Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Michael Lindgren
Michael Lindgren
Michael Lindgren
Preface
This work has been carried out at Dalarna University. The nancial support
was provided by the Swedish Foundation for Knowledge and Competence Development (KK-stiftelsen), ORTIC AB, Jernkontoret and Dalarna University.
I would like to thank the following people:
My supervisor, professor Lars-Erik Lindgren for his experienced guidance and
continual support.
Dr Lars Ingvarsson, for sharing his great experience in roll forming with me.
All colleagues at Dalarna University and ORTIC AB, for their friendship and
for making the workplace a great place to be at.
Finally, I would like to thank my family, Jenny, Fanny and Sandra for always
being there.
Borl
ange, November 2009
Michael Lindgren
ii
Abstract
One of the rst questions to consider when designing a new roll forming line
is the number of forming steps required to produce a prole. The number
depends on material properties, the cross-section geometry and tolerance requirements, but the tool designer also wants to minimize the number of forming steps in order to reduce the investment costs for the customer. There are
several computer aided engineering systems on the market that can assist the
tool designing process. These include more or less simple formulas to predict
deformation during forming as well as the number of forming steps. In recent
years it has also become possible to use nite element analysis for the design
of roll forming processes.
The objective of the work presented in this thesis was to answer the following question:
How should the roll forming process be designed for complex geometries and/or
high strength steels?
The work approach included both literature studies as well as experimental
and modelling work. The experimental part gave direct insight into the process
and was also used to develop and validate models of the process. Starting with
simple geometries and standard steels the work progressed to more complex
proles of variable depth and width, made of high strength steels. The results
obtained are published in seven papers appended to this thesis.
In the rst study (see paper 1) a nite element model for investigating the
roll forming of a U-prole was built. It was used to investigate the eect on longitudinal peak membrane strain and deformation length when yield strength
increases, see paper 2 and 3. The simulations showed that the peak strain
decreases whereas the deformation length increases when the yield strength increases. The studies described in paper 4 and 5 measured roll load, roll torque,
springback and strain history during the U-prole forming process. The measurement results were used to validate the nite element model in paper 1. The
results presented in paper 6 shows that the formability of stainless steel (e.g.
AISI 301), that in the cold rolled condition has a large martensite fraction,
iii
can be substantially increased by heating the bending zone. The heated area
will then become austenitic and ductile before the roll forming. Thanks to
the phenomenon of strain induced martensite formation, the steel will regain
the martensite content and its strength during the subsequent plastic straining. Finally, a new tooling concept for proles with variable cross-sections is
presented in paper 7.
The overall conclusions of the present work are that today, it is possible to
successfully develop proles of complex geometries (3D roll forming) in high
strength steels and that nite element simulation can be a useful tool in the
design of the roll forming process.
iv
vi
Notation
Symbols
a
A
b
B
BB
c
C
DS
D
E
e
ep
et
ej
f
fs
Fn
Ft
h
hl
HC , d
H, g
I
kl
L
LS
n
p
R1
Flange length
Integration constant
Web width
Integration constant
The width of the at strip used to formed the nished prole
Forming length
Relative sliding velocity
Diameter of the shaft
Tolerance distance or horizontal distance between the forming steps
Youngs modulus
Longitudinal engineering strain in the edge of the ange
Longitudinal peak strain in the edge of the ange
Transverse longitudinal strain in the ange
Extra pass.
Yield criterion
Tolerance factor.
Normal force
Tangential force
The distance from the neutral layer to the inner side of the bend
The vertical distance from where the prole will hit the lower
tool to the roll gap between the upper and lower tool
Horizontal distance between two forming steps
Height of the nished prole
Second moment of inertia
Constants used in transverse bending
Deformation length
Length of a shaft
Number of forming steps
Perpendicular moment arm
Female tool radius
vii
r
r0
s
sij
sf
t
Us
VC
vr
Wb
Ws
Wsl
Wt
Y, y
z
x
X
z
1,2
Ls , x
Lb
t
y
pij
, xy
viii
List of Figures
1.1
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
4
5
6
7
10
10
12
13
14
15
15
3.8
3.9
3.10
3.11
3.12
3.13
3.14
3.15
3.16
3.17
3.18
3.19
4.1
4.2
17
19
19
22
24
25
26
27
28
28
33
33
36
37
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
4.8
4.9
4.10
4.11
4.12
4.13
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
This gure shows only half of the U-channel because the symmetry and the rosette strain gage is bonded on the top surface
close to the edge of one ange. The longitudinal direction is
the same as x-direction and the transverse direction is same as
y-direction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The roll load in z-direction was measured with two donut cells.
The torque sensor was used to measure the roll torque and it
was mounted between the lower tool and power transmission.
The equipment measured the forces of each forming step, one
by one. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The spring back, width and depth between the dierent forming
steps were measured with a sliding caliper. . . . . . . . . . . . .
The picture shows the prototype resistance heating machine and
the steel strip which was fed through the machine by wheels
made of copper. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
A sketch of the electrical circuit of the prototype resistance
heating machine. Wikstr
om [56]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The tools and the ower pattern. The V-section was roll formed
in 6 forming steps, from 15o to 120o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The experimental equipment used for research and prototyping
of 3D roll formed proles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The experimental equipment has 6 forming stands. Each stand
has 4 units (tool holders) that can rotate and translate. . . . .
View from the top: The prole is roll formed in six passes and
to do that the prole must go through the machine two times.
Forming stands number 1, 3 and 5 form the left side and forming
stands number 2, 4, and 6 form the right side. . . . . . . . . . .
View from the back. The geometry of the tools is the same for
all forming stands. The only dierence is that the tools for the
ange are moving up and closer to the tools that hold the web,
for example bend angles 30o and 60o . Tools with a constant
radius have been used, Chaing [9]. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The xture used. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The nite element model described in paper 5, Lindgren [37]. .
The geometry of the tools and the corresponding ower pattern
described in paper 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Four forming stands were used. The two rst stands were used
as a belt feeder, the other two forming stands have the same
bend angle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The tensile test data for the materials used in paper 5. . . . . .
xi
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
44
45
46
47
48
49
51
5.5
xii
52
Contents
1 Introduction
1.1 Design of the roll forming process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.2 Research Question and Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
1
2
3
3
5
3 Literature Survey
3.1 Experimental work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.1 Strain histories in roll forming . . . . . . .
3.1.2 Longitudinal membrane strain . . . . . . .
3.1.3 Deformation length . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.4 Roll load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2 Theoretical work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.1 Number of forming steps . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.2 Deformation types . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.3 Deformation length . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.4 Longitudinal membrane strain . . . . . . .
3.2.5 Geometrical restriction from the female tool
3.2.6 Roll forming of high strength steel . . . . .
3.2.7 Bending method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3 Computer simulation of roll forming . . . . . . . .
3.4 3D roll forming, proles with variable cross-section
4 Experimental setup
4.1 The roll forming experiment . . . . .
4.1.1 The roll forming machine and
4.1.2 The tools . . . . . . . . . . .
4.1.3 Strain measurement . . . . .
4.1.4 Roll load and roll torque . . .
4.1.5 Spring back . . . . . . . . . .
xiii
. . .
data
. . .
. . .
. . .
. . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . . . . . . .
acquisition equipment
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
9
9
9
9
11
12
13
13
17
19
21
22
23
25
26
32
35
35
35
35
36
38
39
xiv
4.2
4.3
Contents
Partial heating experiment . . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.1 Furnace experiment . . . . . . . . . .
4.2.2 Prototype resistance heating machine
4.2.3 Roll forming machine and tools . . . .
4.2.4 Sample preparation . . . . . . . . . .
3D Roll forming experiment . . . . . . . . . .
4.3.1 The 3D roll forming machine . . . . .
4.3.2 The tooling concept . . . . . . . . . .
4.3.3 Measuring equipment . . . . . . . . .
5 Computational model
5.1 Nonlinear solution procedure and
5.2 The geometry . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3 Shell element . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4 Material model . . . . . . . . . .
5.5 Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6 Summary
6.1 Paper
6.2 Paper
6.3 Paper
6.4 Paper
6.5 Paper
6.6 Paper
6.7 Paper
of
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
appended papers
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
convergence
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
criteria
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
. . . . .
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
40
40
41
41
42
42
42
43
45
.
.
.
.
.
47
48
48
50
50
51
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
53
53
53
54
54
55
55
56
57
Bibliography
61
Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1
Roll forming is a metal forming process which is spread throughout the world.
Today, roll forming products have numerous applications, for example in buildings, airplanes and the automotive sector as well as in furniture and domestic
appliances, see Figure 1.1. Roll forming is a highly productive process and its
use increases every year, Halmos [19]. Compared to other metal forming processes the benet of this process is that auxiliary operations, such as punching,
welding, clenching etc. can be included, which makes it possible to produce
proles that are ready to use directly.
Figure 1.1. Roll formed products have many applications in the automotive sector,
buildings, domestic appliances etc.
Introduction
When a new roll forming machine is designed the tool designer must decide
how many forming steps are required to form the prole. The number of steps
depends on the cross-section, tolerances, nish of the surface and material
properties. Today there are several computer aided engineering (CAE) systems, for example ORTIC System [27], COPRA RF [15], PROFIL [55], that
can support the tool designer in creating tools. CAE systems use more or
less simple formulas and rules of thumb for predicting the number of forming
steps and suggesting geometry of the tools. Some CAE programs also include
computerized simulation techniques, for example based on the nite dierence
method, Duggal[12], for investigating tool design proposed by the program.
The advantage of this type of analysis is that the simulation time can be very
short. A few years ago nite element analysis was not used for designing roll
forming processes or roll formed proles. Today, however, there are examples
of new proles successfully developed with the help of nite element simulations. This research was devoted to nite element simulations as well as
experiments, and great eort was put into building experimental equipment.
The experiments were carried out in parallel with the building of nite element
models and simpler models.
1.2
Chapter 2
Figure 2.1. The strip is formed in several steps, beginning with an undeformed strip
and ending with the nished prole, Lund et al. [41].
All materials that can be bent, such as aluminium, steel, stainless steel, copper,
can also be roll formed and the material can be pre-painted or pre-coated. The
speed at which a prole can be produced varies between 15 m/min and 185
m/min, Tool and Manufacturing Engineers Handbook [3], depending on the
tolerance of the cross-section, the material and how fast the machine can be
fed with raw material or how fast the nished product can be removed from
the run out table. The thickness of material that can be roll formed ranges
from 0.15 mm to 19 mm, Kolev [31]. The roll forming process is very robust
provided it is set up correctly, and the geometry of the proles produced shows
only small variations. However, the prole can have defects as bows, twist,
are, spring back and oil-canning, see Figure 2.3, if the roll forming process is
not well designed. Many defects depend on the number of forming steps being
too small, which gives residual stresses in the prole that cause unwanted
deformations.
Figure 2.2. The material in the ange will travel a longer distance than the material
in the bending zone. The dierence will cause strain (e) in the ange. In this gure
(H) represents the ange length, (L) the deformation length and (e) the strain in the
ange, Lund et al. [41].
Figure 2.3. Dierent defects that can occur in the nished prole if the roll forming
process is not well designed. From left: twist, are and oil canning, Ingvarsson [27].
Today simulations are used more and more in the industry and especially so
in the automotive sector for industrial engineering, crash tests, sheet metal
forming and so on. The need of simulation also includes roll formed products.
Important advantages of the nite element analysis are that not only can it
provide the same information as computerized simulations, it also includes the
eect of lead gates, see Figure 2.4, and end eect of pre-cut material among
other things.
Figure 2.4. Lead gate is used to guide the prole into the tools and checked lead
gate is used to control the strip laterally.
In the last 10 years a number of research papers have been published where
more or less simplied simulation models have been compared with experiments, for instance Hellborg [24], Bui and Ponthot [8], Sukmoo et al. [53] and
paper 5 in this work, Lindgren [37]. These studies show that the nite element
method is a very valuable tool in designing the roll forming process. Some of
the simplied models also show the possibility of shortening the simulation
time, for example by ignoring the friction between sheet and tooling. Today
there are commercial programs that can reduce the time spent on modelling
the process, COPRA RF [15]. In combination with increased computer capacity this makes the nite element modelling a standard tool in designing the
roll forming process.
2.2
3D roll forming
The use of the roll forming process grows every year thanks to the possibility of forming complicated products in dierent metals in combination with
high productivity. Until eight years ago a disadvantage of roll forming was
that only sections with a constant cross-section could be produced. Today
the problem is solved, ORTIC [1], and 3D roll forming technology is used in
the building industry to produce panels with variable cross-sections and variable longitudinal curvature. The method is very exible which means that
panels can be produced with the same set-up of roll forming tools. For ex-
ample, the Budapest Arena is covered with about 4700 dierent, individually
shaped panels. The automotive industry has become interested in 3D roll
forming as a result of the methods exibility making it particularly suitable
for components made of high strength steels. However, the automotive industry demands design rules, simulations and prototypes to be convinced of
the benets. To meet their demands, probably one of the worlds rst 3D
roll-forming machines, with two translational and two rotational degrees of
freedom per axis, was built within this research work (see Chapter 4). Experiences and results obtained are presented in depth in paper 7, Lindgren and
Ingmarsson [39], of this thesis. Examples of manufactured proles are shown
in Figure 2.5 and Figure 2.6. For the same purpose more or less advanced
experimental equipment have been built by other research institutes and universities also, including the Labein Tecnalia [46], the University of Technology
in Darmstadt [16], Takushoku University in Tokyo [44].
Figure 2.5. 3D roll formed proles in paper 7, Lindgren and Ingmarsson [39]. From
the top: a straight section, a hat-section with a waist on one side and nally a hatsection conical in depth and width.
Today, only a few papers describe nite element simulations of 3D roll forming,
Gulceken et al. [18]. The main dierence between traditional roll forming and
3D roll forming is that modelling the 3D process requires much more work
since the motion of every tool must be exactly described. In the nal paper of
this thesis, Lindgren and Ingmarsson [39], a new tooling concept is described
where hat-proles with variable depth and width are roll formed. In parallel
with the tooling concept, a rst nite element model was developed and used
to simulate the process, Sagstrom [48], see Figure 2.7. These results are not
included in the thesis.
Figure 2.6. U-proles roll formed in the experimental 3D roll forming machine.
Figure 2.7. a) 3D roll forming simulation of the tooling concept in Paper 7, Lindgren
and Ingmarsson [39]. b) The real tools which are modelled in a).
Chapter 3
Literature Survey
A literature survey of research concerned with the roll forming process is
presented below. The chapter is divided into four parts: experimental works,
theoretical work, computer simulations and 3D roll forming.
3.1
3.1.1
Experimental work
Strain histories in roll forming
The strain history, when roll forming a U-prole, has been measured in several
experiments, [9], [4], [51]. These experiments show, see Figure 3.1, that the
longitudinal ange strain starts between the forming stations and increases
rapidly to a maximum value just before the centre of the forming station. The
web strain exhibits the same behaviour but the strain is more compressive.
These strains decrease rapidly when approaching the roll centre. Some strains
cause residual stresses that give rise to defects on the nished prole. Chiang
[9] also measured the longitudinal membrane strain across the strip when
forming a U-prole and a V-prole. The measurement results showed that the
strain is largest at the ange edge.
3.1.2
10
Literature Survey
Figure 3.1. This gure shows the strain histories of the longitudinal web strain and
the longitudinal membrane ange strain for two forming stations.
When multiple roll stations were used (0o o1 0o ), where the rst and
last forming steps were at rolls, the longitudinal strain was reduced by
10 15 % more than in the case with a single station.
With multiple roll stations (0o o1 o2 ) the strain level was on the
same level as in the case (0o o1 0o ).
The level of peak strain depends on the bend angle increment =
(o2 o1 ) and not the roll angle used at the roll station.
Figure 3.2. The denition of the parameters for the bend angle and the bend angle
increment.
Chiang [9] investigated how ange length (a), web width (b) and bend angle
() eect the web strain and the longitudinal membrane strain in the ange of
11
a U-prole. A single roll station was used to study the bend angle, and the result obtained was similar to those obtained by Bhattacharyya and Smith. The
longitudinal strain increased almost linearly with the bend angle but the variation for the web strain was small. In the experiment with varying ange length
the longitudinal strain decreased when the ange length increased. When the
web width increased the longitudinal strain slightly decreased, see Table 3.1.
Table 3.1. The peak strain in the ange edge for various ange lengths and web
widths.
Web(b)
20
20
20
30
30
30
Flange(a)
10
15
20
10
15
20
In an experiment Zhu [57] investigated the inuence of ange length (a), material thickness (t), the bend angle () and bend angle increment () on the
longitudinal strain distribution. The results obtained were as follows:
The longitudinal strain increases in the beginning with a ange length
shorter than 15 mm, but with a ange length over 15 mm the strain
starts to decrease.
When the material thickness increases the longitudinal strain increases
as well.
An increasing bend angle increment increases the longitudinal strain.
An increasing bend angle at a constant bend angle increment decreases
the longitudinal strain. For example, the longitudinal strain is higher for
0o 20o than for 20o 40o . This was not obtained by Bhattacharyya
and Smith [4].
3.1.3
Deformation length
In a study Bhattacharyya et al. [5] formed a U-prole and measured the deformation length, see Figure 3.3, for mild steel and aluminium. The results were
compared with a model, equation 3.1, which they had developed. The derivation of the deformation length will be reviewed in the section on theoretical
work.
8a3
(3.1)
L=
3t
12
Literature Survey
3.1.4
Roll load
Bhattacharyya et al. [6] also investigated the roll load when U-proles of mild
steel with thicknesses of 0.6 mm, 1.0 mm and 1.2 mm, as well as a U-prole
of aluminium with a thickness of 0.6 mm, were roll formed. The investigated
bend angles () ranged from 20o to 40o at intervals of 5o , and to simulate
multiple roll pass situations a roll schedule of 0o o 0o where o was
chosen as above. The width of 40 mm to 60 mm was formed depending on
which ange length (a) was used. The roll load was measured with a load
dynamometer. The roll clearance was set to give an initial bite of 200 N and
this roll load was subtracted from the measured roll load. The result from
the experiment was compared with a model, equation 3.2, which they had
developed. The derivation of equation 3.2 is extensive and can be found in
Bhattacharyya et al. [6]. The following is a brief explanation: the rst term
in equation 3.2 is load caused by bending and stretching of the prole. The
second term is from the reverse bending casing by the prole will curve down
after the rst roll station and then be lifted up by the next roll station, see
Figure 3.4. The second term comes from small deection theory.
13
P =Y
2t3 3 a
3hl EI
+
2
3 sin (D X)3
(3.2)
Figure 3.4. The prole will be reversely bent since the prole will be curved down
and then lifted up (hl) by the next roll station.
3.2
3.2.1
Theoretical work
Number of forming steps
The number of forming steps that a prole requires depends on material properties and the complexity of the prole. Other factors such as the part width,
horizontal centre distance between the passes and the part tolerances must also
be taken into account. However, a standard method to calculate the number
14
Literature Survey
of forming steps does not exist, Halmos [19], so below a number of dierent
approaches are described. A common method used to calculate the number of
forming steps is the forming angle method [3], see Figure 3.5. In the following
example the calculation of a simple section is described.
To determine the number of passes you take the height (g) of the nished
prole and the distance between the forming stands (d) and use the derived
equation 3.5 below. The method is based on the amount of forming per length.
That a conservative forming angle (C) is 1.5o can be kept in mind as rule of
thumb.
The following notation and equations 3.3 - 3.5 are used to calculate the number of forming steps:
n
c
g
=
=
=
=
=
(3.3)
15
c = (n 1)d.
(3.4)
Figure 3.6. The ower method: the engineer starts with a nished prole and
progressively unfolds it to a at strip.
In the ower method, [9] the tool engineer starts with a nished section and
gradually unfolds the prole to a at strip, see Figure 3.6. The way the prole
will be unfolded and the number of forming steps is up to the tool designer
to decide. However, a successful use of this method requires a great deal of
experience, and the method can be very time consuming when applied to more
complex shapes.
Figure 3.7. Front view and side view of the roll forming mill used in the Algorithm,
equation 3.6 to 3.11, [41].
A method to roughly estimate the machine design and number of forming step
for a prole is proposed in [41]. Figures 3.7 - 3.8 and the section below present
16
Literature Survey
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
The logic Algorithm, Equation 3.6 - 3.11 in [41] consists of the rules below
that should be fullled by a design. It is used to roughly estimate the machine
design.
LS 1.2BB .
DS
LS
min 30mm.
7
(3.6)
(3.7)
VC 1.5DS + 2H.
(3.8)
(3.9)
(3.10)
n>
75u
.
HC
(3.11)
The drawback to this method is that thickness and yield strength of the material used are not taken into account.
To predict the number of forming steps Halmos [19] proposes an empirical
equation to be used as a guide. The equation 3.12 was not fully tested at the
publishing date of [19].
n = [0.237H 0.8 +
Y 2.1 0.15
0.834 d
][
+
] s(1 + 0.5z) + ej + fs + 5zsf . (3.12)
t0.87
90 0.003Us
17
Figure 3.8. u is the distance from the edge of a at strip to the edge of the nished
prole. In this case u is used to calculate the number of forming steps, equation 3.11.
where
n =
Y =
H =
t =
Us =
d =
sf =
fs =
z =
ej =
3.2.2
Deformation types
In a bending operation the major part of the deformation occurs in a transverse direction. In roll forming, which also is a bending operation although
the bending is made gradually, other deformation types besides deformation in
the transverse direction can occur. Paton et al. [45] propose four fundamental
deformation types: longitudinal stretching, longitudinal bending, transverse
bending and shear.
The following assumptions were made to derive the deformation types, see
Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10:
The thickness of the strip is small compared to other geometrical dimensions.
Bending only takes place in the fold line of the active bend.
Deformation at the inboard side is neglected.
18
Literature Survey
The outboard region remains constant in the cross-section and rotates
around the active bend.
Transverse sections of the strip remain plane and the prole is bent as
a beam. The latter means that cross-sections remain orthogonal to the
centreline along the prole.
With help of the innitesimal element of length dz, see Figure 3.9 and 3.10,
the following strain models were derived:
Longitudinal stretching
1
d
Ls = r2 ( )2 .
2
dz
(3.13)
d2
d
p( )2 )).
2
dz
dz
(3.14)
where (h) is the distance from the neutral layer to the inner side of the bend,
(s) is parallel moment arm and (p) is the perpendicular moment arm.
Shear
= p(
d
).
dz
(3.15)
h
.
r0
(3.16)
Transverse bending
t =
19
3.2.3
Deformation length
Bhattacharyya et al. [5] derived an expression for the deformation length (L),
see Figure 3.3, by minimising the total plastic work (Wt ) for the bending in
transverse and longitudinal direction. They made the following assumptions:
The material is rigid perfectly plastic.
The bend only takes place along the fold line.
Out of plane bending of the ange and the longitudinal bending of the
web are neglected.
The ange adopts a shape that minimises the plastic work.
Plastic work due to transverse bending
20
Literature Survey
1
Wb = Y t2 .
4
(3.17)
(3.18)
(3.19)
1
1
d
[ Y t2 + Y a3 t( )2 ]dz.
4
6
dz
(3.20)
The function (z) that minimises the Equation 3.20 satises the Euler Equation 3.21
dF
d F
d2
3t
( ) 2 3 = 0.
d
dz
dz
4a
where F = F (z, , ) =
t
4
(3.21)
a3 d 2
6 ( dz )
3t 2
z + Az + B.
8a3
(3.22)
The end conditions give the integration constants (A) and (B), (0) = 0,
(L) = , (0) = 0 and (L) = 0.
The end conditions and Equation 3.22 give the deformation length
8a3
.
L=
3t
(3.23)
21
where () is the bend angle increment, (t) is the thickness of the material
and (a) is the ange length.
3.2.4
Chiang [9] developed two models, (A) and (B) for the longitudinal membrane
strain. Model (A) was based on a publication by Bhattacharyya et al. [5],
equation 3.24, and a model (B) that Chiang derived by geometrical considerations, equation 3.27.
equation 3.13 and equation 3.22 give model (A)
e=
9 t2 2 2 0ra
( )r z |0zL .
32 a6
(3.24)
The peak strain and transverse strain be obtained from Equation 3.24 in model
(A). The peak strain for the ange edge, (r = a, z = L), is written:
3 t
ep = ( ).
4 a
(3.25)
(3.26)
9 t2
2
32 ( a6 )z
Chiang compared model (A) with an experiment and concluded that the model
overestimated the strain three times when approaching the roll station.
Model (B) based on geometry for the engineering strain in the ange edge is
written:
e=
1+
3t
(1 cos ) 1.
4a
(3.27)
The model predicts that the strain is uniform in the deformation zone but gives
no information about the transverse strain. Compared with an experiment,
model (B) gave a closer approximation of the value of the peak strain than
model (A).
22
3.2.5
Literature Survey
Zhu [57] studied how the geometry of the tool inuences the bend angle in the
ange of a U-prole. The forming was divided into three stages, see Figure
3.11, the rst stage being when the bend angle does not change, stage two
when the bend angle changes but the strip is not in contact with the tool and
the third stage being when the strip is contact with the tool.
Figure 3.11. The bend angle is divided into three stages: stage one when the angle
does not change, stage two when the angle changes but the strip is not in contact
with the tool and stage three when the strip is contact with the tool.
Zhu studied both horizontal and vertical rolls, but it is the study of horizontal
tool that is discussed here. Zhu developed models applicable to three cases:
a) the roll fully overlaps the outer edge of the ange.
b) the outer edge of the ange overlaps the roll at any position.
c) the outer edge of the ange overlaps the roll initially.
Only case a) is presented below since in practise case b) and c) are not utilized.
The model obtained for case a) is
a2 cos2
sin(2 )
z =L
+ 2aR1
a2 .
(3.28)
cos2 2
cos 2
Zhu assumed that the derivative for equation 3.28 could be used to predict
forming severities at the point where the strip get in contact with the female
tool for the rst time. The derivative is
23
d
=
dz
Lz
a2
sin 2
2 cos2 2
2)
+ aR1 cos(
cos 2
(3.29)
The theoretical work was compared with the experiment and the conclusions
were as follows:
A concept, the bend angle curve, was proposed and there was a good
agreement between the predicted bend angle distribution and the experimental results.
The longitudinal membrane strain reaches a maximum when the strip
gets in contact with the female tool for the rst time.
An increased ange length will decrease the longitudinal membrane strain.
Increased tool radius will decrease the longitudinal membrane strain.
The longitudinal peak membrane strain increases with increasing bend
angle increment.
Constant bend angle increment and an increasing bend angle decreases
the longitudinal peak membrane strain. However, when the bend angle
is close to 90o the opposite eect will occur.
3.2.6
One project [54] involved the roll forming of both a V-prole made of high
strength steel, yield strength 1000 MPa, and a V-prole made of mild steel,
yield strength 250 MPa. In both cases the V-channel was roll formed in four
steps: 15o , 30o , 45o and 60o . The V-prole made of high strength steel was
straight after the forming whereas the prole made of mild steel was curved,
see Figure 3.12.
Ingvarsson [28] derived a simple formula, equation 3.30, based on geometry
for the longitudinal engineering strain in the ange of the V-channel used in
the project [54].
The simple formula was:
a2 sin2 Vc2 Vc
.
(3.30)
e=
Vc
where (Vc ) is the vertical distance between the centre of upper and lower tool.
In this case the deformation length (L) was simplied with (Vc ).
24
Literature Survey
Figure 3.12. The V-prole made of high strength steel and mild steel were roll
formed in four forming steps: 15o , 30o , 45o and 60o . The V-prole made of high
strength steel was straight after forming but the prole made of mild steel was not.
Ingvarsson calculated the longitudinal strain, equation 3.30 for the case with
the V-prole and compared it with the maximum elastic strain, equation 3.31,
for both mild and high strength steel used in the experiment [54]. The result
showed that in the case with mild steel the strain in the ange was larger than
the maximum elastic strain, and therefore both elastic and plastic strain were
present during the forming. In the case with high strength steel only elastic
strain was present. Plastic strain will give residual strain and in this case
the channel made of mild steel was curved. The conclusion drawn was that
it is advantageous to use high strength steel in roll forming since it will have
smaller plastic strain in the anges and as a result smaller residual strain as
well.
Y
.
(3.31)
E
where E is Youngs modulus and Y is the yield strength for the material.
eelastic =
Sagstr
om et al. [49] studied the inuence of roll forming on the tolerances of
pre-punched holes in a hat-prole made of dierent ultra high strength steels.
25
Furthermore, the amount of springback and are for these steels was observed.
They concluded by measurements that the holes maintained their shape and
that they could be pre-punched, with high tolerances requirements, close to the
ange edges before the roll forming started. Their investigation also showed
that the are in the end of a prole will be smaller with increasing yield
strength, see 3.13, and a parameter for this phenomenon called Delta Flare
was introduced. The denition of Delta Flare is the dierence between the
springback at the end of a prole and the springback in the centre of the same
prole. A suggested explanation to decreasing are was that increasing yield
strength gives less residual stresses that could cause are in the proles.
Figure 3.13. Delta Flare is the dierence between the springback in the centre of
the prole and the end of the prole. This is a plot for 4 dierent ultra high strength
steels with various yield strength.
Galdos et al. [14] studied the inuence of material properties on the roll
forming process when a U-prole was formed. The main objectives were to
investigate the longitudinal strain, forming force, springback and longitudinal
bow for steels ranging from mild to ultra high strength steels. Both nite
element simulations and experiments were used in the study. Their conclusion was that the maximum longitudinal peak strain decreases when the yield
strength increases. The experiment also showed that increasing yield strength
gives a slight, longitudinal bow, which possibly is the result of a smaller peak
strain in the prole.
3.2.7
Bending method
Two dierent proles are shown in Figure 3.14: one C-prole and one top-hat
prole. The C-prole can be roll formed mainly by bending, but forming the
top-hat prole requires both bending and drawing in the bending zone [13].
When bending is used to form a prole the spring back will be large and the
longitudinal residual stresses in the bending zone will be small. In the case
26
Literature Survey
when both bending and drawing are used to form the prole the spring back
will be smaller whereas the longitudinal residual stresses in the bending zone
will be larger, Ingvarsson [26], Lindgren [32]. In roll forming the eect of
drawing can be reduced depending on which bending method that is used,
see Figure 3.15. For example, if the most common method called constant
arc length is used, the thinning of the material will be reduced. This gives
less longitudinal residual stresses in the bending zone, than when the constant
radius-method is used. The latter method, on the other hand, gives more
stretch forming and thus a smaller spring back. Another method called the
variable radius and variable arc length- method, gives a large spring back but
small longitudinal residual stresses.
Figure 3.14. To the left a C-prole is roll formed in 8 passes and to the right a
top-hat prole is roll formed in 5 passes. The C-prole is formed mainly by bending
whereas the top-hat prole is formed both by bending and drawing [13].
3.3
(3.32)
HC = (U2 U1 ).
(3.33)
where HC is the horizontal distance between two forming stands and U is the
coordinate in longitudinal direction, Figure 3.16
27
Figure 3.15. This gure shows three dierent ways of forming a 90o prole. One
way is to let the tools have the same radius in every forming step and dierent arc
length. Another way is to let the arc length be the same in every forming step but
decrease the tool radius. These methods give dierent spring back and longitudinal
residual stresses in the bending zone. The constant arc length is the method most
commonly used.
The shape function has a built in parameter (q, q > 1), i.e. a low value of
q gives a surface with a curvature that gradually increases when the strip is
approaching the forming tools whereas a larger value describes a curvature
that increases slowly in the beginning and faster just before the tools, see Figure 3.17. To determine the value of (q) a minimization of the total power of
deformation in the strip between the forming stands is done through a mathematical procedure.
To describe the deformed curved surface, the following equation is used:
U = U (u, v).
(3.34)
(3.35)
(3.36)
U = U1 U2 .
(3.37)
28
Literature Survey
Figure 3.16. The deformed sheet between roll stand (i) and roll stand (i + 1). The
neutral layer of the sheet is described by the shape function, Equation 3.32.
29
where
W1 , V1 = W and V coordinates of the cross section of the prole at the roll
stand (i) at U = U1
W2 , V2 = W and V coordinates of the cross section of the prole at the roll
stand (i + 1) at U = U2
Boundary conditions and Equation 3.35 and Equation 3.36 give:
When U = U1 , S(U ) = 0, V = V1 (v) and W = W1 (v)
When U = U2 , S(U ) = 1, V = V2 (v) and W = W2 (v)
The equations 3.34 - 3.37 are purely geometric descriptions of the 3D shape of
the deformed strip, which do not take into account the stresses. To calculate
stress and strain a steady-state deformation is assumed between roll stand (i)
and roll stand (i + 1). The strip is divided into a suitable number of elements
and a incremental theory of plasticity is used to calculated the stress and
strain in the strip. The details are given in Hallmos [19]. Kiuchi et al. [30]
developed a computed aided design system that includes the above mention
method. The system has successfully been used to design tools for circular
tubes.
Duggal et al. [12], [11] used the computer aided simulation program RFPASS in a study. The program is based on the mathematical model developed
by Kiuchi et al. [30] and a nite dierence method. The program uses an
elastic-plastic formulation and can be used for analysing multiple roll stations. In the study a simulation of a U-prole was compared with an experiment done by Bhattacharrya and Smith [4]. Duggal et al. concluded that
the peak longitudinal strain deviated less then 2 % between the simulation
and the experiment. The longitudinal residual strains obtained from the RFPASS dropped more then measured strains, which can be explained by the
assumption of a sinusoidal shape for the movement of the sheet. RFPASS can
be used, at least for simple sections, to assist the tool designer. Furthermore,
other surface models than the sinusoidal shape function will be investigated
in future studies.
Han et al. [22] developed a B3 -spline nite strip method to simulate the roll
forming process. The displacement of the strip was modelled with two types
of shape functions. In the longitudinal direction the strip was modelled with
B3 -spline functions and in the transverse direction it was modelled with Hermitian cubic polynomials. Han et al. [22] introduced the updated-Lagrangian
method of the nite element theory to the nite strip method. The model
used accounted for large deformation strain and displacement. Prandtl-Reuss
plasticity ow theory and the von Mises yield criteria were also applied. Han
30
Literature Survey
et al. have written several articles, for example [20] and [21], where they describe how the method was used to analyse simple sections and parameters
that eect the design. The conclusion drawn was that the results from the
simulations agree with observations of roll forming in practise.
Rebelo et al. [47] compared the relative eectiveness of implicit and explicit
nite element analysis in metal forming. The simulated U-prole was modelled with 4-node shells - 20 through the width and 40 through the length. The
strip was pulled through three roll stations and the rigid rolls rotated freely.
The material was modelled as an elastic-plastic material with a yield strength
of 229 MPa and with Youngs moduls of 206.7 GPa. The implicit nite element analysis was almost three times faster (47 CPU hours) than the explicit
analysis (125 CPU hours). The conclusion was the implicit formulation has a
relative advantage, since the problem is rather one dimensional and therefore
has a small wave front.
Brunet et al. [7] developed a master 2D cross-section model with a slave
3D analysis. The 2D analysis was a generalised plane-strain analysis and for
the 3D analysis a thick shell element was used. The tools were modelled as
rigid surfaces and instead of rotating tools they were modelled as rigid surfaces
continuously moving from one forming station to the next station. The friction
between the sheet and the tools was modelled as Coulomb friction. Both the
3D and the 2D analyses included Hills anisotropic model of initial anisotropy
with isotropic hardening. The computed longitudinal deection was compared
with the measured deection in order to validate the model. Brunet et al.
concluded that there was a reasonable dierence between the model and the
experiment.
Heislitz et al. [23] used the explicit code PAM-STAMP to simulate roll
forming. The strip was pulled through the rolls with constant speed. The
rolls were not rotating and the friction between the strip and the rolls was
ignored. Two dierent elements were tried: 8-node brick elements and four
node shell elements. In the nal simulations, however, they used 8-node brick
element. The tools were modelled with rigid 4-node shell elements. The mass
density was increased with a factor 100 without inertia eects aecting the
result. The material model used was Swifts isotropic strain hardening and
Hookes law. The simulations were compared with an experiment and the
maximum deviation was about 10%. The conclusions from the simulations
were as follows:
The adaptive mesh renement can help to speed up the simulation.
At the current status of development, the simulation of roll forming by
using PAM-STAMP is not very ecient due to the required CPU time.
The simulation time for a U-channel was 250 CPU hours.
31
FEM code PAM-STAMP can be used to accurately simulate roll forming. It is possible to produce both the strain distribution and the nal
geometry after spring back.
Sukmoo et al. [53] used the nite element program (COPRA FEA-RF) to
simulate the roll forming of a U-prole and compared the deformation length
with an experiment described in literature. The FE-program COPRA FEARF is a rigid-plastic nite element analysis that uses a combined 2D and a
3D algorithm. One conclusion from the study was that the work hardening
exponent has the most signicant eect on the forming length. Increasing
work hardening exponent gives increasing forming length. Sukmoo et al. also
concluded that it was a good agreement between the simulation results and
the experiment.
Alsamhan et al. [2] utilised the FE-code EPFEP3, which is a 3D implicit
elastic-plastic FE program, to developed a remeshing technique for simulating
roll forming. A dual mesh was used: one for storing the deformation history
and another for FE computational. The conclusion drawn from the simulation
was that the computational time was much less compared to a conventional
FE-model. The result from the simulation was also acceptable compared to
computations without remeshing.
Sheu [52] used LS-DYNA explicit nite element code to simulate a roll
formed U-channel. The study comprised the inuence of friction, corner radius, rolling speed and changing rate of bend angle on the ange angle deviation and the ange length deviation of a 90o U-prole. In the simulation
the front end of the strip was xed and the tools were moved towards the
strip with a given velocity curve. To minimise the number of trails, in this
case 9 trail runs, a reduced factorial design L9 (34 ) was used. The conclusion
drawn from this study was that the bend angle changing rate and rolling speed
are important factors for the bend angle deviation. As concerns the length
deviations all factors are equally important.
Salmani et al. [50] used ABAQUS implicit FE-package to investigate localized edge buckling in a symmetric channel section when dierent bend angles
were used. Here only the model itself will be described. The tools were modelled as rigid surfaces and they rotated to drive the strip forward. A friction
coecient of 0.2 was assumed. The strip was modelled with a four node
shell element and ve integration points through the thickness were used. An
elastic-plastic material model was implemented as a table in the software. A
comparison was made between the model and an experiment done by Bhattacharyya and Smith [4]. The conclusion was that the deformation history in
the ange edge of the prole was similar to the deformation history in experiment and the error between the membrane peak strain ranged from 0 to 12
% depending on the bend angle.
32
Literature Survey
Bui and Ponthot [8] used the in-house nite element code Metafor to simulate a roll formed U-prole and compared the result with experiments in
literature. The strip was modelled with a 8-noded brick element and with
renement of the mesh in the bending zone. The tools were modelled as rigid
surfaces. The mechanical behaviour of the material was described by Swift
isotropic strain hardening law. The speed of the rolls and the friction between
them and the sheet were studied. Coulomb friction = 0 and = 0.2 were
tested. The result showed that the friction did not inuence the springback
and the longitudinal strain to any great extent, and the speed inuenced the
result only moderately. Bui and Ponthot concluded that the nite element
models can be simplied especially for complex proles, for example by ignoring the friction and thereby saving computer simulation time. They also
concluded that the study conrmed the potential of the nite element simulation in designing the roll forming process.
3.4
In 2001 ORTIC AB [1] developed a new roll forming technology, 3D roll forming, which made it possible to roll form proles with variable cross-sections.
Since then the technology has been used to produce panels that cover buildings
world wide, Ingvarsson [29].
In [33] Lindgren describes how to produce a C-prole with 3D roll forming
technology. Figure 3.18 shows two cross-sections for a C-prole with variable
depth and width and the corresponding blank of sheet metal. The automatic
control system controls the tools so they are always perpendicular to the tool
paths. The tool path is a mathematical description of the bending line which
is generated from the cross-section in the longitudinal direction of the channel.
One way to roll form the C-prole according to Figure 3.18 is to start forming
along the outer bending line and then continue along the inner bending line.
Groche et al. [16] integrated a single exible roll forming stand with a
traditional roll forming line. The objective was to produce U-proles with
variable cross-sections. The stand had tools that could rotate and translate
with the help of servomotors. The control of the motors depended on the feed
rate of the prole which was measured by an encoder. The tools followed a
bending line created in a CAD-System which the control program could read.
In [44] Ona describes a single exible roll forming stand and a slitter roll
stand. The units were controlled with a CPU. The tools and the slitter could
rotate and translate in and out. The equipment was used for producing Uproles with variable cross-sections in the longitudinal direction. The experiments showed that the material in the ange were compressed or stretched,
see Figure 3.19, if the ange was too high.
33
Figure 3.18. To the left: the unfolded C-prole, the blank of sheet metal. To the
right: two dierent cross-sections of the C-prole.
Figure 3.19. A 3D roll-formed U-prole. Tension stress acts on the transition zone
where the U-prole is small and compression stress acts on the transition zone where
the prole is wider.
Groche et al. [17] also developed a semi-empirical model for designing 3D roll
formed U-channels. The model was based on mechanics of buckling of plates
and nite element analyses. The model focused on the compressed area in the
ange of a U-prole with variable cross-section, see Figure 3.19, and it can be
used for feasibility checks without simulation or experimental tests.
34
Literature Survey
G
uleceken et al. [18] used COPRA RF [15] coupled with the nite element
module MSC.Marc to simulate the 3D roll-forming process. The main objective was to study how the exible roll forming process can be modelled and
simulated. The simulated U-channel was modelled with a number of 1274 full
integrated 8-noded hexahedral volume elements. An elastic-plastic material
model where the swift extended power law describes the material hardening
was used. In addition, Von Misses yield criteria and the associated ow rule
were applied. The surface of the tools was modelled using rigid shells. To
control the rotating tools the load control option in the MSC.Marc was used.
The simulation time was only 3-4 CPU hours since the model was relatively
rough. The result showed that the dimensions of the simulated part were close
to the dimensions of the desired prole.
Chapter 4
Experimental setup
The experimental equipment developed and built for the work presented in
the appended papers 4 to 7, is described below.
4.1
Section 4.1 describes the experimental equipment used in the study presented
in paper 4 and 5. The aim of these experiments was to measure strain history,
roll load, roll torque and springback during the roll forming of a U-channel
and to compare the results with nite element simulations.
4.1.1
A universal, spindle type roll-forming mill, Eckhardt [13], with six roll forming
stands and universal joint driven shafts, was used in the experiment, see Figure
4.1. Only the lower shafts were driven. The mill has a three-phase frequency
controlled motor. The horizontal distance between the roll forming stands
is 450 mm and, in this experiment, the vertical distance was 150 mm plus
material thickness. The rst and last forming stands were used as feeder rolls.
The data acquisition equipment came from NATIONAL INSTRUMENTT M
and the software used for measurement was LabVIEWT M .
4.1.2
The tools
The investigated prole was a U-channel where the forming steps had the bend
angles: 20o , 40o , 60o and 80o , see Figure 4.2. The bending method used to
form the prole was the constant arc length method, Chaing [9], which means
that the radius of the neutral layer of the bend decreases in every forming step.
For the bend angles listed above the radii of the neutral layer of material with
35
36
Experimental setup
Figure 4.1. A universal, spindle type roll-forming mill where the lower tools are
driven with universal joint driven shafts.
a thickness of 1mm are 19.8, 9.9, 6.6 and 4.95 mm respectively. The tools
were designed for materials with a thickness of 1 mm but they were used for
materials with thicknesses up to 1.47 mm when roll torque and roll load were
measured. The results imply that the material in the ange will be squeezed
when the bend angle increases. To avoid this phenomenon, with material
thicker than 1 mm the upper tool for a bend angle of 80o was also used as an
upper tool for a bend angle of 60o . The roll pitch radius for the upper and
lower tools was 75 mm.
The lower tools in the two rst forming steps had guides, see Figure 4.2, to
align the material with the machine. These guides inuence the longitudinal
and transversal strain in the strip.
The surface nish of the tools is RZ = 1m, and an abundance of lubrication was applied to have a similar low friction coecient between the dierent
materials and the tools.
4.1.3
Strain measurement
Strain gages were used [25] to measure the biaxial strain history on the top
surface of the ange during the forming process. The strain gage was a
45o /90o /135o rosette, relative to longitudinal direction, with a measuring grid
of 1.5 mm. It was bonded close to the edge of the ange and the grid was
allocated about 2.5 mm from the edge, see Figure 4.3.
37
Figure 4.2. Geometry of the tools used in the experiment. The tools have a bend
angle of 20o , 40o , 60o and 80o .
Figure 4.3. This gure shows only half of the U-channel because the symmetry and
the rosette strain gage is bonded on the top surface close to the edge of one ange.
The longitudinal direction is the same as x-direction and the transverse direction is
same as y-direction.
The grids, 45o /90o /135o , were placed with 2.4 mm in longitudinal direction
(x-direction) between each, to make them follow the same path during the
forming process. The position of the sheet was measured with an encoder,
and with the help of the position the strain measurement results from the
dierent grids were adjusted in time to make them measure the same point in
the process.
The strain in longitudinal and transverse direction was determined with
strain transformation, Dahlberg [10], equation (4.1).
38
Experimental setup
(4.1)
The equation (4.1) and the measurements in 45o /90o /135o give the equation
(4.2) and the equation (4.3) for the longitudinal and transverse strain.
4.1.4
x(longitudinal) = 45 + 135 90 .
(4.2)
y(transverse) = 90 .
(4.3)
The roll load was measured with two donut load cells from Honeywell Sensotec
Sensors. They were mounted in the forming stands on both sides of the upper
tool, see Figure 4.4, and were able to measure a total roll load of 17800 N in
z-direction, Figure 4.3.
Figure 4.4. The roll load in z-direction was measured with two donut cells. The
torque sensor was used to measure the roll torque and it was mounted between the
lower tool and power transmission. The equipment measured the forces of each forming step, one by one.
39
The roll torque was measured with a torque sensor from Burster, which can
measure up to 75 Nm. It was mounted in the universal joint shaft between
the lower tool and the power transmission, see Figure 4.4.
The measurement of the load and torque was made in one forming step at
a time. For example the bend angle 20o was measured when the rst feeder
roll and the roll for a bend angle of 40o also were engaged with the strip, for
measurement of 40o are the rolls for bend angle 20o and 60o engaged at the
same time.
The load and torque are dependent on the tolerance between the thickness
of the roll formed material and the roll gap between upper and lower tools.
The roll gap was adjusted to be 10 % to 15 % wider than the thickness of the
material in order to avoid the material to be squeezed between tools causing
very high load and torque. The roll gap was checked with a feeler gage. This
method also takes into account shaft deection and bearing slackness.
4.1.5
Spring back
The prole will experience some spring back after each forming step and then
deform more and more as it approaches the next step. However, between
springback and deformation, the prole will have a shape that does not change
provided the distance between the forming steps is large enough. In the present
experiments this occurred about 100 mm to 150 mm before and after the
forming step depending on material properties and geometry conditions of the
prole.
The width (y-direction) and depth (z-direction) of the prole were measured, see Figure 4.5, between the forming steps in the area where the shape
does not change. This was done with a sliding caliper, and a measurement
tolerance of about 0.1 mm.
Figure 4.5. The spring back, width and depth between the dierent forming steps
were measured with a sliding caliper.
40
4.2
Experimental setup
Section 4.2 describes the experimental equipment used in the study described
in paper 6, Lindgren et al. [38]. The aim of this study was to partially
heat up the bending area on cold rolled AISI 301 stainless steel and then roll
form the strip. The heating reduced the amount of martensite in this area.
The plastic forming increases the martensite fraction again restoring the yield
strength of the material. The material properties in the bending zone were
then investigated before and after the roll forming process and compared with
heat treated samples from furnace experiments.
4.2.1
Furnace experiment
Samples, with a size of 0.7 15 84 mm, of the cold rolled stainless steel:
AISI 301, were heated in an electrical batch furnace and then quenched in
water. The heat treatment times were 15, 30, 60, 90 and 120 s, respectively,
with temperatures increasing from 500o C to 1200o C, in steps of 100o C each.
Figure 4.6. The picture shows the prototype resistance heating machine and the
steel strip which was fed through the machine by wheels made of copper.
4.2.2
41
The prototype resistance heating machine and a sketch of the electrical circuit are shown in Figure 4.6 and Figure 4.7. The machine consists of a programmable logical control (P LC) system where the rotation speed of the heating wheels can be adjusted. The power used to heat up the material was controlled by a thyristor that was controlled by a trigger signal from the PLC.
The transformer increases the current in the material. The voltage over the
material can be varied between 5 and 7 V (voltage) by adjusting the transformer. For all experiments 7 V, a speed of 1 m/min and a contact pressure of
5 Bar between the wheels and the sheet were used. The diameter of the wheels
was 122.5 mm and the width of the contact zone was 4 mm. Three dierent
powers called P 10, P 20 and P 30 adjusted by the thyristor were investigated;
the results described Paper 6, Lindgren et al. [38].
Figure 4.7. A sketch of the electrical circuit of the prototype resistance heating
machine. Wikstr
om [56].
4.2.3
The roll forming machine in the experiment was the same as that described in
section 4.1.1, see Figure 4.1. A V-section was roll formed in six forming steps:
15o , 30o , 60o , 90o , 105o and 120o . The prole had an inner radius of 0.4 mm
and the material was 0.7 mm thick, see Figure 4.8. The forming velocity was
3.5 m/min and the forming load about 500 N. The diameter of the upper tools
was 140 mm and of the lower tools 100 mm. The tools were designed with the
constant radius method , Chaing [9], which means all forming steps had the
same inner radius.
42
Experimental setup
Figure 4.8. The tools and the ower pattern. The V-section was roll formed in 6
forming steps, from 15o to 120o .
4.2.4
Sample preparation
Cross-sections of all samples from the furnace heat treatment as well as partially heated samples from before and after the roll forming, were examined
with light optical microscope and with Vickers microhardness tests with an
applied load of 500 g. The samples were hot mounted using a thermosetting resin followed by mechanical grinding and polishing with 1 m diamond
suspension. To reveal the microstructure of the samples from the furnace experiment, an etching solution of 60 ml deionised water, 62 ml concentrated
HCl, 3 ml concentrated HN O3 and 5 ml concentrated H2 SO4 was applied.
The etching time was approximately 60 s in room temperature. To etch the
heated zone of the partially heated samples, a solution consisting of 25 ml
concentrated HCl and 5 ml 10 wt% chrome acid solution in deionised water
was used. In these cases etching time was 5-10 s.
4.3
Section 4.3 describes the experimental equipment used in the study presented
in paper 7, Lindgren and Ingmarsson [39]. The aim of the study was to
investigate a new tooling concept for a production of hat-channels with variable
cross-sections.
4.3.1
An experimental 3D roll forming machine was built in this study, see Figure
4.9. The machine was equipped with slitter heads to t the metal sheet,
and six forming stands with four units each, see Figure 4.10. The units have
43
servo control axis, two translations and two rotations axis. A unit can be
moved up and down, in and out and rotate, and the speed of the tools can
be controlled individually. To control the servo-axis the position of the sheet
metal is measured by encoders.
The desired cross-section (depth and width) can be created in a CADprogram and read by the control system. Depending on the tooling the machine can produce for example U-proles, C-proles, hat-proles etc. with
variable cross-sections.
Figure 4.9. The experimental equipment used for research and prototyping of 3D
roll formed proles.
4.3.2
In the study described in paper 7, a hat-section with variable depth and width
was investigated and a special tooling concept was used. This concept demands
two forming stands per pass, see Figure 4.11. Forming stands number 1, 3 and
5 form the left side of a channel and forming stands number 2, 4, and 6 the
right side. For example, a channel is roll formed in six forming steps with
the bend angles 15o , 30o , 45o , 60o , 75o and 85o and therefore the section
demands two laps in the machine. The rst lap forms 15o - 45o , and then the
control program of the machine switches to the next lap, 60o - 85o .
The tools are the same for all stands, for example Figure 4.12 shows that
44
Experimental setup
Figure 4.10. The experimental equipment has 6 forming stands. Each stand has 4
units (tool holders) that can rotate and translate.
Figure 4.11. View from the top: The prole is roll formed in six passes and to do
that the prole must go through the machine two times. Forming stands number 1,
3 and 5 form the left side and forming stands number 2, 4, and 6 form the right side.
the tools for the left and right side are the same for both the 30o and 60o . The
dierence between the passes is that the tools that hold the ange have moved
up closer to the tools that hold the web. The ower pattern is a function of
the length of the section. This exibility makes it possible to use as many
passes as the cross-section requires without making more tools. It also makes
it possible to produce a section not only of variable width but also of variable
45
Figure 4.12. View from the back. The geometry of the tools is the same for all
forming stands. The only dierence is that the tools for the ange are moving up and
closer to the tools that hold the web, for example bend angles 30o and 60o . Tools
with a constant radius have been used, Chaing [9].
4.3.3
Measuring equipment
46
Experimental setup
Chapter 5
Computational model
Details about the nite element models described in paper 1-3 and paper 5
are presented in the following chapter. The roll forming process was modelled
with the implicit FE package MARC/MENTAT [43], see Figure 5.1. Large
displacement and large additive strains were taken into account in an UpdatedLagrangian approach. Nonlinear plastic material behaviour as well as contacts
with friction contributed to the nonlinearities in the models.
Figure 5.1. The nite element model described in paper 5, Lindgren [37].
47
48
5.1
Computational model
5.2
The geometry
Figure 5.2. The geometry of the tools and the corresponding ower pattern described
in paper 5.
49
Figure 5.3. Four forming stands were used. The two rst stands were used as a belt
feeder, the other two forming stands have the same bend angle.
50
5.3
Computational model
Shell element
The strip was modelled with a bilinear thick shell element type number 75,
MARC elements Library [42]. This is a four node element that calculates
membrane strains and the curvatures at the middle surface. The element can
be used in a curved shell analysis and thanks to the simple formulation the
element is not so expensive. A nite element model, with 3, 5, 7, 9 and 11
integrations points in the thickness direction, was evaluated for the work in
paper 5. It was found that at least ve integration points must be used to
predict the springback decently. The integrations points were spaced equally
throughout the thickness with one point both on the top and bottom surface.
To calculate the stress and strain MARC uses numerical integration through
the thickness.
5.4
Material model
An elastic-plastic material model with the von Mises yield criterion and isotropic
hardening was assumed together with the associated ow rule. The yield criterion is written as
3
f = y =
sij sij y .
(5.1)
2
where sij is the deviatoric Cauchy stress giving the eective stress . The
deformation is elastic as long as this is lower than the yield limit y .
The associated ow rule is written as
pij =
=
.
ij
sij
(5.2)
5.5 Contact
51
Figure 5.4. The tensile test data for the materials used in paper 5.
5.5
Contact
The friction between the prole and the tools was modelled as a type of
Coulomb friction. MARC uses
Ft = Fn
where
vr
C
Fn
Ft
=
=
=
=
=
vr
2
arctan( ).
(5.3)
Sliding velocity
Relative sliding velocity, in the study is C = 0.01
Normal force
Tangential force
Friction coecient, in the study = 0.085
The tools were modelled as rigid bodies and the material was deformable.
MARC uses a method called direct constraint method for this contact situation. During the procedure, the node seldom hits the surface of the rigid body
exactly. In order to make this situation easier a contact tolerance around the
rigid surface is given. MARC detects contact if a node in the deformable material comes inside this contact tolerance area (D) and it is default 25 % of
the thickness of the smallest shell element used, see Figure 5.5. The contact
tolerance is also default symmetrically (D1 = D2) placed around the surface
of the rigid body. Greater tolerance gives less accuracy when calculating and
52
Computational model
a smaller tolerance means that MARC will have more problems discovering
contact, which causes higher computational costs. In this thesis a tolerance
of 4 - 5 % of the shell thickness was used. As a result of rotating tools, many
nodes are in almost contact in the roll forming process. This means that many
contact separations can occur thereby causing an extended calculation time.
In order to avoid this it is possible to displace the tolerance distance closer to
the surface of the rigid body using a bias factor which means that D1 < D2.
The default is a bias factor of 0 which means that D1 = D2 but in this thesis
a bias factor of 0.25 was used.
Figure 5.5. The used tolerance distance D1 and D2 in paper 5 is 5 % of the thickness.
The bias factor is default 0 in MARC which means that D1 = D2. In paper 5 is a
bias factor of 0.25 used which means D1 < D2.
Chapter 6
Paper 1
6.2
Paper 2
54
6.3
Paper 3
6.4
Paper 4
6.5 Paper 5
6.5
55
Paper 5
6.6
Paper 6
56
6.7
Paper 7
Chapter 7
58
59
ence between the two forming operations is that in bending plain strain can
be expected whereas in roll forming there is a more three dimensional strainstate. Lundberg and Melander [40] have compared air bending to roll forming
with the help of nite element simulations. As a part of their study a damage
criterion was proposed, which exhibited a higher damage factor for air bending than for roll forming. They concluded that this could explain why high
strength steel can be roll formed but not air bent to the same small minimum
bending radius.
One way of getting around such problems as the minimum bend radius or
the increased forming force and springback is to use partially heated material. The results presented in paper 6, Lindgren et al. [38], show that it is
possible to substantially increase the formability by using austenitic stainless
steel, e.g. AISI 301, in a cold rolled condition and increase the ductility in
the forming areas by partial heating. Furthermore, the heated areas will be
deformation hardened and regain some of the strength during the roll forming.
It was steel that had an initial high fraction of martensite. The heated region,
that became austenitic, regained the martensitic structure during the plastic
straining. Paper 2, Lindgren [35] shows that the longitudinal strain decreases
when the yield strength increases. It is true that the springback also will increase, but this can be reduced by partial heating so that the strip can easily
enter the next forming step. The results from these two studies indicate that
it would be possible to roll form a prole with just a few forming steps without
introducing residual strain, for example in the ange of a V- or U-prole, that
could cause quality problems.
The 3D roll forming process has great potential when combining its exibility with the advantages of traditional roll forming. With only one set of
tools it is possible to produce proles with varying cross sections in a highly
productive process including high material utilization and low tooling costs.
Research concerning traditional roll forming is limited compared to many other
research areas. However, research on 3D roll forming is still in its cradle. Beside the things we need to know when designing a traditional roll forming
machine, such as the number of forming steps, the tool design and springback,
it is equally important to know the limitations of radius changes in both depth
and width when designing a 3D roll forming machine or a prole. In order to
start investigating these factors a 3D roll forming machine was built within
this research, which proved it possible to produce hat-proles of variable depth
and width with a new tooling concept, see paper 7, Lindgren and Ingmarsson
[39]. Thanks to the simple shape of the new tools it is also possible to roll
form a prole of varying thickness without changing the tools. This tooling
concept has been patented by ORTIC [1]. Furthermore, two dierent proles were identied in the study: conical proles and proles with transitions
zones. Conical proles get residual stresses in the longitudinal direction sim-
60
ilar to those in straight proles and they are easy to produce. Proles with
transitions zones get residual stresses that can give wavy edges and distortion
of the web and ange, which means that a particularly careful design of the
process is required.
Conclusion
In order to answer the research question initially posed, this study, as it progressed, was divided in three parts: modelling, high strength steels and 3D
roll forming. However, when designing a roll forming process these research
areas go hand in hand. On the basis of research of others and from the present
work, the following overall conclusions can be drawn:
Today, it is possible to successfully develop proles of complex geometries (3D
roll forming) in high strength steels and nite element simulations can be a
useful tool in the design of the roll forming process.
Listed below are some suggestions about future work in the above mentioned
areas in order to further improve the competitiveness of the roll forming process and enable the development of new, advanced products:
Develop nite element models for the 3D roll forming process.
Develop material models of advanced high strength steels.
Investigate, through simulations, the potential of partially heating materials. The aim is to enable a production of proles in high strength steel,
in a process based on small bending radius and fewer forming steps.
Establish, through simulations and experiments, the minimum radius
in width and depth that 3D roll formed proles can have, without any
quality problems arising. Alternatively with the same techniques nd
out how these problems can be dealt with.
Bibliography
[1] ORTIC AB. www.ortic.se. internet.
[2] A. Alsamhan, I. Pillinger, and P. Hartely. The development of real time
re-meshing technique for simulating cold roll forming using fe methods.
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 2004. Article in Press.
[3] Corporate author. Tool and Manufacturing Engineers Handbook, volume 2. SME, Dearborn, Michigan, 4 edition, 1984.
[4] D. Bhattacharyya and Smith P. D. The development of longitudinal strain
in cold roll forming and its inuence on product straightness. Advanced
Techology of Plasticity, 1:422427, 1984.
[5] D. Bhattacharyya, P. D. Smith, and I. F. Collins. The prediction of
deformation length in cold roll forming. Journal of Mechanical Working
Technology, 9(2):181191, Mars 1984.
[6] D. Bhattacharyya, P.D Smith, S. K. Thadakamalla, and Collins L. F.
The prediction of roll load in cold roll forming. Journal of Mechanical
Working Technology, 14(3):363379, June 1987.
[7] M. Brunet, B. Lay, and P. Pol. Computed aided design of roll forming of
channel sections. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 60:209214,
1996.
[8] Q.V. Bui and J.P. Ponthot. Numerical simulation of the cold roll-forming
processes. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 202:275282, 2008.
[9] K.F. Chaing. Cold roll forming. Masters thesis, Aukland, Aukland, New
Zeeland, 1984.
[10] T. Dahlberg. Teknisk H
allfasthetsl
ara. Studentlitteratur, 2 edition, 1997.
[11] N. Duggal. Process simulation of roll forming and roll pass design. Masters thesis, Ohio state University, 1995.
61
65
PAPER 1
Finite element model of roll forming of a U-channel profile
Michael Lindgren
Summary
Cold roll-forming (CRF) is a highly productive process and therefore an interesting metal forming
process. CRF products can be found in many applications like buildings, furniture and vehicles.
However, it is a geometric complex process and therefore the knowledge that has been obtained
through simple models is limited. The use of FE models to simulate sheet metal forming processes
in general is common but not in case of CRF. Finite element models can be used to enhance the
understanding of the process and as design tools. They can also be used to create simpler design
rules.
The objectives of this study are to create a model that can be used to predict the longitudinal
membrane strain in the flange and to analyse the contact between the tools and the strip. This strain
is important as it determines the number of forming steps needed to form the profile.
The created finite element model accounts for friction and elasto-plastic deformations of the strip.
The rotating tools are assumed to be rigid. The strip is modelled with thick shell elements and the
simulations start from an undeformed strip to a finished U-channel.
Keywords: Cold roll forming, Finite element analysis, Computer simulation
Introduction
In cold roll forming (CRF) the sheet is continuously and progressively formed in several forming
stands from sheet metal to a finished cross section, Figure 1. The number of forming steps needed
to obtain a wanted cross-section is the first choice when designing a CRF machine. They depend on
the wanted cross-section, thickness and the material. Other important parameters are spring back,
deformation length and longitudinal membrane strain in the flange. The longitudinal membrane
strain develops as the profile is successively formed. The material in the edge of flange will travel a
longer distance 'L than the material in the bending zone between the forming stands, Figure 2.
This strain should not be plastic in order to avoid wave edge or another defect on the finished
profile. If plastics strains are present, then more forming stands are needed.
Today there are several computer programs available on the market that can support the design of
CRF machines. The programs are based on thumbs of rules and simplified formulas. However,
only limited conclusions can be drawn based on these programs due to the complex geometry of the
formed strip and the simplifications in their design rules. The finite element method can be used to
increase the knowledge of the roll forming process.
M. Lindgren
L + 'L
Rolling direction
Flange
Previous work
Rebelo et al. [2] studied implicit and explicit finite element formulation used in metal forming
process simulations. The advantage of explicit formulation is that the analysis cost increases in
direct proportion to the size of the mesh. Whereas in the implicit formulation it increases with the
square of the wave front times the degrees of freedom. They concluded that in roll forming the
wave front is small due to the problem being very one dimensional. Therefore the simulation was
faster with implicit formulation when CRF was simulated.
McClure and Li [3] simulated roll forming with the ABAQUS software and compared the result
with experiments from Bhattacharrya and Smith [4]. The model ignored friction between the tools
and a horizontal force was applied in the leading edge to pull the material through the roll stations.
The obtained membrane strain was similar to the experiments by the latter.
Heislitz et al. [5] used the code PAM-STAMP to simulate the roll forming process. The strip was
pulled through the rolls with a constant speed, without friction and without rotating tools. The
explicit FEM code was used. They tried both eight node brick element and shell element and they
also concluded that re-meshing reduced the simulation time when they used shell elements. They
concluded that at the current status of development, the simulation of roll forming by using PAMSTAMP is not very efficient due to the required CPU.
Brunet et al. [6] tried a specially developed FEM code, PROFIL. It used a master 2D cross-section
analysis with a slave 3D shell analysis between two or four successive roll stands. The tools were
modelled as rigid surfaces and they were not rotating. The forming of one thin channel, one thick
channel and a circular tube were simulated. The calculated peak strain in the flange overestimated
the experimental values with 10-30%.
Alsamhan et al. [7,8] have developed a re-meshing technique to simulate CRF. The result from the
simulation showed that re-meshing can reduce the computer simulation time.
2
M. Lindgren
In this study a CRF process has been modelled with the FE package MARC/MENTAT [9].
3.1 The geometry
The model consists of six forming stands and two stands where no forming occurs. The latter are
used as a belt feeder to the six forming stands. The forming starts from an undeformed strip and
ends with a finished symmetrical U channel, Figure 3. The distance between each of the forming
stands is 330 mm.
To simulate the CRF process the geometry was generated with the ORTIC CAE system [10]. The
tools are then modelled as rigid surfaces in the FE program.
The strip is 1.502 mm thick, the width is 31.8 mm and the length is 1000 mm. To obtain a steady
state condition three rolls shall be engaged in the same time, therefore the chosen length of the
model. Due to the symmetry, only one half of the geometry is modelled.
The strip is modelled with 2750 thick shell elements. The elements size is 4*1 mm in the bending
zone and in other regions the elements size is 4*4 mm.
The strip is modelled with a bilinear thick shell element type number 75 [9]. This is a four node
element that calculates membrane strains and the curvatures at the middle surface. The element can
also account for transverse shear strains. The element can be used in curved shell analysis and due
to the simple formulation the element is not so expensive [9]. Therefore is the shell element 75
attractive for the CRF simulations. Three layers of integration points are used in the thickness
direction.
The initial angular speed of the tools is 10 rad/s which gives the strip a speed of 0.6 m/s. The speed
is increased by 0.5% in every forming stand in order to counteract buckling between the stands.
Dogal 350 YP
550
Stress
500
450
400
350
300
0
10
15
Plastic strain %
M. Lindgren
The simulation has been performed on a 2 GHz computer with 512 Mb RAM. Thirty-four CPU
hours were needed to finish the simulation above.
The longitudinal membrane strains in the edge of the strip increase between the stands then drop
just before the contact between the upper and lower tools, Figure 5. This result is similar to earlier
papers that have been written about FE simulations of CRF [3], [5].
Longitudinal membrane strain vs displacement in longitudinal direction
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
-0.05
0
0.5
1.5
2.5
Figure 5. The longitudinal membrane elastic - plastic strain in the edge of the strip
in six forming stands. Constant forming steps are used (15 - 30 - 45 - 60 - 75 - 90).
4
M. Lindgren
When the strip is in contact with the lower tool for the first time the strain will drop from a
maximum value and compress until the contact zone between the upper and lower tools is reached.
This is in agreement with what Bhattacharyya and Smith observed [4].
It has been known that the tool radius influences the membrane strains in the flange. A smaller
radius gives a more severe forming as the material will not roll smoothly into the tool. Zhu [11]
obtained a model for the lower tool geometry and proposed a bend angle curve for the lower tool.
The derivative of the bend angle curve at the point where the strip is in contact with the lower tool
for the first time, shows how severe the forming is.
The tool radius is included in his model and it predicts more severe forming when the lower tool
radius decreases. Zhu also concluded that the peak strains will decrease when constant forming
steps are used. This agrees with the result from the simulation in this study, Figure 5.
Conclusion
A model of the CRF process, which includes friction and rotating tools, has been successfully
implemented. The simulation time is acceptable for research but still too long for industrial use.
The results from the simulations agree well with existing knowledge about the process. The model
can be used to further investigate important parameters as flange length, thickness of the material,
Youngs modules, yield strength and contact conditions. Thereby, the model can be used to improve
existing design rules.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks ORTIC AB, Knowledge foundation, Jernkontoret and Dalarna University for
their technical and financial support.
Reference
[1]
[2]
PAPER 2
Cold roll forming of a U-channel made of high strength steel
Michael Lindgren
Errata
Page 1 (77)
Notation in the text for bend
angle
Notation in the text for
degree
should be
mld@du.se
Abstract
Cold roll forming is a bending process where the bending occurs gradually in several forming steps from an undeformed strip to a nished
prole. The process is very interesting for the sheet metal industry due to the high speed in which the prole can be produced. High strength steel
has, in recent years, become more common in cold roll forming. These materials have advantages but also disadvantages that affect the design of
the process.
Simple models in literature [K.F. Chiang, Cold roll forming, ME Thesis, University of Auckland, August 1984] predict that the longitudinal
peak membrane strain in the ange of a prole is independent of the material properties. However, Ingvarsson [L. Ingvarsson, Forenklad teori
for rullforming av elementar v-prol, jamforelse mellan normalt och hoghallfast stal, VAMP 15- rullforming 23 april 2001] compared mild and
ultra high strength in a roll forming experiment and the conclusion was that the material properties will affect the nished prole. This paper is a
fundamental study performed in order to understand the observation by Ingvarsson [L. Ingvarsson, Forenklad teori for rullforming av elementar
v-prol, jamforelse mellan normalt och hoghallfast stal, VAMP 15- rullforming 23 april 2001].
The objectives of this study are to investigate the change in the longitudinal peak membrane strain at the ange edge and the deformation length
when the yield strength increases. These are important since they can be used to determine the number of forming steps and the distance between
them when designing the cold roll forming machine. The result from the simulations show that the longitudinal peak membrane strain decreases
and the deformation length increases when the yield strength is increased.
2007 Published by Elsevier B.V.
Keywords: Cold roll forming; High strength steel; Finite element analysis
1. Introduction
In cold roll forming a prole is formed in several forming
steps from an undeformed strip to a nished prole (Fig. 1). The
forming process is geometrically complicated due to the fact that
the forming does not only occur in the tools but also between
each forming stand. When creating the tools the tool designer
must decide how many forming steps the prole demands. The
number of steps is dependent on the shape of the cross-section,
tolerance, thickness and the material properties.
It is important to minimise the number of steps as this reduces
the cost of the cold roll forming machine. Then the process can
be a competitive alternative also for smaller production volumes.
Therefore the knowledge of how high strength steel affects the
number of forming steps is important.
Existing relations between the longitudinal peak membrane
strain, deformation length and the yield strength of the mate-
L, deformation length;
a, ange length;
t, thickness of the strip;
Y, bend angle;
r, distance from the bending zone;
z, distance from where the bending starts;
e, the longitudinal membrane engineering strain at the ange.
3. Background
The prole is formed in several steps and that will cause longitudinal strain in the ange. The strain develops as the material
in a ange of a prole will travel a longer distance than the
78
9
32
t2
a6
0<r<a
r 2 z2
(2)
0<z<L
Fig. 1. The prole is formed in several forming stands from an undeformed strip
to a nished prole.
Fig. 2. One half of the U-channel. The strip is formed by a bend angle (Y8) in the contact zone between the rolls. It will cause a longitudinal membrane strain (e) in
the ange.
79
Table 1
Series of experiments where the forming steps are 08 (feeder roll)108108 and
08 (feeder roll)208208, when seven different yield strengths are used
200 MPa
400 MPa
600 MPa
800 MPa
1000 MPa
1200 MPa
1400 MPa
08108108
08208208
Fig. 3. Four forming stands are used. The two rst stands are used as a belt
feeder. The other two forming stands have the same bend angle (Y).
Fig. 4. The ctive tensile test data for seven different materials. They have been implemented in the nite element program as a table.
80
Fig. 5. When the virgin yield strength increases the longitudinal peak membrane
strain will decrease. When the plastic strain goes to zero the total strain will
atten out and the strain is purely elastic.
Fig. 6. The behaviour for the longitudinal peak membrane strain is similar to
the case with a forming step of 108. But now is the curve for the elastic and
plastic longitudinal peak membrane strain displaced to a higher level of virgin
yield strength.
Fig. 7. The deformation length for bend angle 108 and 208 will increase when
the yield strength increases. The length is greater for bend angle 208.
81
The model for the peak strain, Eq. (3), has the additional assumption that the ange edge remains straight during the deformation.
7. Conclusions
The simulations show that the longitudinal peak membrane
strain decreases, the deformation length increases for materials with higher yield strength. This information has not been
possible to obtain from simple models as in Eqs. (1)(3).
Decreasing longitudinal peak membrane strain gives less
residual stresses in the ange of the prole and quality problems as wave edges, longitudinal curvature, end are, etc. will
decrease. It will make it possible to use fewer forming steps
for proles made of high strength steel. However, high strength
steel has larger spring back that has to be accounted for. This is
[1] S.M. Panton, S.D. Zhu, J.L. Duncan, Geometric constraints on the forming
path in roll forming channel sections, Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng. 206.
[2] D. Bhattacharyya, P.D. Smith, C.H. Yee, L.F. Collins, The prediction of
deformation length in cold roll forming, J. Mech. Work. Tech. 9 (1984)
181191.
[3] K.F. Chiang, Cold roll forming, ME Thesis, University of Auckland, August
1984.
[4] L. Ingvarsson, Forenklad teori for rullforming av elementar v-prol,
jamforelse mellan normalt och hoghallfast stal, VAMP 15- rullforming 23
april 2001.
[5] M. Brunet, S. Mguil, P. Pol, Modelling of a roll-forming process with a
combined 2D and 3D FEM code, J. Mater. Process. Technol. 8081 (1998)
213219.
[6] M. Farzin, M.S. Tehrani, E. Shameli, Determination of buckling limit of
strain in cold roll forming by nite element analysis, J. Mater. Process.
Technol. 125126 (2002) 626632.
[7] M. Lindgren, Finite element model of roll forming of a U-channel prole,
To be presented at International Conference on Techn. of Plasticity, Verona,
2005.
[8] MARC, Element Library, vol. B, Marc Analysis Research Corporation,
USA.
PAPER 3
An improved model for the longitudinal peak strain in the
flange of a roll formed U-channel developed by FE-analyses
Michael Lindgren
Errata
Page 4 (85)
Page 1 (86)
should be
A study of Figure 5 indicates
that five variables should be
included, the thickness, bend
angle, flange length, yield
strength and the tool radius,
Equation (8)
Equation (7) and Equation
(10), are determined so the
model fits the results from
the simulations done in the
factorial design.
Metal Forming
An Improved Model for the Longitudinal Peak Strain in the Flange of a Roll
Formed U-Channel developed by FE-Analyses
Michael Lindgren
Material Science, Dalarna University, 78188 Borlnge, Sweden, mld@du.se
Today one can find cold roll forming (CRF) products in many applications, for example vehicles, furniture and in the building industry. Though
CRF is a well known sheet metal process, it is still not entirely understood due to the geometrically complex forming. There are several computer aided engineering (CAE) programs on the market that can assist the tool maker when designing a new CRF machine. However, they
are often based on simple formulas when predicting the stress and the strain in the strip.
The main objective of this study is to improve formulas for the longitudinal peak membrane strain and the deformation length when a U-channel is formed. These are important since they can be used to determine the number of forming steps and the distance between them. A twolevel factorial design is done using the finite element analysis to investigate which parameters affect the peak strain and the deformation
length. The parameters are then used to build models for the peak strain and the deformation length.
Keywords: cold roll forming, factorial design, finite element analysis
1RWDWLRQV
D
W
6
T
T
'T
5
U
.L
$%
]
/
/6
\
H
)ODQJHOHQJWK
7KLFNQHVVRIWKHVWULS
<LHOGVWUHQJWK
%HQGDQJOH
%HQGDQJOHRIWKHIHPDOHWRRO
%HQGDQJOHLQFUHPHQW
)LFWLYHWRROUDGLXV
7RROUDGLXV
&RQVWDQWV
,QWHJUDWLRQFRQVWDQWV
&DUWHVLDQFRRUGLQDWHLQORQJLWXGLQDOGLUHFWLRQ
'HIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK
6WUDLQEDVHGGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK
'LVWDQFHIURPWKHEHQGLQJ]RQHWRWKHIODQJHHGJH
(QJLQHHULQJVWUDLQ
,QWURGXFWLRQ
,Q FROG UROO IRUPLQJ &5) WKH VKHHW LV FRQWLQXRXVO\
IRUPHGLQVHYHUDOIRUPLQJVWHSVIURPWKHVKHHWPHWDOWRD
ILQLVKHG FURVV VHFWLRQ 'XH WR WKH JHRPHWULFDOO\ FRPSOH[
IRUPLQJWKHUHVHDUFKDERXW&5)LVOLPLWHG7KHNQRZOHGJH
RIKRZWKHWRROVVKDOOEHGHVLJQHGLVPDLQO\EDVHGRQWKH
H[SHULHQFHRIWKHWRROPDNHU7RGD\WKHUHDUHVHYHUDOFRP
SXWHU DLGHG HQJLQHHULQJ &$( SURJUDPV DYDLODEOH RQ WKH
PDUNHWWKDWFDQVXSSRUWWKHWRROPDNHUZKHQGHVLJQLQJWKH
WRROVIRUWKH&5)PDFKLQH7KHFRPSXWHUSURJUDPVDUHXVX
DOO\EDVHGRQVLPSOLILHGIRUPXODV
6RPHUHVHDUFKKDVEHHQGRQHWRVLPXODWHWKH&5)SURFHVV
E\ XVLQJ WKH ILQLWH HOHPHQW DQDO\VLV >@ 7KHUH DUH DOVR
&$(SURJUDPVWKDWFDQRIIHUDPRGXOHEDVHGRQWKHILQLWH
HOHPHQWPHWKRG)(0WKDWFDQVLPXODWHWKH&5)SURFHVV
EDVHGRQWKHJHRPHWU\JHQHUDWHGE\WKH&$(SURJUDP7KH
GLVDGYDQWDJHRI)(0LQ&5)VLPXODWLRQVLVWKDWWKHSURILOH
FDQKDYHDFRPSOLFDWHGFURVVVHFWLRQDQGVRPHWLPHVWKHUH
DUHXSWRIRUW\UROOVWDQGVQHHGHGWRFRPSOHWHWKHILQLVKHG
VHFWLRQWKXVWKHVLPXODWLRQWLPHEHFRPHVORQJ+RZHYHU
)(0DQDO\VLVZLOOEHDFRPSHWLWLYHDOWHUQDWLYHLQWKHIXWXUH
DQGLVWRGD\DQH[FHOOHQWWRROWRXVHLQUHVHDUFKWRLQFUHDVH
WKHNQRZOHGJHDERXWWKH&5)SURFHVV7KHREMHFWLYHRIWKLV
ZRUNLVWRXVH)(PRGHOWRLPSURYHH[LVWLQJIRUPXODVIRU
WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO SHDN VWUDLQ LQ WKH IODQJH RI D IRUPHG 8
VKDSH FURVVVHFWLRQ 7KHVH DUH LPSRUWDQW FRQFHUQLQJ WKH
QXPEHURIIRUPLQJVWHSVDQGWKHGLVWDQFHEHWZHHQWKHP
%DFNJURXQG
Figure 1. The material will travel a longer distance 'z in the flange
than in the bending zone.
82
Metal Forming
?] $
W
] # $] # %
D
ZKHUH] LV&DUWHVLDQFRRUGLQDWHLQORQJLWXGLQDOGLUHFWLRQ
WLVWKHWKLFNQHVVDQGDLVWKHIODQJHOHQJWK
)URP WKLV DQG WKH NQRZQ ERXQGDU\ FRQGLWLRQV %KDW
WDFKDU\\D HW DO FRXOG REWDLQ D PRGHO IRU WKH GHIRUPDWLRQ
OHQJWK
R
D ?
/$
W
ZKHUH'TLVWKHLQFUHPHQWLQWKHEHQGDQJOH
7KHPRGHOSUHGLFWVWKDWWKHPDWHULDOSURSHUWLHVGRQRWDI
IHFWWKHOHQJWK,QWKHVDPHVWXG\WKH\GHULYHGDPRGHOIRU
WKHHQJLQHHULQJORQJLWXGLQDOVWUDLQLQWKHIODQJHRIDSURILOH
,WLVJLYHQE\
r s
G?
H $ \
G]
ZKHUH \ LV WKH GLVWDQFH IRUP WKH EHQGLQJ ]RQH WR WKH
IODQJHHGJH
&KDLQJ >@ FUHDWHG DQRWKHU UHODWLRQ IRU WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO
VWUDLQLQWKHHGJHRIWKHIODQJHZLWKKHOSRI(TXDWLRQ
7KLVH[SUHVVLRQLV
l\D
r s
l
W
l
\
]
H$
l
D
]/
&KDLQJFRPSDUHGWKHPRGHO ZLWK DQ H[SHULPHQW DQG KH
FRQFOXGHGWKDWWKHPRGHOSUHGLFWVDSHDNVWUDLQDERXWWKUHH
WLPHVODUJHUWKDQWKHPHDVXUHG
=KX>@VWXGLHGWKHIHPDOHWRROJHRPHWU\DQGREWDLQHGDQ
LPSOLFLWEHQGDQJOHFXUYHPRGHOIRUWKHIHPDOHWRROZKLFKLV
S
]$/U
D FRV ?]
VLQ? U ?]
# DU
U D
FRV ?
FRV ?
ZKHUHTLVWKHEHQGDQJOHRIWKHIHPDOHWRRO
=KX FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO SHDN VWUDLQ RFFXUV
ZKHQWKHVWULSLVLQFRQWDFWZLWKWKHIHPDOHWRROIRUWKHILUVW
WLPH=KXDOVRFRQFOXGHGWKDWWKHGHULYDWLYHRIWKHEHQGDQ
JOHFXUYHDWWKDWVSHFLILFFRQWDFWPRPHQWFDQEHXVHGWRGH
WHUPLQHWKHVHYHULW\RIWKHIRUPLQJ7KHGHULYDWLYHLV
G?
/U]
$
G]
D VLQ ?]
FRV?] U ?
# DU
FRV ?
FRV ?
=KX HW DO >@ LQYHVWLJDWHG WKH HIIHFWV RI JHRPHWU\ ZLWK
KHOSRIWKHEHQGDQJOHFXUYHWKDW3DQWRQHWDO>@SURSRVHG
7KHPRGHOSUHGLFWHG
7KH SHDN ORQJLWXGLQDO VWUDLQ LQFUHDVHV ZLWK WKH PDWHULDO
WKLFNQHVV
7KHSHDNORQJLWXGLQDOVWUDLQDQGWKHGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK
LQFUHDVHZLWKWKHEHQGDQJOHLQFUHPHQW
:KHQIL[HGIRUPLQJLQFUHPHQWLVXVHGWKHSHDNORQJLWX
GLQDOVWUDLQIDOOVEXWWKHQUDSLGO\LQFUHDVHVZKHQWKHDQ
JOHILQDOO\DSSURDFKHV
,QFUHDVLQJWKHIHPDOHUDGLXVGHFUHDVHVWKHSHDNORQJLWX
GLQDOVWUDLQGXHWRORQJHUFRQWDFWOHQJWKZLWKWKHWRRO
:KHQ WKH IODQJH OHQJWK LQFUHDVHV WKH SHDN ORQJLWXGLQDO
VWUDLQLQFUHDVHVLQLWLDOO\EXWDWDFHUWDLQIODQJHOHQJWKLW
VWDUWVGHFUHDVLQJ
7KHVLPSOHIRUPXODVIRUWKHGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWKDQGWKH
ORQJLWXGLQDOVWUDLQ(TXDWLRQVDQGGRQRWLQFOXGHWKH
HIIHFWRIPDWHULDOSURSHUWLHVDQGWKHWRROJHRPHWU\+RZHY
HUWKHVWXGLHVE\=KXHWDO>@,QJYDUVVRQ>@DQG/LQGJUHQ
>@VKRZWKH\GRDIIHFWORQJLWXGLQDOVWUDLQDQGWKHGHIRU
PDWLRQOHQJWK
,QJYDUVVRQ>@UROOIRUPHGD9VHFWLRQRIPLOGDQGXOWUD
KLJKVWUHQJWKVWHHOZLWKWKHHTXDOQXPEHURIIRUPLQJVWHSV
7KHXOWUDKLJKVWUHQJWKVWHHOJDYHDVWUDLJKWSURILOHZKHUHDV
WKHPLOGVWHHOGLGQRW7KHFRQFOXVLRQZDVWKDWIHZHUIRUP
LQJVWHSVDUHQHHGHGZKHQKLJKVWUHQJWKVWHHOLVXVHG
/LQGJUHQ>@LQYHVWLJDWHGWKH\LHOGVWUHQJWKLQIOXHQFHRQ
WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO SHDN VWUDLQ DQG WKH VWUDLQ EDVHG GHIRUPD
WLRQ OHQJWK 7KH FRQFOXVLRQ ZDV WKDW LQFUHDVHG \LHOG
VWUHQJWKJLYHVLQFUHDVHGGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWKDQGGHFUHDVHG
ORQJLWXGLQDOSHDNVWUDLQ
$SSURDFKDQG6FRSH
,QWKLVSURMHFWD&5)SURFHVVKDVEHHQPRGHOOHGZLWKWKH
)( SDFNDJH 0$5&0(17$7 7KH REMHFWLYHV ZLWK WKLV
VWXG\DUH
:LWK WKH KHOS RI WZROHYHO IDFWRULDO GHVLJQ XVLQJ )(
DQDO\VLV WR LQYHVWLJDWH ZKLFK SDUDPHWHUV LQIOXHQFH WKH
ORQJLWXGLQDO SHDN PHPEUDQH VWUDLQ DQG WKH VWUDLQ EDVHG
GHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK
7RFUHDWHDVLPSOHPRGHOWKDWFDQSUHGLFWWKHSHDNVWUDLQ
DQGWKHGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK
7KHGHYHORSHGVLPSOLILHGPRGHOLVFRPSDUHGZLWKHDUOLHU
)( DQDO\VLV RI WKH &5) SURFHVV >@ >@ DQG ZLWK WKH
IRUPXODVLQ(TXDWLRQDQG
)LQLWH(OHPHQW0RGHO
7KHJHRPHWU\7KHILQLWHHOHPHQWPRGHOFRQVLVWVRIWZR
IRUPLQJ VWDQGV DQG WZR VWDQGV ZKHUH QR IRUPLQJ RFFXUV
)LJXUH7KHODWWHUDUHXVHGDVEHOWIHHGHUWRWKHRWKHUWZR
ZKHUHWKHIRUPLQJWDNHVSODFH7ZRGLIIHUHQWVWULSVDUHVLP
XODWHG7DEOH
7KHVWULSLVPRGHOOHGZLWKDIRXUQRGHWKLFNVKHOOHOHPHQW
W\SHQXPEHULQ0$5&>@7KHHOHPHQWVL]HLV
PP
LQWKHEHQGLQJ]RQHDQGLQRWKHUUHJLRQVWKHHOHPHQWVL]HLV
PP7KUHHOD\HUVRILQWHJUDWLRQSRLQWVDUHXVHGLQWKH
WKLFNQHVVGLUHFWLRQ
83
Metal Forming
Table 1. The strip models.
.GPIVJ
6JKEMPGUU
9KFVJ
0WODGTQHGNGOGPV
5VTKR
OO
OOOO
OO
5VTKR
OO
OOOO
OO
.GXGNU
.QY*KIJ
OO
OO
OO
OO
OO
/2C
OO
/2C
7KH WRROV DUH PRGHOOHG DV ULJLG VXUIDFHV DQG GXH WR WKH
V\PPHWU\RQO\KDOIRIWKHJHRPHWU\LVPRGHOOHG7KHLQL
WLDODQJXODUVSHHGRIWKHWRROVLVUDGVZKLFKJLYHVWKH
VWULSDVSHHGRIPV7KHVSHHGLVVWHSSHGXSE\LQ
WKHVW DQGQG IRUPLQJVWDQG7KLVLVGRQHLQRUGHUWRFRXQ
WHUDFWEXFNOLQJEHWZHHQWKHVWDQGV
0DWHULDOPRGHO $QHODVWLFSODVWLFPDWHULDOPRGHOZKHUH
WKHYRQ0LVHV\LHOGVXUIDFHDQGWKHDVVRFLDWHGIORZUXOHLV
XVHG7KHKDUGHQLQJLVLVRWURSLF7KHXVHGGDWDIRUWKHPD
WHULDOLVVKRZQLQ)LJXUH)ORZVWUHVVYHUVXVSODVWLFVWUDLQ
IRUWKHPDWHULDOLVLPSOHPHQWHGDVDWDEOHLQWKH)(SURJUDP
&RQWDFW&RXORPEIULFWLRQLVDVVXPHGLQWKHPRGHODQG
WKHIULFWLRQFRHIILFLHQWLV7KHFOHDUDQFHEHWZHHQWKHXS
SHUDQGORZHUWRROVLVUHVSHFWLYHO\
)DFWRULDO'HVLJQ
84
$ WZROHYHOIDFWRULDOGHVLJQ>@KDVEHHQXVHGWRLQYHV
WLJDWHZKLFKIDFWRUVDUHPRVWLQIOXHQWLDORQWKHORQJLWXGLQDO
SHDNPHPEUDQHVWUDLQDQGWKHGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK7KHLQ
YHVWLJDWHGIDFWRUVDUHIODQJHOHQJWKDVWULSWKLFNQHVVW
WRROUDGLXVU\LHOGVWUHQJWK6DQGEHQGDQJOHLQFUHPHQW
'T 7KH IDFWRUV KDYH WZR OHYHOV WKH ORZOHYHO DQG WKH
KLJKOHYHO7DEOH
7KHWHVWVHULHVDUHVHWXSLQDVWDQGDUGRUGHULQDWDEOHRI
FRQWUDVWFRHIILFLHQWV>@QRWVKRZQKHUH7KHILYHSDUDP
HWHUVQHHGWKDWLVVLPXODWLRQV7KHORQJLWXGLQDOSHDN
PHPEUDQH VWUDLQ DQG WKH VWUDLQ EDVHG GHIRUPDWLRQ OHQJWK
DUH WKH UHVXOWV IRU HDFK VLPXODWLRQ ,W LV DVVXPHG WKDW SD
UDPHWHUV WKDW KDYH D VPDOO LQIOXHQFH RQ WKH UHVXOWV LV OLNH
QRLVH DQG ZLOO IROORZ D QRUPDO GLVWULEXWLRQ7KH IDFWRUV
WKDWKDYHDODUJHLQIOXHQFHRQWKHUHVXOWVZLOOWKHUHIRUHGH
YLDWHVWURQJO\IURPDQRUPDOGLVWULEXWLRQ7KHVHSDUDPHWHUV
FDQ EH HDVLO\ LGHQWLILHG E\ SORWWLQJ WKH UHVXOWV LQ QRUPDO
SUREDELOLW\SORWDVLQ)LJXUHDQG7KLVSORWLVVXFKWKDW
UHVXOWVDORQJWKHLQGLFDWHGVWUDLJKWOLQHGRIROORZDQRUPDO
GLVWULEXWLRQ7KH\KDYHDVPDOOLQIOXHQFHRQWKHUHVXOWV2QH
FDQVHHWKDWILYHFDVHVLQ)LJXUHDQGVHYHQFDV
HVLQ)LJXUHGHYLDWHIURPQRUPDOGLVWULEXWLRQ
7KXVWKH\VKRXOGEHLQFOXGHGLQPRGHOVIRUWKH
SHDNVWUDLQDQGWKHGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK7KHSD
UDPHWHUV WKDW DIIHFW WKHVH FKDQJHV KDYH EHHQ
LGHQWLILHG EDVHG RQ WKH WDEOH RI FRQWUDVW FRHIIL
FLHQWV7KHVH SDUDPHWHUV DUH ZULWWHQ DV LGHQWLIL
FDWLRQWH[WLQWKHILJXUHVQHDUWKHVHSRLQWV
3URSRVHG PRGHOV IRU WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO SHDN
VWUDLQDQGWKHGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK $ VWXG\RI
)LJXUHLQGLFDWHVWKDWWKHVWUDLQEDVHGGHIRUPD
WLRQOHQJWKPRGHOVKRXOGLQFOXGHIRXUYDULDEOHV
EHQGDQJOHIODQJHOHQJWKWKHWKLFNQHVVDQG\LHOG
VWUHQJWK7KH EHQG DQJOH WKH IODQJH OHQJWK DQG
WKH\LHOGVWUHQJWKGRKDYHSRVLWLYHHIIHFWVLQ)LJ
XUH DV WKH\ DUH LQ WKH SRVLWLYH SDUW RI WKH DE
VFLVVD ,QFUHDVLQJ WKH WKLFNQHVV UHGXFHV WKH GH
IRUPDWLRQOHQJWKDQGWKHUHIRUHLWVHIIHFWLVQHJD
WLYH LQ WKH ILJXUH 3RVLWLYH HIIHFWV DUH SODFHG LQ
WKHQXPHUDWRUDQGQHJDWLYHHIIHFWVLQWKHGHQRP
steel research int. 78 (2007) No. 1
Metal Forming
D . ? . 6 .
W .
$ VWXG\RI)LJXUHLQGLFDWHVWKDWILYH
YDULDEOHVVKRXOGEHLQFOXGHGWKHWKLFN
QHVV EHQG DQJOH IODQJH OHQJWK \LHOG
VWUHQJWK DQG WKH WRRO UDGLXV (TXDWLRQ
2QH FDQ DOVR VHH LQWHUDFWLRQV EH
WZHHQ WKH SDUDPHWHUV LQ )LJXUH DQG
)LJXUH DQGFRQVLGHUDWLRQVIRULQWHUDF
WLRQVZLOOEHLQFOXGHGLQWKHPRGHOV,Q
WHUDFWLRQV DUH WKRVH VLPXODWLRQV ZKHUH
GLIIHUHQWSDUDPHWHUVLQWKHWDEOHRIFRQ
WUDVWVFRHIILFLHQWVDUHYDULHGVLPXOWDQH
RXVO\7KHILQDORXWFRPHRIWKHUHOHYDQW
SDUDPHWHUVLV
SHDN $ .
W . ? .
D . 6 . U .
7KHIHPDOHWRROUDGLXV =KX>@FRQ
FOXGHG WKDW ZKHQ FRQVWDQW IRUPLQJ LQ
FUHPHQWVDUHXVHGIRUH[DPSOH
LQ VWHSV RI WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO SHDN
PHPEUDQHVWUDLQZLOOGHFUHDVHLQHYHU\
IRUPLQJVWHS=KXSURSRVHGDPRGHOIRU
WKHIHPDOHJHRPHWU\(TXDWLRQWKDW
LQFOXGHVWKHWRROUDGLXVEXWWKHPRGHO
KDV WKH GLVDGYDQWDJH WKDW RQH PXVW
NQRZZKHUHWKHVWULSLVLQFRQWDFWZLWK
WKH WRRO WKH ILUVW WLPH 7KH VXJJHVWLRQ
JLYHQLQWKLVSDSHULVWRXVHDQHIIHFWLYH
UDGLXV:KHQWKHHGJHRIWKHIODQJHLV
LQFRQWDFWZLWKERWKWKHXSSHUDQGORZ
HUWRROWKHGLUHFWLRQRIWKHQRUPDOYHF
WRUWRWKHSRLQWZKHUHWKHHGJHLVFRQ
WDFWZLWKWKHWRROVFDQEHXVHGDVDQHI
IHFWLYHUDGLXV)LJXUH
7KH PRGHO IRU WKH HIIHFWLYH WRRO UD
GLXV5LV
5 $ D WDQ ? #
U
FRV ?
7KHDGYDQWDJHRIWKHHIIHFWLYHUDGLXV
LVWKDWWKHUDGLXVZLOOLQFUHDVHZKHQWKH Figure 5. Normal probability plot for the longitudinal peak membrane strain.
EHQG DQJOH LQFUHDVHV 7KH PRGHO FDQ
DOVREHLPSOHPHQWHGLQD&$(V\VWHP7KHGLVDGYDQWDJHRI
WKHHIIHFWLYHUDGLXVLVWKDWWKHPRGHOZLOOSUHGLFWDQLQILQLWH
UDGLXVZKHQWKHIODQJHUHDFKHV LQWKHIRUPLQJSURFHVV
,Q>@WKDWSUREOHPZLWKWKHODVWIRUPLQJVWHSZDVDOVRRE
VHUYHG DQG FRQFOXGHG WKDW LW KDV WR GR ZLWK WKH VHYHUH
ERXQGDU\FRQGLWLRQVEHWZHHQWKHWRRODQGWKHVWULS
7KHWRROUDGLXVULQ(TXDWLRQUHSODFHVZLWKWKHHIIHF
WLYHWRROUDGLXV5(TXDWLRQWKHSHDNVWUDLQPRGHOZLOO
QRZDFFRXQWIRUFRQVWDQWIRUPLQJLQFUHPHQW,WLVZULWWHQDV
SHDN $ .
W . ? .
D . 6 . 5 .
85
Metal Forming
5HVXOWVDQG'LVFXVVLRQ
7KH REWDLQHG PRGHOV IRU WKH VWUDLQ
EDVHGGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWKDQGWKHORQ
JLWXGLQDOSHDNPHPEUDQHVWUDLQDUH
/ V $
SHDN $
Figure 7. The models Equation (2) and Equation (11) are compared with the work done by
Lindgren [10]. One can see that Equation (11) agrees well with Lindgren [10] but Equation
(2) does not.
W ?
D 6 5
ZKHUH WKH YDULDEOHV DUH JLYHQ LQ WKH
XQLWVPLOOLPHWUHUDGLDQVDQG1HZWRQ
7KHPRGHOWKDW%KDWWDFKDU\\DHWDO
>@ REWDLQHG IRU WKH GHIRUPDWLRQ
OHQJWK(TXDWLRQSUHGLFWVWKDWWKH
GHIRUPDWLRQ OHQJWK LQFUHDVHV ZLWK LQ
FUHDVLQJIODQJHOHQJWKEHQGDQJOHDQG
GHFUHDVLQJ WKLFNQHVV (TXDWLRQ
SUHGLFWV WKH VDPH EXW LW DOVR SUHGLFWV
LQFUHDVLQJ GHIRUPDWLRQ OHQJWK ZKHQ
WKH\LHOGVWUHQJWKLQFUHDVHV7KHLQIOX
HQFH RI WKH \LHOG VWUHQJWK RQ WKH GH
IRUPDWLRQOHQJWKDOVRDJUHHVZLWKWKH
)(VLPXODWLRQV E\ /LQGJUHQ >@ ,Q
)LJXUH (TXDWLRQ DQG (TXDWLRQ
DUH FRPSDUHG ZLWK WKHVH UHVXOWV
7KH DJUHHPHQW EHWZHHQ WKH (TXDWLRQ
DQG WKH VLPXODWLRQ UHVXOW WKDW
/LQGJUHQ >@ REWDLQHG LV JRRG 7KH
(TXDWLRQ DQG WKH UHVXOWV IURP WKH
VLPXODWLRQV GR QRW DJUHH ZHOO GXH WR
WKH ODUJH VLPSOLILFDWLRQV LQ (TXDWLRQ
,W VLPSOLILHG ERWK WKH PDWHULDO DV
ZHOO DV WKH GHIRUPDWLRQ EHKDYLRXU
7KHDVVXPSWLRQVIRUSUHGLFWLRQRIWKH
GHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWKDUH
7KH IODQJH DGRSWV WKH VKDSH WKDW
PLQLPLVHVWKHSODVWLFZRUN
7KHPDWHULDOLVULJLGSHUIHFWO\SODV
WLF
%HQGLQJ WDNHV SODFH RQO\ DORQJ WKH
IROGOLQH
7KHORQJLWXGLQDOEHQGLQJRIWKHZHE
DQG RXWRISODQH EHQGLQJ LQ WKH
IODQJHFDQEHQHJOHFWHG
7ZRDGGLWLRQDOGLIIHUHQFHVEHWZHHQ
WKHPRGHOVIRUWKHGHIRUPDWLRQOHQJWK
/DUH
(TXDWLRQ LV EDVHG RQ WKH EHQG
Figure 8. The model Equation (12) is compared with the simulation result that Lindgren [10]
DQJOHRIWKHIODQJHIRUDVWULSZKHUH
obtained. One can see that they agree very well.
HODVWLFVWUDLQVDUHQHJOHFWHGZKHUH
DV WKH FXUUHQW FRPSXWDWLRQDO PRGHO
LQFOXGHVWKHVH
'HWHUPLQHWKHPRGHOSDUDPHWHUV 7KHFRHIILFLHQWVDQG
7KH VWUDLQ EDVHG GHIRUPDWLRQ OHQJWK (TXDWLRQ LV
H[SRQHQWV.LLQWKHSURSRVHGPRGHOVIRUVWUDLQEDVHGGH
GHILQHG GLIIHUHQWO\ IURP WKH GHILQLWLRQ XVHG E\ %KDW
IRUPDWLRQ OHQJWK DQG WKH SHDN VWUDLQ (TXDWLRQ DQG
WDFKDU\\DHWDO>@,WZDVIRXQGFRQYHQLHQWWRLGHQWLI\
(TXDWLRQ DUH GHWHUPLQHG VR WKH PRGHO ILWV WKH UHVXOWV
LW LQ WKH ILQLWH HOHPHQW PRGHO DV WKH OHQJWK IURP WKH
IURPWKHVLPXODWLRQVGRQHLQWKHIDFWRULDOGHVLJQ
SRLQW ZKHUH WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO VWUDLQ DW WKH HGJH RI WKH
86
Metal Forming
&RQFOXVLRQ
)(DQDO\VLVDQGIDFWRULDOGHVLJQKDYHEHHQXVHGZLWKVXF
FHVVWRFUHDWHVLPSOHIRUPXODVIRUWKHVWUDLQEDVHGGHIRUPD
WLRQ OHQJWK DQG WKH ORQJLWXGLQDO SHDN PHPEUDQH VWUDLQ ,W
VKRXOGEHQRWHGWKDWWKHPRGHOLVGHYHORSHGIRUWKHIRUPLQJ
RIDUHFWDQJXODU8VKDSH
7KHPRGHOIRUWKHORQJLWXGLQDOSHDNPHPEUDQHVWUDLQLV
LPSURYHGFRPSDUHGZLWKWKHDQDO\WLFDOPRGHO7KHPRGHO
FDQQRZSUHGLFWGHFUHDVLQJSHDNVWUDLQZKHQFRQVWDQWIRUP
LQJ LQFUHPHQWV DUH XVHG DV ZHOO DV GHFUHDVLQJ SHDN VWUDLQ
ZKHQWKH\LHOGVWUHQJWKLQFUHDVHV
7KH PRGHO IRU WKH VWUDLQ EDVHG GHIRUPDWLRQ OHQJWK LQ
FOXGHVSDUDPHWHUVVLPLODUDVIRU(TXDWLRQEXWWKHPRGHO
DOVRDFFRXQWVIRULQFUHDVLQJOHQJWKZKHQWKH\LHOGVWUHQJWK
LQFUHDVHV
7KHVLPSOHPRGHOVWKDWKDYHEHHQGHYHORSHGFDQHDVLO\
EHLPSOHPHQWHGLQD&$(V\VWHPWRHVWLPDWHWKHORQJLWXGL
QDOSHDNPHPEUDQHVWUDLQDQGWKHVWUDLQEDVHGGHIRUPDWLRQ
OHQJWKDQGWKHUHE\JLYLQJEHWWHUGHVLJQ
steel research int. 78 (2007) No. 1
87
PAPER 4
Experimental investigation of roll load and roll torque when
high strength steel is roll formed
Michael Lindgren
Abstract
The cold roll forming process is a highly efcient process used to produce proles for many applications, for example vehicles, buildings,
domestic machines, etc. Therefore, its market share is increasing every year. Many of the above products are already today made of high strength
steel and the usage of these materials will likely continue to increase.
The objectives of this project are to nd how the roll load and roll torque are inuenced by the yield strength of the material. Full-scale experiments
have been performed. U-channels made of different materials from mild to ultra high strength steels have been formed. The roll torque is measured
during the process using a torque sensor mounted between the tool and the power transmission. Used power is also calculated with help of the
motor current. The roll load is measured with load cells mounted on both side of the roll forming tool.
The experimental result will increase the understanding of the specic conditions for roll forming steels with increasing yield strength. The
result can be used to support the roll machine designer to choose machine elements and power unit for these applications. Furthermore, the result
can also be compared with nite element simulations in order to improve and validate simulation models.
2007 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Cold roll forming; High strength steel; Roll torque; Roll load
1. Introduction
Roll forming is a bending operation where the bending occurs
in several forming steps from an undeformed strip to a nished
prole. Every forming step consists of a pair of forming tools that
rotate and drive the strip forward during the forming. Today one
can nd roll formed products in many different elds as buildings, vehicles, furniture, etc. The use of the process increases
continuously due to the efciency of the process.
Despite the fact that roll forming is a common sheet metal
forming process and used worldwide there are relatively few
publications about the process. The explanation may be the complexity of the deformation behaviour in the process despite its
visual simplicity. There are numerous factors which can inuence the roll forming design, for example unlimited variation
of the shape of the prole. Nevertheless, some researchers have
developed simple models [1,2], and in a newly released book
Halmos [3] described how this process can be used successfully.
Finite element simulations have been used a long time in
sheet metal forming to develop forming tools. However, this has
not been the case for the roll forming processes due to limited
computer capacity. Only in recent years has this became possible [46], and today roll forming computer aided engineering
system [7], can offer simplied nite element models for simulations. From these models the roll load and roll torque can be
received and compared with measurement and thereby validated.
Bhattacharyya et al. [8] suggested an analytic model for the
roll load in a single roll station, Eq. (1), when a U-channel was
formed:
2t 3 3 a
F =s
(1)
3 sin()
where t is the thickness, s the yield strength, a the ange length
and is the bend angle.
The model was compared with measurements for mild steel
and aluminium for different thickness and bend angle. The
conclusion was that the error between the model and the measurements was within 020%.
The current work is an investigation of the roll forming of a
U-channel of different sheet metals, ranging from mild to ultra
high strength steel. Roll load and roll torque have been measured
during the forming. The results from these measurements can
45
Table 1
The materials that have been tested are Docol, DC01 (carbon steel) and HyTens,
SS2333 (stainless steel)
Material
Thickness (mm)
RP0.2 (MPa)
DC01
Docol 800DP
Docol 1200M
Docol 1200M
HyTens 1200
SS2333
HyTens X
1.46
1.48
1.46
1.22
1.0
1.0
1.0
193
533
1129
1119
1018
301
286
The strip is formed through a single forming step with varying bend
angles, 20 , 40 , 60 and 80 , during the forming the load and torque are
measured. The forming passes before and after the single step are only
used as at rolls (0 - -0 ). This is done in order to eliminate the inuences on torque from other forming steps. The bending angle increment
is dependent on the amount of spring back from the previous forming
step.
The load and the torque are dependent on the tolerance between the thickness
of the formed material and the roll gap between the tools. The load and the torque
will be very large if the clearance between the upper and lower tool is too small.
To avoid this, the prole is rolled in between the tool and the roll load is increased
until the roll gap is between 0.1 and 0.15 mm larger then the thickness of the
formed material, this is checked with a feeler gage.
The measurement starts when the prole rests on both the at rolls before
and after the forming step. The velocity of the prole that is used during the
measurement is 9.7 m/min. A lubricant is used in abundance and the surface
nish is RZ = 1 m.
3. Result
In Fig. 2 are the measured roll load and the roll torque presented for Docol 1200 M, thickness 1.46 mm. The mean value is
calculated for every experiment in Fig. 2 during the sample time
30 to sample time 60. A new mean value and standard deviation
is then calculated for the mean value from experiments 1 to 3
for the load and the torque. These values are presented for all
used materials in Table 2.
3.1. Models
In the experiments, for example bend angle 60 , have materials with different thickness and virgin yield strength been used,
if one assumes that only these parameters inuence the load and
the torque a model can be created as Eqs. (2) and (3):
FLoad = k1 ()t k2 sk3
k5 k6
TTorque = k4 ()t s
Fig. 1. A standard roll forming mill is used to do experiments, the roll load is
measured with load cells and the roll torque is measured with a torque sensor
during a forming of different steels.
(2)
(3)
46
Fig. 2. The roll load and roll torque is measured for three different experiments. The used material in the gure is Docol 1200 M, thickness 1.46, at the bend angle
60 .
Pengine = 3U I cos()
(4)
where U = 400 V, I = 0.6 0.1 A and cos() = 0.83.
Which gives a power of:
PEngine = 0.345 0.057 kW
(5)
Table 2
Seven different materials have been formed with the bend angles 20 , 40 , 60 and 80
Material
HyTens X
SS2333
HyTens 1200
Docol 1200 M
Docol 800 DP
DC01
Docol 1200 M (1.22 mm)
HyTens X
SS2333
HyTens 1200
Docol 1200 M
Docol 800 DP
DC01
Docol 1200 M (1.22 mm)
HyTens X
SS2333
HyTens 1200
Docol 1200 M
Docol 800 DP
DC01
Docol 1200 M (1.22 mm)
HyTens X
SS2333
HyTens 1200
Docol 1200 M
Docol 800 DP
DC01
Docol 1200 M (1.22 mm)
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
40
40
40
40
40
40
40
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
80
80
80
80
80
80
80
The forming load and the forming torque are measured for all cases.
Mean value
Standard deviation
Load (N)
Torque (Nm)
Load (N)
Torque (Nm)
1818
2039
2857
8503
5247
3846
5399
2228
2418
4500
10001
8203
4877
6825
2038
2121
4689
10148
7946
4992
6521
2752
2628
4536
9575
8368
4543
7260
9.2
13.3
11.4
30.1
28.4
28.8
21.5
12.1
12.9
21.2
54.1
42.4
31.1
33.5
8.4
9.0
16.8
45.7
36.2
23.0
29.5
15.4
16.3
25.2
61.3
51.9
27.0
47.1
59
591
299
412
258
199
417
141
26
195
750
547
158
1168
206
286
394
704
384
863
522
205
275
344
372
42
527
1109
0.6
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.2
3.8
0.7
0.7
0.2
1.0
2.6
2.4
1.2
4.8
0.3
1.1
1.3
2.8
1.0
1.6
2.4
1.2
1.3
0.7
2.0
0.3
11.0
2.1
Fig. 3. The models, Eqs. (2) and (3), are compared to the experimental result
for the used materials.
(6)
where total torque and forming angle velocity for bend angles
20 , 40 , 60 and 80 (Table 2) is:
TTotal = 30.1 + 54.1 + 45.7 + 61.3 = 191 Nm,
= 2.156 rad/s
(7)
(8)
4. Conclusion
The results from the experiments can be used to validate
and calibrate nite element models. Calculated force will agree
fairly well with the measured load provided the material model is
correct. The material model can be calibrated by separate material testing. Then the friction coefcient can be adjusted until
the torque also agrees well. A lubricant is used in abundance
and the surface nish is RZ = 1 m which should give a friction
coefcient between 0.05 and 0.1 for Coulomb friction.
Eqs. (2) and (3) give the torque and force required for the
bending in a forming step as a function of thickness, material
47
PAPER 5
Validation of finite element model of roll forming
Michael Lindgren
Keywords: Roll Forming, Roll Load, Roll Torque, Finite Element Simulation
ABSTRACT. Roll forming is a common sheet metal forming process and it is used for
producing profiles to vehicles, buildings, furniture etc. The use of the process increases every
year due to the high production speed that can be used, 10 - 40 meters per minute is common.
Though roll forming is a well known sheet metal process it is still not entirely understood due
to the geometrically complex process. The use of finite element simulation in sheet metal
forming in general is common but not in the case of roll forming, due to the profile can have a
complicated cross-section and up to 40 forming steps can be needed and the simulations time
can be several days. However, the computers have become faster and the demand for finite
element simulations increases from the industry. The objectives with this study is to compare
finite element simulations with experimental data for the roll load, roll torque, strains and
spring back when a U-channel is roll formed.
M. Lindgren
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Roll forming is a bend operation but the bending occurs in several steps from an
undeformed sheet to a finished profile. The rate of production is very high and in most cases
one can also find secondary operations in a roll forming line such as punching, slitting,
notching etc.
Roll forming is a complex process and experience is required in order to be successful with
the machine and the tool design. Today one can find computer aided engineering programs,
for example [1-2], that can assist the designer and get a proposal for the tool design. The
programs use more or less simple formulas to calculate the number of forming steps, the
strain and spring back in the profile during the forming [10]. In the past few years some
computer aided engineering programs can also offer simplified finite element models.
The objectives with this study are to validate a finite element model by comparing it with
earlier published experimental results [9]. The focus is on roll load and torque, strains and
spring back during the roll forming.
1.2. Previous work
Rebelo et al. [3] studied sheet metal forming with the help of finite element analysis and
they compared implicit and explicit finite element formulations when simulating roll forming.
They concluded that implicit formulation was faster then explicit due to roll forming having a
small wave front and the problem is assumed one dimensional.
McClure and Li [4] simulated roll forming with ABAQUS. The model ignored friction
between the tools and the profile. A horizontal force was applied in the leading edge to pull
the profile through the roll stations. The membrane strain in the profile was compared with
experiments available in literature. The strain in the profile was similar to the experiment.
Sukmoo et al. [5] used COPRA FEA-RF to simulate roll forming and compared the
forming length with an experiment available in literature. The finite element model used a
combined 2D and a 3D algorithm. A rigid-plastic material model was used. The conclusion
from the simulation was that increased work hardening exponent gives increased forming
length. It was also good agreement between the simulation result and the experiment.
Lindgren [6] modelled the roll forming process with the finite element program
MSC.MARC. The tools were modelled as rigid surfaces and they rotated to drive the profile.
A Coulomb friction model was used with the friction coefficient 0.1. The profile was
modelled with thick shell elements. An elastic-plastic material model was used. The result
from the simulation was similar to earlier papers that have been written about finite element
simulations.
Chiang [7] used the strain gage technique to measure the strain history in the profile. The
strain gage was bounded onto both the top and bottom surface at the edge of the profile. The
recorded result was used to calculate the membrane strain in the edge of the profile. One of
the conclusions was that the membrane strain increases rapidly when approaching the tools
and the maximum value is right before the centre of the tools. In the study cold rolled mild
steel was used.
Bhattacharyya et. al. [8] developed a semi-empirical model for calculating the forming
load when a U-channel was formed. The model was compared with measurements for mild
steel and aluminium with a different thickness and a different bend angle. The error between
the measurement and the model was about 0-20%.
Lindgren [9] measured the roll load and the roll torque with a load cell and a torque sensor
when a U-channel was formed. The used steels had a thickness from 1 mm to 1.46 mm and a
yield strength from 193 MPa to 1129 MPa. The conclusion was that about 0.5 kW was needed
2
M. Lindgren
in every forming step for normal production speed and under conditions similar to those in the
study. It was also concluded that the roll load and torque required for a bending in a single
forming step can be approximated as a function of material virgin yield strength, thickness
and geometry.
2. EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE
2.1. The roll forming machine and tools
A standard roll forming machine [10] is used to form the U-channel. The machine has six
forming stands and universal joint driven shafts run the tools, the top shafts are not driven.
Five forming steps are used to form the U-channel, 20, 40, 60, 80 and 97.
Measurements are performed between the forming steps. The geometry for the used tools is
shown in Figure 1. The horizontal distance between the forming stands is 450 mm. The roll
load and the roll torque will be very large if the clearance between the lower and upper tools
is too small. To avoid this, the roll gap is about 10% larger then the thickness of the formed
material, this is checked with a feeler gage.
The velocity of the profile that is used during the measurements is 3.375 m/min. A
lubricant is used in abundance and the surface finish for the tools is RZ = 1 m.
Figure 1. The geometry of the used roll forming tools during the strain measurement experiment.
From the left, bend angle 20, 40, 60 and 80.
M. Lindgren
Figure 2. One half of the U-channel with localiser of the strain gage rosette indicated.
Figure 3. The spring back is measured with a sliding caliper. The width in y-direction and depth in zdirection of the profile after every forming step is compared with finite element simulation.
M. Lindgren
Figure 4. The extrapolated tensile test data for the materials SS2333 and HyTens 1200 are
implemented in the finite element program as a table.
M. Lindgren
Figure 5. Measured and computed longitudinal and transverse strains. The used material is HyTens
1200.
Figure 6. Measured and computed longitudinal and transverse strains. The used material is SS2333.
M. Lindgren
measured for the worst case. The measured results [9] are mean values of three different
measurements and the standard deviations between these measurements are 200 N to 400 N
(error bars in the figure).
Figure 7. Measured and computed roll load versus bend angle for HyTens 1200
Figure 8. Measured and computed roll load versus bend angle for SS2333
The agreement between the finite element simulation and the experiment for the roll torque
is within 25% for HyTens 1200 and 47% for SS2333, Figure 9-10. The roll torque is
dependant both on the roll load and the friction between the sheet and the tools so the
experimental result can vary more between the different measurements. The standard
deviation for the measurements is between 0.7 Nm to 1.7 Nm (error bars in the figure).
M. Lindgren
Figure 9. Measured and computed roll torque versus bend angle for HyTens 1200.
Figure 10. Measured and computed roll torque versus bend angle for SS2333.
4.3.
Spring back
The measured and computed width and depth of HyTens 1200 is shown in Figure 11. The
definitions of width and depth of the U-channel is shown in Figure 3. The upper curve in
Figure 11 starts at 84 mm, which is the original width of the strip. The corresponding square
symbols show measured width between the forming steps. They are joined by a dashed line.
The lower curve and corresponding triangle symbols show change in the depth of the Uchannel.
M. Lindgren
Figure 11. Measured and computed width and depth is compared between every forming step. The
The ultra high strength steel, HyTens 1200, Figure 11, shows satisfying agreement
between simulation and experiment for the forming step one and two. The difference
increases for the third and fourth step. The final error in the simulations is about 1 2 degrees.
The same results are shown for SS2333 in Figure 12. The agreement between the
simulation and the experiment is better than in the case of HyTens 1200 and the error in the
bend angle is about 0.5 1.0 degrees for the last step.
Figure 12. Measured and computed width and depth is compared between every forming step. The
used material is SS2333.
M. Lindgren
5. CONCLUSION
Results from the simulations have been compared with experimental results. The
simulations and experiments agree satisfactorily for the longitudinal strain, transverse strain,
roll load and torque for both HyTens 1200 and SS2333. The spring back agrees decently for
SS2333 but for the HyTens 1200 is the difference about 1 2 degrees, which is not
acceptable if the model will be used to design the forming process.
Finite element simulations will not replace the computer aided engineering (CAE)
programs in the future, but it will be a useful complement to the CAE programs. Today a
CAE program can be used to give an initial proposal to how many forming steps a profile
needs. The program also proposes the design of the steps. Still it requires an engineer with
experience to decide if the proposed tool design is good enough and if not, modify it. The
toolmaker also has to design guides on the tools so that the materials can be lead in to the
tools properly. Here is where the finite element simulations can support the toolmaker before
taking a decision for manufacture the tools.
6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The author thanks ORTIC AB, Swedish Knowledge Foundation, Jernkontoret and Dalarna
University for their technical and financial support.
7. REFERENCE
1. Ubeco, Profile-Roll forming design software.
2. Data M software, COPRA-Roll forming.
3. N. Rebelo, J. C. Nagtegaal, L. M. Taylor, R. Passman: Comparsion of implicit and
explicit finite element methods in the simulation of metal forming processes, ABAQUS
User Conference, Newport, RI, (1992).
4. C. K. McClure, H. Li: Roll forming simulation using finite element analysis,
Manufacturing Review 8 (1995) 114-119.
5. H. Sukmoo, L. Seungyoon, K. Naksoo: A parametric study on forming length in roll
forming, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 113 (2001) 774-778.
6. M. Lindgren: Finite Element Model of Roll Forming of a U-channel, International
Conference on Technology of Plasticity, Verona, (2005).
7. K. F. Chiang: Cold roll forming, M. Sc. Thesis, University of Auckland (1984).
8. D. Bhattacharyya, P. D. Smith, S. K. Thadakamalla, I. F. Collins: The Prediction of Roll
Load in Cold Roll Forming, Journal of Mechanical Working Technology 14 (1987) 363
379.
9. M. Lindgren: Experimental Investigations of the Roll Load and Roll Torque When High
Strength Steel is Roll Formed, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 191 (2007)
4447
10. G. T. Halmos Roll Forming Handbook, first ed. (2005), CRC Talylor & Francis, New
York.
11. MSC.MARC., Element Library Volume B, Marc Analysis Research Corporation,
USA.
12. K. Hoffmann: An Introduction to Measurements using Strain Gages, Hottinger Baldwin
Messtechnik GmbH, Darmstadt (1989).
10
PAPER 6
Roll forming of partially heated cold rolled stainless steel
Michael Lindgren, Ulf Bexell, Lars Wikstrm
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
Review
a r t i c l e
i n f o
a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Today you will nd roll formed details in many different products, for example buildings,
household appliances and vehicles. The industry, in order to save weight, tends to use more
and more high strength steel. The disadvantage with these materials is that they can be
18 July 2008
difcult to form due to reduced ductility. A way to increase the ductility in the forming
Keywords:
work hardening almost to the as-received condition in the outer and inner radius of the roll
TRIP steel
formed prole. Furthermore, the heating power decides the bend angle obtained. Finally,
High-strength steel
the mechanical properties after heating and roll forming are discussed.
Roll forming
Contents
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Experimental . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1. Material . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.2. Furnace experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.3. Partial heating experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.4. Roll forming experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.5. Sample preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1. Furnace experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2. Partial heating experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3. Roll forming experiment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3118
3118
3118
3118
3118
3119
3119
3120
3120
3120
3121
3122
3123
3123
3123
3118
1.
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
Introduction
2.
Experimental
2.1.
Material
The investigated material, HyTens 1600, is a cold rolled stainless steel. The composition satises the grade of AISI 301. The
total reduction after the last annealing step is 57.5% resulting
in a yield strength Rp0.2 of 1460 MPa, an average hardness of
580 HV0.5 and a thickness of 0.7 mm. In Fig. 1 a tensile test
of the material is presented and in Fig. 2 the microstructure
is shown. The microstructure shows a typical cold deformed
structure with heavily deformed austenite grains which are
transformed to -martensite.
2.2.
Furnace experiment
2.3.
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
3119
2.4.
2.5.
Sample preparation
3120
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
3.
Results
3.1.
Furnace experiment
3.2.
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
3.3.
3121
different power input, is that the higher power input the wider
is the middle region and the hardness in the centre and near
the surface approaches the same hardness values. For the P20
sample, see Fig. 10b, the hardness is 250270 HV0.5 in the centre
and 300320 HV0.5 at the near surface. For the P30 sample the
hardness is 260 HV0.5 in both the centre and at near surface
and the middle region is around 2.2 mm wide, see Fig 10c.
Fig. 11 shows LOM images of etched cross-sections of the
partially heated material for the P10, P20 and P30 settings,
respectively. It can be seen that the heating zone starts in the
centre of the material and grow towards the surface when the
power increases, which also is apparent from the hardness
proles in Fig. 10.
Figs. 12 and 13 show LOM images of the microstructure in
the transition and in the middle regions, respectively, for the
P30 sample. It can be seen that the material has started to
recrystallize in the transition region although the austenite
grains are barely visible. In the middle region the material is
fully recrystallized and the characteristic structure of austenite grains is seen.
3122
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
4.
Discussion
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
3123
radius method where it is a constant distance from the bending point to the arc centre in all forming steps. This method
will bend a part of the arc length in every forming step to its
nal shape. This means that the middle part of the arc length
is nished already in the 15 forming step. The method will
also give a superimposed tension on the bending. Therefore,
the hardness is almost the same for all bending angles since
the forming has occurred already in the rst forming step.
As a consequence of the combined bending and tension this
bending method will cause thinning of the sheet metal in the
bending zone. In this case, the thickness reduction was about
10%. The increased hardness in the neutral layer veries the
superimposed tension. If the constant arc length method
(see Fig. 6), which not superimpose tension in the material to
the same extent, had been chosen it probably would have been
possible to roll form the material with a lower power input to
a larger bending angle.
In this study, the only parameter that is varied is the power
input. Other parameters such as thickness and yield strength
of the material, and the velocity of the heating etc. can be varied. It can be expected that these parameters also will have an
inuence on the resulting forming properties. However, this
study has shown that by partially heating a cold rolled TRIP
steel the formability properties has increased substantially
thus making it suitable for roll forming.
5.
Conclusions
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank ORTIC AB, The Knowledge
Foundation (KK-stiftelsen), Jernkontoret, Triple Steelix and
Outokumpu Stainless AB for their technical and nancial support.
references
3124
j o u r n a l o f m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s i n g t e c h n o l o g y 2 0 9 ( 2 0 0 9 ) 31173124
Halmos, G.T., 2005. Roll Forming Handbook, rst ed. CRC Talylor
& Francis, New York.
Johannsen, D.L., Kyrolainen, A., Ferreira, P.J., 2006. Inuence of
annealing treatment on the formation of nano/submicron
grain size AISI 301 Austenitic stainless steels. Metall. Mater.
Trans. A 37, 23252338.
Mszros, I., Prohszka, J., 2005. Magnetic investigation of the
effect of -martensite on the properties of austenitic
stainless steel. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 161, 162168.
Mumtaz, K., Takahashi, S., Echigoya, J., Kamada, Y., Zhang, L.F.,
Kikuchi, H., Ara, K., Sato, M., 2004. Magnetic measurements of
the reverse martensite to austenite transformation in a rolled
austenitic stainless steel. J. Mater. Sci. 39, 19972010.
Petit, B., Gey, N., Cherkaoui, M., Bolle, B., Humbert, M., 2007.
Deformation behavior and microstructure/texture evolution
of an annealed 304 AISI stainless steel sheet. Experimental
and micromechanical modelling. Int. J. Plast. 23, 323341.
Spencer, K., Embury, J.D., Conlon, K.T., Vron, M.T., Brchet, Y.,
2004. Strengthening via the formation of strain-induced
martensite in stainless steels. Mater. Sci. Eng. A. 387389,
873881.
Trillo, E.A., Beltran, R., Maldonado, J.G., Romero, R.J., Murr, L.E.,
Fisher, W.W., Advani, A.H., 1995. Combined effects of
deformation (strain and strain state), grain size, and carbon
content on carbide precipitation and corrosion sensitization
in 304 stainless steel. Mater. Charct. 35, 99112.
PAPER 7
3D roll-forming of hat-profile with variable depth and width
Michael Lindgren, Lars-Olof Ingmarsson
Abstract
The use of roll-formed products in automotive, furniture, buildings etc. increases every year due to the low
part-production cost and the complicated cross-sections that can be produced. The limitation with
roll-forming until recent years is that one could only produce profiles with a constant cross-section in the
longitudinal direction. About eight years ago ORTIC AB [1] developed a machine in which it was possible to
produce profiles with a variable width (3D roll-forming) for the building industry. Experimental equipment
was recently built for research and prototyping of profiles with variable cross-section in both width and
depth for the automotive industry. The objective with the current study is to investigate the new tooling
concept that makes it possible to roll-form hat-profiles, made of ultra high strength steel, with variable
cross-section in depth and width. The result shows that it is possible to produce 3D roll-formed profiles with
close tolerances.
Keywords: 3D roll-forming, Variable cross-section, Flexible roll-forming, Profile, Ultra high strength steel.
1. Introduction
1.1 Background
Roll-forming is a sheet metal forming process where the forming occurs with rolls in several steps, often
from an undeformed sheet to a product ready to use. This is a highly productive process and the speed by
which the profiles can be formed is between 5-60 m/min depending on a second operation such as welding,
punching, etc that often is done in the same line. The use of the process increases due to the possibility to
produce complex products in material as ultra high strength steel.
The limitation with the process until eight years ago was that only a profile with constant cross-section
was possible to produce. At that time ORTIC AB [1] developed a method, 3D roll-forming, that could
produce panels to buildings where the cross-section was variable in the longitudinal direction, Figure 1.
Figure 1.
The method used is very flexible which means that panels with different geometry in the longitudinal
direction can be produced with the same set-up of roll-forming tools. The Budapest Arena for example is
covered with 4700 different individually shaped panels. Today many buildings worldwide have been covered
with panels produced using this method [2]. The success of the forming method has made other industries
interested.
The automotive industry is one area where 3D roll-forming is of great interest since the industry can utilise
the flexibility of the method together with the use of high strength steel with low part-production cost. A 3D
roll-forming experimental machine has been built to use for research and to fulfil the needs of prototypes for
the automotive industry. The difference compared to the machines for the building industry is that a profile
with variable depth can also be produced.
The objective with this study is to investigate a new tooling concept that makes it possible to roll form
hat-profiles with variable depth and width in longitudinal direction. To evaluate the new tooling concept
three different hat-profiles, one with constant cross-section and two with variable cross-section in depth and
width, are roll-formed and the tolerances from fifty profiles of each kind are compared.
Figure 2. A 3D roll-formed U-profile. Tension stress acts in transition zone where the U-profile is small and compression stress in the
transition zone where the profile is wider.
2. Experimental procedure
2.1 The roll-forming machine and new tooling concept
A 3D roll-forming experimental machine is used to form profiles with variable depth and width. The
machine has slitter heads, to fit the metal sheet, and six forming stands where every stand has four units. The
units have servo control axis, two translations and two rotations axis. The unit can be moved up and down, in
and out, rotate and the speed of the tool can be controlled individually.
The geometry of the tools is simple, i.e. the tools are completely cylindrical. This also means that the
thickness of the material can vary without having to install new tools. The size of the machine decides which
thickness of the material that can be roll-formed.
In this study a hat-profile with variable depth and width has been roll-formed and for this type of profile
the new tooling concept demand two forming stands per pass, Figure 3. Forming stand number 1, 3 and 5
form the left side of the profile and the forming stand number 2, 4, and 6 the right side. For example the
profiles are roll-formed in six forming steps with bend angles 15q, 30q, 45q, 60q, 75q and 85q and therefore
the profile demands two laps in the machine, the first 15q-45q and then the control program of the machine is
switched to the next lap 60q-85q.
The tools are the same for all stands, for example in Figure 4 one can see that the tools for the left and
right side are the same for both 30q and 60q. The difference between the passes is that tools that hold the
flange have moved up and moved closer to the tools that hold the web. The used flower pattern is a
function of the length of the profile. This flexibility makes it possible to use as many passes as the
cross-section requires without making more tools. It also makes it possible to produce profiles with, not only
variable width, but also, variable depth in different thickness of the material.
Figure 3. View from the top. The profile is roll-formed in six passes and to do that the profile must go through the machine two laps.
Forming stand number 1, 3 and 5 formed the left side and forming stand number 2, 4, and 6 formed the right side.
Figure 4. View from the back. The geometry of the tools is same for all forming stands. The only difference between, for example,
bend angles 30 and 60 is that the tools for the flange are moving up and closer to the tools that hold the web. Tools with constant
radius have been used, Lindgren et. al.[10].
The horizontal distance between the forming stands is 400 mm. The production speed that is used during
the tolerance tests is 2.6 m/min. A simple input and run out table is used and the profiles are hand fed both
the first and the second lap. First all profiles with the same cross-section go through their first roll-forming
lap. Then is the control program switch to the second lap and all profiles of same cross-section are finished.
Figure 6. Points (light dots) on the flanges (F), at the sides (S) and in the bottom (B) are measured and this is done in eleven
different cross-sections in the longitudinal direction.
Eleven different cross-sections in the longitudinal direction have been measured, five cross-sections in the
middle part of the hat-profile and three cross-sections in the ends, Figure 6. The distance between the
cross-sections is 100 mm. In every cross-section eleven points are measured, two on respective flange, two
on respective side and three points in the web, notations for the points see Figure 6.
Figure 7. The produced hat-profiles. The top profile is straight, the middle one has a waist on one side and the bottom is a conical
profile in both depth and width.
In Figure 8 the range, the difference between the maximum and minimum value, and the standard
deviation are presented for the straight hat-profile. The result shows that most points are below 1.2 mm in
range and a standard deviation of 0.3 mm or less. The maximum value is on the right flange, 1.46 mm, with a
standard deviation of 0.26 mm. The web has less variation than the flanges and the maximum value is 0.78
mm with a standard deviation of 0.19 mm. It can also be seen that the profiles have low variation in the
points, (B7,-600) and (B5, -600), this is where the profiles are fixed to the measurement fixture.
Figure 8. To the left is the range and to the right is the standard deviation for each point in longitudinal direction of the straight
hat-profile. The coordinate system, x = longitudinal direction, y = measured point, see Figure 6.
The result for the conical hat-profiles in depth and width, Figure 9, shows that the range for most of the
points is below 1.2 mm and with a standard deviation less than 0.3 mm. The highest value (range) is 1.52
mm with a standard deviation is 0.31 mm. This point is located in the left flange in the beginning of the
profile.
In Figure 10 the range and standard deviation are presented for the hat-profile with a waist on one side.
The range is less than 1.2 mm and the standard deviation is less than 0.3 mm for almost every point. The
maximum value is on the right flange in the beginning of the profile. The value is 1.67 mm and the standard
deviation 0.33 mm.
Figure 9. To the left is the range, the difference between the maximum and minimum value, and to the right the corresponding
standard deviation for the hat-profile with conical width and depth. The coordinate system, x = longitudinal direction, y = measured
point, see Figure 6.
Figure 10. The measured result for the hat-profile with a waist on one side is presented. To the left is the range, the difference
between the maximum and minimum value, and to the right is the corresponding standard deviation. The coordinate system, x =
longitudinal direction, y = measured point, see Figure 6.
3.2 Discussion
The focus in the current study is to investigate the new tooling concept and see if the cross-section
tolerances are similar for different types of 3D roll-formed profiles.
The profiles can be dived into three types:
1. Straight profiles. The tooling is not translating or rotating in z-direction (Figure 6) during the
forming. This is the same as in traditional roll-forming.
2. Conical profiles in depth and width. The tooling translates in z- and y-direction (Figure 6). This is
only still a bending in longitudinal direction. Then the residual stresses are similar as for straight
profiles
3. Profiles with transition zones, similar to the profile in Figure 3. The tooling will translate and rotate
in all direction during the forming.
It can be expected to be more difficult to fulfil tolerance requirements when forming conical profiles than
for straight profiles. However, the study shows that the tolerances are at the same level, Figure 8 and Figure
9. The range for most points is under 1.2 mm with a standard deviation of less than 0.3 mm. This means that
only translation of the tools does not make it more difficult to fulfil the tolerances.
Comparing the result of the forming of the profile of the third type with the straight profile show that the
tolerances are also in this case about the same in level, Figure 8 and Figure 10. The difference, apart from
that the tools translate and rotate in all directions, is that the profile will get residual stresses after forming
completely different from profile 1 and 2. This is due to complex material flow in this forming process and it
may warp the web and the flange, Figure 11. In the study the goal was to get a flange that was in the same
plane throughout the complete profile. To do that the length of the leg has been made longer in this area, see
Figure 12.
Figure 11. The complex material flow warps the web and the flange so the flange is not on the same plane in the longitudinal
direction.
Figure 12. In the study was a goal to get the flange in the same plane in the longitudinal direction. To do that the leg of the profile
was made longer in the warping zone. This is possible with the new tooling concept.
The tool concept requires one to hold on to the flange and the web in each forming station, Figure 4. To
be able to do so the flange has to have a certain width so that the material does not slip away from the tool
which would lead to variations of the width of the flange. During the test it has been noted that a width of at
least 10 mm is needed to avoid this problem.
4. Conclusion
Probably one of the first 3D roll-forming machines in the world with two translational and two rotational
degrees of freedom per axis has been built and used in the current study. Based on a specific tooling concept
hat-profiles with variable cross-section in depth and width has been produced using simple cylindrical
shaped rolls.
The main conclusions are:
x The new tooling concept makes it possible to roll-form hat-profiles with a variable cross-section
both in depth and width with tolerances on the same level as for straight profiles.
x The tools make it possible to roll-form different thickness of the material with only software
changes due to their simple, cylindrical shape.
x The flange of the hat-profile must be at least 10 mm to avoid that the flange slips in the tools and
thereby cause variations of the width
x Three different profiles have been identified in the study, type 1, which are completely straight,
type 2 are conical profiles and type 3, profiles with transitions zones. The first two give similar
residual stresses in the longitudinal direction and they are easy to produce. Type 3 gets residual
stresses that can give wavy edges, distortion of the web and flange, these profiles require careful
design of the process.
5. Reference
[1] ORTIC AB, (www.ortic.se)
[2] BEMO SYSTEM, (www.bemo.com)
[3] L. Ingvarsson: Innovativa stlprodukter-praktikfall baserad p rullformningstekniken, In: Proc. Stl
2004, May 2004, Borlnge, Sweden
[4] P. Groche, G. von Breitenbach, M. Jckel, A. Zettler: New tooling concepts for future roll forming
applications. In: Proc. ICIT 2003, Celje, Slovenia
[5] H. Ona: Study on development of intelligent roll forming machine, In: Proc. 8th ICTP 2005, Verona,
Italy
[6] P. Groche, A. Zettler, S. Berner: Development of a one-step-model for the design of flexible
roll-formed parts, The 9th International Conference on Material Forming; Glasgow, United Kingdom
April 26 - 28, 2006
[7] E. Gulceken, A. Abe, A. Sedlmaier and H. Livatyali: Finite element simulation of flexible roll
forming: A case study on variable width U channel. 4th International Conference and Exhibition on
Desing and Production of MACHINES and DIES/MOLDS, Cesme, TURKEY, 21-23/6/2007
[8] COPRA RF Software, (www.datam.com)
[9] MSC.Marc, (www.mscsoftware.com)
[10] M. Lindgren, U. Bexell, L. Wikstrm: Roll Forming of partially heated cold rolled stainless steel,
Journal of materials processing technology 209 (2009) 3117-3124
[11] gom, optical measuring techniques, (www.gom.com)
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank ORTIC AB, Swedish Knowledge Foundation, Jernkontoret, Dalarna University,
SSAB, VOLVO, SAAB, Bendiro and Swerea/IVF for their technical and financial support.