Sheet Metal Bending Simulation Using ANSYS Workbench

Objective: Perform the sheet metal bending challenge for different materials and settings

Case 1:Aluminium Alloy 1199,Copper Alloy NL and Magnesium Alloy NL. Find out the Equivalent stress, Equivalent elastic strain and Total Deformation in Y directionand compare the results for the three materials.

Case 2:With the material as Aluminium Alloy 1199, change the friction coefficient to 0.19 and run the analysis. Compare the results .

Case 3: Refine the mesh on the plate such .With Aluminium alloy1199 as material, run the analysis and compare the results.

Geometry

The assembly model have three part and Plate, Die and Punch

Material Properties

For the analysis we use four different materials for Punch And Die we use structural steel throughout all the case and we use Aluminum Alloy 1199,Copper Alloy NL and Magnesium Alloy NL For plate .

Structural Steel

Aluminum Alloy 1199

Copper Alloy NL

Magnesium Alloy NL

Pre Processing for Case 1

• Contact region

There are two contact region both contact have same properties

The contact type is Frictional

Frictional coefficient as 0.1

Behavior Auto Asymmetric

Formualtion Augmented Lagrange

Plate and Punch

Plate and Die

Mesh

Body sizing for punch and die with element size 4.0mm

Body sizing for plate with element size 1mm

Face sizing is done on the face of contact with element size 1mm

Patch Conforming method for plate with Tetrahedron element

Analysis Setting

Boundary Condition

• The displacement is given to the punch in -yaixs

  Tabular data

• The z direction displacement is fixed for plate

• The displacement for die is given in last two steps

Post Processing

• Equivalent (von-Misies)Stress For Plate
• Equivalent Elastic Strain for Plate
• Equivalent Stress on whole assembly
• Equivalent Strain on whole assembly
• Directional Deformation in Y-axis

Aluminium Alloy 1199

Equivalent (von-Misies)Stress For Plate (71.724MPa)

Equivalent Elastic Strain for Plate(0.0015499)

Equivalent Stress on whole assembly(23563MPa)

Equivalent Strain on whole assembly(1.1793)

Directional Deformation Yaxis(-12.056mm)

• Copper Alloy NL

Equivalent (von-Misies)Stress For Plate (144.4MPa)

Equivalent Elastic Strain for Plate(0.017234)

Equivalent Stress on whole assembly(20425Mpa)

Equivalent Strain on whole assembly(1.0222)

Directional Deformation Yaxis(-9.387mm)

Magnesium Alloy NL

Equivalent (von-Misies)Stress For Plate (198.95MPa)

Equivalent Elastic Strain for Plate(0.0059511)

Equivalent Stress on whole assembly(16438Mpa)

Equivalent Strain on whole assembly(0.82257)

Directional Deformation Yaxis(-11.291mm)

Case 2:With the material as Aluminium Alloy1199 , change the friction coefficient to 0.19

• For the Plate We're Gonna use Aluminum Alloy 1199 as Material
• And on the Contact Region We are assigning Frictional coefficient as 0.19
• All Other Boundary Condition and Analysis Setting And Mesh Properties are same .

Equivalent (von-Misies)Stress For Plate (70.981MPa)

Equivalent Elastic Strain for Plate(0.0015603)

Equivalent Stress on whole assembly(119150Mpa)

Equivalent Strain on whole assembly(0.59636)

Directional Deformation Yaxis(-12.465mm)

Case3: Mesh Refinement for the Plate

• Body sizing for plate with element size 0.5mm

Equivalent (von-Misies)Stress For Plate (83.467MPa)

Equivalent Elastic Strain for Plate(0.0016885)

Directional Deformation Yaxis(-13.056mm)

Comparison & Conclusion

Case1: Plate with Three Different Materials.

• The stress Concentration in magnesium alloy is maximum while in aluminum alloy is minimum.
• Youngs Modulus(E) is inversely proportional to the strain hence, more strain less E
• The elastic Strain on Copper Alloy is Minimum Compare to all the other Material Because The Copper Alloy Has the highest Young's Modulus.
• The Deformation in Copper Alloy Plate is Lesser Because its stiffer than other materials due to the higher Young's Modulus.

Case2 :Plate with Aluminum Alloy 1199 and with different frictional co-efficient

• As we can see when co efficient of friction increase the stress on the plate decreases and
• The stress and strain on the on the Die also decreases by half
• Since the strain is more for the plate with co efficient of friction 0.19 the deformation is also more compare to other.

Case3: Mesh Dependency Test

By decreasing the element size the value increases and become more accurate

In this i have decreased the element size by 0.5mm and the stress , strain and deformation have increased 10%

so the 0.5mm is mesh optimum size