2.4.

16

FEM Process Simulation Using a Segmented-Elastic

Blank Holder with LS-DYNA

Heinrich Markstaedter, Andreas Gehle

Institute for Metal Forming Technology (IFU), Universität Stuttgart

Summary
This paper deals with the application of LS-DYNA and ANSYS in the tool development and
optimisation process at the Institute for Metal Forming Technology (IFU).
It is possible to apply locally different surface pressures by varying the pin forces using a segmented-
elastic blank holder in combination with a multi-point cushion system, developed at the IFU. This is
achieved by means of a closed loop pressure controller. The material draw-in between blank flange/
tool contact surfaces can thus be determined exactly. Furthermore, in combination with
hydromechanical deep drawing, tapered parts can be formed in a single punch stroke in excellent
quality and accuracy. The process has been simulated using the explicit FEM solver LS-DYNA in
order to optimise and verify the design rules for the segmented-elastic blank holder. The blank holder
is modelled using 8-node volume elements. The internal stresses in the blank holder can be defined in
addition to the higher simulation accuracy. The obtained results are used for further blank holder
shape optimisation.
FEM-Process Simulation

Part Design Tool Design

Experimental
Investigation

Keywords

Hydromechanical Deep Drawing, Segmented-Elastic Blank Holder, FEM, ANSYS, LS-DYNA

0. Introduction
The industrial use of new materials as well as increase of complex and extensive requirements need
optimisation of the existing and/ or development of new manufacturing processes.
At the Institute for Metal Forming Technology (IFU), Universität Stuttgart, parts with tapered-shaped
walls have been formed using the hydromechanical deep drawing process with a segmented-elastic
blank holder.
Deep drawing with hydraulic counter pressure has numerous advantages compared to the
conventional deep drawing process. Hydromechanical deep drawing is a process capable of
producing complex non-cylindrical components with excellent surface quality. Due to the lower die
costs compared to conventional deep drawing dies, hydromechanical deep drawing is advantageous
especially in the production of niche vehicles and other low volume applications. The tools and forming
presses have to resist very high stresses in hydroforming processes due to high forming pressures.
LS-DYNA and ANSYS have been used for numerical investigations of forming processes and for tool
design in this work.

1. Hydromechanical Deep Drawing

Hydromechanical deep drawing is a process whereby hydraulic counter pressure applied during the
forming cycle acts to form the sheet metal on to the punch. Die design for hydromechanical deep
drawing is shown in Figure 1. The counter pressure is generated by the penetration of the punch, i.e.
by "passive" compression of the hydrostatic medium and/ or by “active” pressurisation using an
external pump. The counter pressure is regulated by a pressure control valve during the punch
stroke [1]. An additional safety valve avoids bursting of the sealed counter pressure chamber.

FBh FP FBh
Detail A
Blank holder (Bh)
Punch (P) (Upper binder)
Detail A
Draw ring (Dr)
Sealing Bl/Dr (Lower binder)
hBulge
Blank (Bl)
Sealing Dr/Cp pc
Counter pressure
recipient (Cp)
Bulge
FP + FBh

FP = Punch force pc = Counter pressure

FBh= Blank holder force

Figure 1 Hydromechanical deep drawing

There are many advantages of using hydromechanical deep drawing to produce parts compared to
the conventional deep drawing. They can be summarised as follows:
- Assuming Coulomb's law of friction, the friction force between the sheet metal and the punch
increases with an increase in the counter pressure. The greater the counter pressure, the greater
the friction force between the part wall and the punch. An increasing counter pressure results in a
corresponding increase of the maximum draw ratio, β0 max.
- Moreover, it is possible to produce sheet metal parts with tapered-shaped walls without wall
wrinkles. This can be done by optimising the counter pressure curve along the punch stroke.
Products with tapered-shaped walls can only be manufactured by conventional deep drawing if a
multi-stage process is used. Complicated shapes can be formed with a minimum number of
forming stages having excellent surface quality using hydromechanical deep drawing.
- During the hydromechanical deep drawing process, the outer blank surface is in contact with the
hydrostatic medium. Hence, no friction occurs between the blank and the die. This leads to a high
surface quality and allows production of class A panels.
- Higher strains and a nearly even strain distribution over the part surface leads to lower springback.

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

2
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

- Higher work hardening effects can be achieved with hydromechanical deep drawing. This leads to
an improved dent resistance of auto body panels like hoods and roofs for the same sheet
thickness.
- The counter pressure forms the shape of the part. This allows for substitution of the female die with
the counter pressure chamber. The manufacturing costs and the tool production time can thus be
reduced.
However, it has to be noted that the hydromechanical deep drawing process requires a number of
additional investments such as presses with high ram forces and with appropriate hydraulic equipment
for the counter pressure generation and control [2]. The high ram force results from the forming force
and the force resulting from the counter pressure multiplied with the punch cross-section.
Furthermore, it has to be mentioned that hydromechanical deep drawing has a higher cycle time when
compared to conventional deep drawing, which is due to limitations on the maximum valve flow rate
and the time needed for filling up the counter pressure recipient.
The technological and economical advantages beginning to come out with true low volume niche
vehicles of the automotive companies, the use of hydromechanical deep drawing has been increased
in North America, Japan and Europe in recent years.
2. Control of the material draw-in
For a stable production process of the high quality deep drawn parts, the influence of material draw-in
between binders is of particular importance. On the one hand is the requirement for higher work
hardening to allow for higher dent resistance of auto body panels like hoods and roofs. On the other
hand is the condition of minimum allowable sheet thickness. The possibilities for material draw-in
control are listed below:
- Different shape and size of the blank (see Figure 2)
- Use of a different type and amount of lubricant
- Use of draw and lock beads as shown in Figure 2
- Variation of the blank holder force using a multi-point cushion system as discussed below.

Draw bead

Blank geometry
Lock bead

Draw bead Lock bead

Blank geometry

Figure 2 Using of the draw and lock beads for the control of the material draw-in

Segmented-Elastic Blank holder

In order to control material draw-in between the binders, a segmented-elastic blank holder (SEB) has
been developed at the IFU [3, 4]. The segmented-elastic blank holder consists of pyramidal-shaped
blank holder segments each loaded by a corresponding cushion pin (see Figure 3). The geometry of a
blank holder segment resembles a pyramidal stump. The pin force acts on the smaller area of the
pyramidal stump. The pyramidal stump geometry correlates to the stress distribution cone appearing
when a point force acts on a massive plate. With this design, an optimal equal blank holder pressure
distribution in the flange region of the drawn part is achieved together with a reduction of die weight. A
plate on the broader side of the pyramidal stump connects the segments together. The segments are
also connected on the narrower side by another plate (frame) in order to stiffen the blank holder
against bending.

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

3
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

 Locally increased
surface pressure
Draw ring
(upper die)
Plate
thickness Blank
Segmented-
elastic
Frame blankholder
thickness (SEB)
FPin FPin FPin, increased FPin

Figure 3 Segmented-elastic blank holder [3, 4]

F1

F2 = 2 F1

Figure 4 Results of the ANSYS calculation for surface pressure distribution (left) and deformation at
the segmented-elastic blank holder (right) [5]

With this blank holder design, it is possible to achieve very stiff segments which are connected by
elastic links. Variation of the pin force in one segment influences the surface pressure of neighbouring
segments only to a small extent (Figure 4) [5]. This is suitable for use in a multi-point cushion system
because of the possibility of locally influencing the surface pressure by varying the pin forces pin by
pin. The material draw-in behaviour between the binders can thus be influenced locally easily.
Additional devices to control material draw-in such as lock- and draw- beads can be avoided in most
cases. This reduces the tryout process to a minimum and leads to a reduction in the tool cost and to a
reduction of the time needed for tryout.
3. FEM Process Simulation for Hydromechanical Deep Drawing Process
The tool active surfaces are usually modelled by means of rigid body elements in the case of FEM
simulation for hydromechanical deep drawing. Elasticity of the tools and the machine can be
considered by the stiffness of the tools and/ or contact definition.
Optimisation of the tool design requires FEM process simulations. It is of special interest to predict the
material draw-in during hydromechanical deep drawing with the segmented-elastic blank holder (SEB)
developed at the IFU.
The following sections describe how the simulations are applied to carry out a feasibility study of a
T-shaped component. Due to the hemispherical shape and requirements for good part surface quality,
it is recommended to use hydromechanical deep drawing. The LS-DYNA explicit code was used to
simulate different tool concepts and process parameters for hydromechanical deep drawing.
3.1 FEM Process Simulation for a Rigid Blank Holder
The feasibility study of the T-shaped part was carried out using a rigid “one piece” body blank holder.
Figure 5 shows the model for FEM process simulation using LS-DYNA [6]. The model consists of the
punch with an appropriate addendum design, the blank holder, the blank and the counter pressure
recipient. Furthermore, a boundary curve has to be created which defines the area in which counter
pressure is applied.

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

4
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

 Punch

Blank
holder

Blank

Boundary
curve

Counter
pressure
recipient

Figure 5 FEM model for hydromechanical deep drawing process using a rigid blank holder [6]

The tool geometry is modelled as “MATERIAL_RIGID” with shell type #2. For the punch and draw ring,
the contact type *CONTACT_FORMING_ONE_WAY_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE with soft constraint
4 is considered. The contact type *CONTACT_FORMING_SURFACE_TO_SURFACE with soft
constraint 0 is used for the blank holder. The blank is meshed using the element type BELYTSCHKO-
TSAY. The defined blank material type is Type 36 (3-Parameter Barlat Plasticity, for modelling sheets
with anisotropic materials) [7]. Material properties for the blank material (aluminium alloy AA 6061,
t0 = 1.2 mm) are obtained from a uniaxial tensile test.

Schell thickness in mm

Fracture Limit

0.3
ϕ1

0.2
Critical Zone

t0 = 1.2 mm

ϕ2

Figure 6 Sheet thickness distribution for aluminium alloy Figure 7 Forming limit diagram for
AA 6061 using a rigid blank holder aluminium alloy AA 6061

The conducted FEM process simulations have shown that failures such as cracks due to high material
thinning, wall wrinkles and possible leakage due to wrinkles in the flange area can occur. It was not
possible to optimise the process parameters like blank holder force and counter pressure build-up
over the draw depth to produce a part with sufficient surface quality and required sheet thickness. This
is shown by material thinning in the marked area of the hydromechanical deep drawn part (with draw
depth of 65 mm as against the required draw depth of 80 mm, Figure 6) and by the cracks in the
corresponding forming limit diagram (Figure 7).

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

5
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

3.2 FEM Process Simulation for a Segmented Blank Holder
The finite element simulation results with the rigid blank holder indicated that the ability to control
material draw-in in the flange area is nessesary for a successful drawing process. This is possible by
use of the segmented-elastic blank holder. A segmented-elastic blank holder allows locally different
surface pressure by varying the segment forces. The model using a segmented blank holder for FEM
simulation using LS-DYNA is shown in Figure 8. The blank holder is modelled using eight separate
surfaces. This model is similar to the model with a rigid blank holder. The difference lies in the use of
small blank holder segments instead of a single blank holder surface. The advantage here is the
possibility of applying equal or different blank holder forces on each segment in order to achieve the
required optimal material draw-in.

Punch

Segmended
blank holder 8
7
1 6
Blank
2 5
3 4
Boundary
curve

Counter
pressure
recipient

Figure 8 FEM model for hydromechanical deep drawing process using a segmented blank holder

Equal blank holder forces were applied on all segments at the beginning of the optimisation process.
The pin forces were then individually modified in order to produce a good part. Figure 9 shows the
optimised blank holder forces for the blank holder segments.

20 80 High counter
pressure for the
Counter pressure in bar
Blank holder force in kN

forming of tapered
shape part
15 5 60 geometry
3
8

10 7 40

1 4
2
6 Low counter
5 20 pressure to
avoid critical
bulging

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 0 4 8 12 16 20 24

Process time in ms Process time in ms

Figure 9 Blank holder forces versus the Figure 10 Counter pressure curve versus the
process time process time

Beside the optimisation of pin forces, the counter pressure build-up was modified from “linearly
increasing” to multiple regions. The maximum counter pressure in the hydromechanical process is
limited by the bulge width. A larger bulge width at high fluid counter pressures leads to blank rupture

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

6
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

and uncontrolled material thinning. The smallest bulge width is reached near the end of the process.
The part should hence be calibrated at the end of the punch stroke using the maximum allowable
counter pressure. Figure 10 shows the principle trend of the counter pressure along the punch stroke
for hydromechanical deep drawing of the T-shaped part.
Optimisation of the different process parameters indicated the possibility of producing a good part with
the required surface quality and sheet thickness. Figure 11 shows the thickness distribution in the
marked area of the hydromechanical deep drawn part with a draw depth of 80 mm. The corresponding
forming limit diagram however shows that the elements at the lobe transition surfaces lie near the
critical zone (Figure 12).

Schell thickness in mm

Fracture Limit

0.4

ϕ1
0.2

Critical Zone

t0 = 1.2 mm

ϕ2
Figure 11 Sheet thickness distribution for aluminium Figure 12 Forming limit diagram for
alloy AA 6061 using a segmented blank holder aluminium alloy AA 6061

The results of the process simulation show that the blank holder segments can move independently in
the Z-direction due to wrinkling in the flange area. The real blank holder, however, consist of a single
part. The neighbouring segments are connected with each other in reality and cannot lift separately. In
order to verify the results of the FEM process simulation with a segmented blank holder and to take
into consideration the possible blank holder tilting occuring as a result of material draw-in, FEM
simulations with a segmented-elastic blank holder were carried out. Additionally, the maximal stress in
the blank holder during the process can be determined.

3.3 FEM Process Simulation for a Segmented-Elastic Blank Holder

It is necessary to build up the blank holder with volume elements for this simulation. The geometry of
the blank holder was meshed in ANSYS with approximately 16,000 volume elements of type
SOLID 45 and shell elements of type SHELL 63, as shown in Figure 13. The meshed blank holder
was imported into DYNAFORM using the ANSYS-DYNAFORM (ANDY) interface for generating the
hydromechanical deep drawing model.
The simulation model is built up similar to the model with a rigid blank holder. The blank holder
definition and element formulation is changed in the dyn-file. The type “MAT_ELASTIC” is used
instead of “MAT_RIGID”. Additionally, the output of contact interface data was written.

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

7
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

 Punch

Segmented-
elastic
blank holder

Boundary
Blank curve

Counter
pressure
recipient

Figure 13 Meshed model of the blank Figure 14 FEM model for simulation with the
holder using ANSYS segmented-elastic blank holder

The results of the simulations using the process parameter of the segmented-elastic blank holder
show a good accordance between the two blank holder models. The deviation of the blank holder
forces is under 5 %. This is displayed by the thickness distribution and FLD shown in Figure 15 and
Figure 16 respectively.

Schell thickness in mm
Fracture Limit

0.2

Critical Zone
ϕ1

t0 = 1.2 mm

ϕ2
Figure 15 Sheet thickness distribution for aluminium Figure 16 Forming limit diagram for
alloy AA 6061 using a segmented-elastic aluminium alloy AA 6061
blank holder

The surface distortion shown by the red curve in Figure 15 is located out of the part geometry and is
thus acceptable.
Figure 17 shows the contact interface pressure distribution using the segmented-elastic blank holder
model. It can be recognised that the application of different pin forces leads to varying blank holder
pressure in the flange region. This leads to an optimised material flow in the blank flange area.
Figure 18 represents the equivalent stress distribution (according to von Mises) in the segmented-
elastic blank holder. The maximum computed equivalent stress values in the marked area are to be
regarded as uncritical. They lie below the yield point for the blank holder material GGG 70 and
therefore do not lead to plastic deformation. Using a segmented-elastic blank holder in the numerical
model, it is thus possible to determine the optimal blank holder pressures in the different blank holder

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

8
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

segments and the tool stresses during the forming process. The determination of maximum tool
stresses is to be taken into consideration for the tool design. This is important in the determination of
tool life.

Contact interface pressure in N/mm²

Figure 17 Due to LS-DYNA calculated contact interface pressure of the segmented-elastic

blank holder

Equivalent stress σeq in N/mm²

Figure 18 Equivalent stress σeq of the segmented-elastic blank holder calculated using LS-DYNA

A tool for hydromechanical deep drawing with segmented-elastic blank holder was designed based on
the numerical results. The experimental investigation are found to be in close correlation with the
process simulation results. The failure and results of process optimisation are shown in Figure 19.

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

9
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany

 Wrinkles in the flange area due to insufficient blank holder force Wall wrinkles occurring due to a non-optimised counter pressure curve

Deep drawn T-shaped component with optimised process parameters (aluminium alloy AA 6061, t0 = 1.2 mm, draw depth 100 mm)

Figure 19 Comparison of the process simulation results with experimental deep drawn parts

4. Conclusions and Outlook

Different tool designs and process control parameters for hydromechanical deep drawing of a
T-shaped aluminium alloy AA6061-T0 were investigated. A tool for hydromechanical deep drawing of
T-shaped parts was built using the numerical results. The T-shaped component could be produced in
the required quality without preliminary tryout by adjusting the blank holder forces in the individual
segments. Optimisation of the different process parameters (counter pressure, blank holder force)
using the segmented-elastic blank holder was possible as a result of FEM simulation. Possible failures
in the part were identified and avoided by adequate modifications of the tool geometry and the process
parameters.
It is thus to be noted that modelling the blank holder using volume elements leads to exact
determination of process parameters and also the internal tool stresses during the forming process.
This is advantageous in determining the optimal tool design and process sequence.

References
[1] K. Siegert, Sheet Metal Hydroforming, In: K. Siegert (Editor) Hydroforming of Tubes,
B. Lösch Extrusions and Sheet Metals, Vol. 1, MAT-INFO Werkstoff-
Informationsgesellschaft mbH, Frankfurt 1999

[2] K. Siegert Grenzen des Ziehens von Karosserieteilen

Tagungsband UKD´85, 6.-7.3.1985, Darmstadt. Veranstalter: Institut für
Fertigungstechnik e.V., Institut für Umformtechnik, TH Darmstadt

[3] M. Häussermann Vielpunktziehtechnik-Möglichkeiten der Werkzeuggestaltung, In: K. Siegert

(Hrsg.) Neuere Entwicklungen in der Blechumformung, Mat-INFO Werkstoff-
Informationsgesellschaft mbH, Frankfurt 2000

[4] J. Hohnhaus Optimierung des Systems Zieheinrichtung/Werkzeug, In: K. Siegert (Hrsg.)

Neuere Entwicklungen in der Blechumformung, Mat-INFO Werkstoff-
Informationsgesellschaft mbH, Frankfurt 1998
st
[5] B. Oberpriller, Feasibility Study of Hydromechanical Deep Drawn Outer Panels, 21 CAD-
H. Markstädter FEM Users’ Meeting 2003, November 12-14, 2003 International Congress on
FEM Technology

[6] A. Gehle Equipment and die Design Optimisation of Hyfromechanical Deep Drawing,
T. Khandeparkar In: M. Liewald (Editor) Hydroforming of Tubes, Extrusions and Sheet Metals,
Vol. 4, MAT-INFO Werkstoff-Informationsgesellschaft mbH, Frankfurt 2005

[7] J.O. Hallquist LS-DYNA Keyword User’s Manual Version 970, 2003

23rd CADFEM Users’ Meeting 2005

10
International Congress on FEM Technology
with ANSYS CFX & ICEM CFD Conference

November 9 – 11, 2005, International Congress Center Bundeshaus Bonn, Germany