steel/aluminum thin-walled tubes during plastic joining. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 127, 2357–2370 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11636-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11636-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation