Metalforming Simulation: The Quick and the Dead
February 1, 2011Comments
When Australian toolmaker Die Engineering Pty. Ltd. faced the recent challenge of developing the die for deep-drawing the front-bumper reinforcement for the Toyota Camry, from a 590-MPa-tensile-strength Japanese steel, it needed to quickly determine if it could compete with other toolmakers that had quoted the part to be drawn in a minimum of two stages. Thanks to sheetmetal-forming
 |
Die Engineering won the job and proceeded with tool design based on the simulations provided at quotation. To be successful in the press, it was critical to use simulation to validate the final tool design. Here, the firm relied on virtual tryout using StampingSimulation.com’s SimulateLite Service. In addition, a sample of the 590-MPa production steel was sent to ThyssenKrupp Steel Services, Detroit, MI, for uniaxial tensile-strain testing. Die Engineering received the test data in less than 24 hr., and fed the data into the simulation to ensure accurate results.
Says Paul Elliston, Die Engineering director: “It was critical for the timing and cost of the project that we make acceptable parts at first tool tryout. After simulation, we calculated the required binder force and lubricant requirements, but our first part split. We immediately checked the blank size and realized we had cut the trial blank larger than the simulation determined. After making a simple blank-size adjustment, the die began to form acceptable parts without splits or wrinkles. The customer couldn’t believe it.”
Elliston estimates that using simulation early in the project and by simulating the final tool design reduced the tryout process by at least 4 to 5 days. In fact, he’s certain that the job would have been lost at quotation if it was not determined that the product was feasible in one draw.
StampingSimulation.com: 866/617-8267; www.stampingsimulation.com
See also: StampingSimulation.com Pty. Ltd.
Technologies: Software
Webinar