FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

IN METAL FORMING

A PRESENTATION BY:
ABHISHEK V HUKKERIKAR
&
JITENDRA SINGH RATHORE

What is analysis?

Imaginatio
n

384,400
kilometers

200 meters
"In 1 million to 10 million years
they might be able to make a
plane that would fly."
-The New York Times, 1903

Applicatio
n

Model

Analysis

Abhishek & Jitendra

Methods of analysis
Mode
Mode of
of
analysis
analysis

Analytical
Analytical &
&
numerical
numerical
methods
methods

Elementary
Elementary theory
theory

Slip
Slip Line
Line field
field
theory
theory

Empirical
Empirical
Methods
Methods

Finite
Finite
Element
Element
Method
Method
(FEM)
(FEM)

Finite
Finite Difference
Difference
method
method (FDM)
(FDM)

Upper
Upper &
&
Lower Bound
Lower
Bound
method
method

Similarity
Similarity
theory
theory

Visio
Visio plastic
plastic
method
method

Image courtesy: Lecture notes, Fundamental of solving

methods, Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt

Abhishek & Jitendra

Elementary plasticity
theory
Approach:
Establishment of kinetics
relative to the process.
Establishment of differential
equations suiting the
process & the
simplification.

Abhishek & Jitendra

Upper & Lower boundary method

Method approximates the values of deforming forces
to be higher or lower than actual forces.
Any estimate of the collapse load of a structure made
by equating the rate of the energy dissipation
internally to the rate at which external forces do
work, in some assumed pattern of the deformation
will be greater than or equal to the correct load
-W.F. Hosford & R.M Caddell

Assumptions of the method:

Material being deformed is isotropic & homogenous
There is no effect of work hardening

William Hosford

No friction exists between work piece & tool

interface.
Plane strain conditions assumed.

Abhishek & Jitendra

Slip-line theory
Here flow pattern from point to point while
deformation is considered & analyzed.
Slip line refers to the planes of maximum
shear stress which are inclined at 45 o to
the principle planes.
Assumptions of the method:
Material being deformed is isotropic &

homogenous
There is no effect of work hardening & strain

Slip
line
on
the
edge

due to
frictionless
upsetting
due to
Symmet
ry
Symmet
ry plane

rate.
No friction exists between work piece & tool

interface.
Plane strain conditions assumed.
Effect of temperature , strain rate, & time

neglected.

Abhishek & Jitendra

Image courtesy: Lecture notes, Fundamental of solving

methods, Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt

Comparison
FEM
Material flow analysis &
local states of stress &
strain described.
Various boundary
conditions can be
applied.
Multi-axial stress in
consideration

Analytical methods
Only Global analysis is done.
Material homogeneity is assumed.
2-deminsional conditions.
Temperature effects neglected.
Abhishek & Jitendra

Finite Element Analysis

A brief history

Concept was developed by the works of Richard

Courant & Alexander Hrennikoff (early 40s).

Idea was originated to solve complex problems

of civil engineering & structural analysis.

Idea was promoted by Boeing to compute

Richard Courant

sweep of airplane wings (mid 50s).

M.J Turner & Ray W. Clough articles established

the applications of FEA (mid 50s).

Idea was also used to compute roof of Munich

Olympic stadium (late 60s)

Abhishek & Jitendra

R.W.Clough

Areas of applications
Engineering
Fluid mechanics
Thermodynamics
Metal Forming etc

Biological Sciences
Botany
Zoology
Archeological Anthropology
Paleontology

General application
Geology
Astrophysics

Abhishek & Jitendra

Engineering applications

Numerical assessment of static & seismic

behavior of the Basilica of Santa Maria
allImpruneta (Italy)

C-blade Forging &

Manufacturing

Department of Atomic & Solid

state physics University of Cornell

Department of electronics &

Telecommunications, University of
Naples,Italy

Abhishek & Jitendra

Hochschule Regensburg,
Biomechanik

Lehrstuhl Numerische Mathematik,

Ruprecht-Karls-Universitt,
10
Heidelberg

Hierarchy of FEM
Physical Problem
Establish Finite element model of the
physical problem
Solve the problem
Interpret the result
Abhishek & Jitendra

11

Space Incrementation
Finite Elements:
Every model is sub-divided

into finite elements. Their

junction points are called as
nodes.
Model assumes that forces act

at nodes & stresses & strain

exist at the finite element.
Reliability of FEA depends on
& Jitendra
number of finiteAbhishek
elements.

12

Stiffness Matrix

xample: Beams protruding from fixed surface

u

E A 1 1 u1 F1

L 1 1 u 2 F2

F1

F2
u1

Stiffness Coeffecient Displacement Force

u
2

EA
F1
(u2 u1 )
L
EA
F2
(u1 u2 )
L

1 1 0
EA
1 2 1
L
0 1 1

u1 F1
u2 F2
u3 F3

Stiffness Matrix

13

Space Incrementation
Element types:

Image courtesy: Lecture notes, Fundamental of solving

methods, Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt

Abhishek & Jitendra

14

Space Incrementation
Meshing
Network of nodes is called a
mesh.
There are 2 broad meshgeneration methods.
Unstructured( Formed

automatically) A
Structured (Formed by grid

based sub-dividing of geometry)

Abhishek & Jitendra
B

15

Space Incrementation
Meshing:
Accuracy of results always

depends on the assumptions.

Fine mesh is considered

where there are stress &

strain gradients.
A coarse mesh is used in the

areas of reasonably constant

stress or areas of interest.
Abhishek & Jitendra

16

Protocols
Gaps are not

permitted during
meshing.
Nodes are numbered

sequentially.

Abhishek & Jitendra

17

Space Incrementation
Approaches:
LAGRANGES approach
Mesh is bound to the

material
Mesh will be distorted with

increasing deformation.
Courtesy: FHWA. USA
Abhishek & Jitendra

18

Space Incrementation
EULERS Approach
Mesh is fixed & not

bound to the
material.
Material flows

through fixed mesh.

Abhishek & Jitendra

19

Space Incrementation
Remeshing
Why is it necessary?
Formation of unacceptable shapes due to large local deformations.
High relative motion between die surface & deforming material.
Large displacement causes computational problems.
Difficulties encountered in incorporating die boundary shapes with

increase in relative displacement.

To overcome above difficulties, periodic redefining of mesh is necessary

Abhishek & Jitendra

21

Space Incrementation
Remeshing comprises of
following steps:
1. Assignment of new mesh
system to work piece

2. Transfer of information
(strain, strain rate, &
temperature) from the old
to the new mesh through
interpolation.
Abhishek & Jitendra

Image courtesy: emerald.com

22

Solvers
For simulation of metal forming, following 2
solutions are used:
Implicit method ( Stable, iterative, high

computational effort)
Explicit method (conditionally stable, no

iteration, less computational effort)

Abhishek & Jitendra

23

Implicit solvers
Studies reveal that this solver

is useful in smaller & 2D

problems.
Each time step or increment

has to be treated as
unconditionally stable process.
Large time steps lead to larger

iterations & process do not

converge.

Abhishek & Jitendra

(Newton Raphson method )

Non-linear analysis of
reinforced concrete beam 24

Implicit Solvers
In the implicit approach a solution to the set of finite
element equations involves iteration until a
convergence criterion is satisfied for each increment.
Here computation is divided into several calculation

time steps.
At the end of each time step(increment) the

equilibrium between internal & external load must be

reached.
Else iteration continues.
Abhishek & Jitendra

25

Explicit solvers
The finite element equations in the explicit
approach are reformulated as being dynamic.

In this form they can be solved directly to

determine the solution at the end of the increment,
without iteration.

Two methods are followed for time step

calculations. Abhishek & Jitendra

26

Explicit solvers
Here largest allowable time step for a stable solution depends
on:
Highest Eigen frequency occurring (max )in the system
Corresponding damping ()

tm (2/max)* ((1+2)0.5-)
Sonic frequency & smallest element Le are estimated as
follows:
t Le /C

Abhishek & Jitendra

with C=(E/)0.5

27

Computational time required for

explicit/implicit methods
(Calculation time)

Complexity

Efficiency
Implicit
Explicit

Model-size

Implicit

Statics

Explicit

Structural
dynamics

Highly
dynamic

implicit: Complexity ~ number of freedom degrees x wave front

explicit: Complexity ~ number of freedom degrees
Image courtesy: Lecture notes, Fundamental of solving
methods, Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt

Non-linearities in FEM
Following Non-linearities are encountered during
the simulations.
Geometrical Non-linearity
Material Non-linearity
Contact variance (Change of boundary

conditions)
Friction
Abhishek & Jitendra

29

Geometrical Non-linearity
In practical cases it is not
uncommon to encounter
strain of magnitude 2 or
more due to :
Large elongation
Large rotation
Portions of rigid body

Courtesy: MRF tyres, India

movements
Abhishek & Jitendra

30

Geometrical Non
linearity
Hydroforming
Operation
Tube

In consideration of
geometrical nonlinearity

Tools
Upper part
Lower part

Geometrical nonlinearity
neglected

Image courtesy: Lecture notes, Fundamental of solving

methods, Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt

Material Non-linearity
Occurs when:
Transition of elastic to plastic

phase
Depends on ,, , CP

Note: This non-linearity is

important when considering
thermal effects z.B hot
forming or for calculation of
temperature increase during
forming process.
Abhishek & Jitendra

Courtesy: COMSOL, USA

32

Material Non-linearity during tensile

test
considered
kf = kf (v, v)
(strain hardened!)

Material-nonlinearity (flow curve)

Not considered
Initial mesh
kf = 100 N/mm2 = const.

Image courtesy: Lecture notes, Fundamental of solving

methods, Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt

Contact Non-linearity
Changing contact changes:
a.) Mechanical Boundaries
b.) Thermal Boundaries.
Types of contacts in metal
forming
1.) Contacts with rigid tools
2.) Contacts with deforming tools
Courtesy: ICS, Switzerland
3.) Self contact
Abhishek & Jitendra

34

Friction
Friction is non-linear. Friction leads to
asymmetrical equation system. This increases
the calculation complexity.

Categorization:
1. <N -- Sticking friction
2. =N Slide friction

Abhishek & Jitendra

35

Why is FEM advantageous over

other solving methods
with friction

without friction

Abhishek & Jitendra

36

Comparision with &

without friction during
upsetting
Upsetting
without friction

with friction

Image courtesy: Lecture notes, Fundamental of solving

methods, Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt

Vote of thanks &

References
Sincerely indebted to:
Prof Dr. Ing. G. Hirt, Head of the department, IBF, RWTH Aachen
Dipl.-Ing. Simon Seuren, IBF, RWTH Aachen
Institute of Metal Forming, RWTH Aahcen
References:
Fundamentals of solving methods in metal forming by Prof.Dr.- Ing.G.Hirt
Metal forming & finite element method Atlan,Oh, Kobayashi
Manufacturing process III A.C.Niranjan
Comparison of the implicit and explicit finite element methods

using crystal plasticity- F.J. Harewood , P.E. McHugh

Web resources:
National program on technology enhanced learning, Dr. R. Krishnakumar, IIT madras.
Abhishek & Jitendra

38

Thank you for your patience & kind

attention!

Abhishek & Jitendra

39