Week 4 -Wire Bending Challenge
ANSYS WEEK 4 - WIRE BENDING CHALLENGE
AIM :
Wire bending process to be simulated in the Ansys workbench using three different materials.
OBJECTIVE:
The main objective of the challenge is to compare the result for Equivalent stress and Strain on the wire only using three different materials.
1) Copper Alloy (Non-Linear).
2) Aluminium Alloy (Non-Linear).
3) Magnesium Alloy (Non -Linear).
THEORY:
Wire bending single tool
Plastic deformation of metal wire where the wire is fed forward bent in one or more steps and subsequently cut loose.
The workpieces of metal wire are fed through the split die adapted with bending pins suited for bending shapes. The rotary bending tool bends the wire around the die resulting in plastic deformation. Then, the wire is moved up to the next position. The entire bending anvil can be rotated about the wire axis, thus enabling bending in all directions.
The finished part is released by cutting the wire in the desired location. Many bending machines can switch between different sets of bending tools to be able to vary the bending radius or allow other complex bends.
Fig 1: Wire bending
PROPERTIES
1) Copper Alloy (Non-Linear)
Fig 2: Properties of copper
2) Aluminium Alloy (Non-Linear)
Fig 3: Properties of Aluminum
3) Magnesium Alloy (Non-Linear)
Fig 4: Properties of Magnesium
PROCEDURE
SIMULATION SETUP
For setting up the simulation process for wire bending, first adding all three materials to the engineering data, then importing the model to the geometry for checking any irregularities or the surface damage of the geometry.
Fig 5: Wire bending
And then updating the model in the mechanical module as reaming each part for further setup.
Fig 6: Renaming each part
Contact
As the model has contacts but they are Flip over the target and renamed based on the definition, As the first contact is between the wire as contact bodies and the wheel as a target bodies, which is the frictional type with a friction coefficient of 0.2, the formulation method is Augmented LaGrange, Normal stiffness as a factor 0.1, update stiffness at Each iteration, and interface treatment as Add offset
Fig 7: Contact 1
The second contact is between wheel as contact bodies and wire as target bodies with the same settings for both.
Fig 8: Contact 2
Revolute Joint is provided to the base of the wheel so it can revolve while bending the wire but the coordinated system should be given properly so it can revolve in the right direction.
Fig 9: Revolute joint and change coordinate
Mesh
This component is a solid part, tetra mesh can be generated, and to have the accurate result the mesh is refined at the wire and bending source by giving the face sizing.
First, the Patch conforming method is inserted by selecting all three bodies and methods as Tetrahedrons.
Fig 10: Tetrahedrons method
The face sizing 1 with selecting 4 faces and element size 2.2mm
Fig 11: Face sizing 1
The face sizing 2 with selecting 4 faces, sphere radius 7mm, and element size 0.8mm.
Fig 12: Face sizing 2
Fig 13: Mesh on wire bending
Analysis settings
A total of 8 steps are provided to run the simulation but step 1 has different parameters with an initial time step 0.1 s, minimum time step 1e-002 s, and final time step 0.2 s. From step 2 to 8 as carryover, the time step is ON with minimum time step is 1 e-002 s and maximum time step 1 s.
Fig 14: Analysis setting for step 1
Fig 15: Analysis setting for step 2 to 8
The fixed support is given to the wheel which is connected to a wire and another fixed support to the top of the wire so while bending it should not get outside of the process to fail the simulation.
Fig 16: Fixed support 1
Fig 17: Fixed support 2
Also, the joint rotation is also with an angle of 20 degrees at each rotation
Fig 18: Joint rotation
RESULTS
CASE 1: Copper Alloy (Non-Linear).
Fig 19: Equivalent stress on the CL wire
Fig 20: Equivalent strain on CL wire
CASE 2: Aluminium Alloy (Non-Linear).
Fig 21: Equivalent stresson AL wire
Fig 22 Equivalent elastic strain on AL wire
CASE 2: Magnesium Alloy (Non-Linear).
Fig 23: Equivalent stress on ML wire
Fig 24: Equivalent elastic strain on ML wire
Result Comparison
Equivalent von misses stress of all three materials
| Sr.No | Copper Alloy | Aluminium Alloy | Magnesium Alloy |
| Equivalent stress min (MPa) | 4.4098e-003 | 2.7799e-003 | 1.5895e-003 |
| Equivalent stress max (MPa) | 336.46 | 340.22 | 255.24 |
| Equivalent stress Avg (MPa) | 141.65 | 116.92 | 108.19 |
Fig 25:Equivalent stress plot
As per the graph and the table listed below the result is obtained after the evaluating wire bending simulation for equivalent stress is that copper alloy material has higher stress to the wire at the time of bending with an average value of 141.65 MPa and the magnesium alloy has the least stress on the bending process with the average value of 108.19 MPa and the Aluminium alloy with 116.92 MPa average value.
Equivalent Elastic strain of all three materials
| Sr.No | Copper Alloy | Aluminium Alloy | Magnesium Alloy |
| Equivalent strain (mm) | 7.5832e-008 | 7.4262e-008 | 7.1467e-008 |
| Equivalent strain (mm) | 3.088e-003 | 4.8335e-003 | 5.6833e-003 |
| Equivalent strain (mm) | 1.6095e-003 | 2.1156e-003 | 2.8507e-003 |
Fig 26:Equivalent elastic strain plot
As per the graph and the table listed below the result is obtained after the evaluating wire bending simulation for an equivalent elastic strain is that copper alloy material has higher strain to the wire at the time of bending with an average value of 141.65 MPa and the magnesium alloy has the least strain on the bending process with the average value of 108.19 MPa and the Aluminium alloy with 116.92 MPa average value.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
File for wire bending: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1lt3iadHUzbQ3AWH9xLWg21_DeyXzY14C/view?usp=sharing