Anda di halaman 1dari 10
 
www.seipub.org/sas Solids and Structures (SAS) Volume 3 , 2014 20
 
Self-Piercing Riveting Process and Joint Modeling and Simulations
M. Grujicic
 *1
 , J.S. Snipes
1
 , S. Ramaswami
1
 , F. Abu-Farha
2
 
Departments of:
1
Mechanical Engineering; and
2
Automotive Engineering, Clemson University Clemson, SC 29634, USA
*
gmica@clemson.edu
 
Received 27 January 2014; Accepted 19 May; Published 4 June 2014 © 2014 Science and Engineering Publishing Company
 Abstract
A three-step computational approach is proposed to help establish the effect of various self-piercing riveting (SPR) process and material parameters on the quality and the mechanical performance of the resulting SPR joints. Using the results of a virtual-testing procedure, the constitutive relations for the simplified SPR connectors are determined, parameterized and validated. The availability of such connectors is mandatory in large-scale computational analyses of whole-vehicle crash.
Keywords
Self-Piercing Riveting; Process Modeling; Virtual Testing; Joint Connectors
Introduction
Self-piercing riveting falls into the category of fast, spot-type, sheet-metal mechanical-fastening processes. In contrast to traditional riveting, self-piercing riveting does not require pre-drilled or pre-punched holes and, therefore, no alignment between the rivet-setting machine and the sheets to be joined is required. Consequently, self-piercing riveting is typically a high-speed, one-step joining process. The results of the SPR-process modeling displayed in Figures 1(a)–(d) reveal the four basic stages (i.e. clamping, piercing, flaring and releasing) of this process. A comprehensive list of the main advantages and few limitations of SPR relative to the alternative  joining/fastening technologies can be found in Abe
et al.
 (2006). In the same reference, a brief overview of the main areas of application of SPR can also be found. A review of the open-domain literature carried out as part of the present work revealed a number of experimental studies of the SPR process [Abe
et al.
 (2006); Sun and Khaleel (2007); Sun
et al.
 (2007)]. These studies are focused mainly on the following aspects of this process: (a) an investigation of the effect of various process parameters such as rivet shape/material, worksheet materials and thicknesses, die shape, clamping force, punch force vs. time profile, etc. on the overall structural integrity of the resulting joint; (b) mechanical testing of the joints to determine their static, dynamic and cycling strengths under various combinations of shear and normal-types of loading; and (c) establishment of the functional relationships  between the SPR process parameters and the mechanical properties of the riveted joints. Besides real-time monitoring of the punch force vs. time profile during the SPR process, most of the aspects of this joining process could not be monitored (and, thus, controlled) in real time. Consequently, the effect of various SPR process parameters on the quality, structural integrity and mechanical performance of the self-piercing riveted joints relies upon the use of various post-mortem characterization/ measurement techniques. To overcome this limitation, computer modeling of the SPR process has been the subject of a number of investigations. A review of the open-domain literature carried out as part of the present work revealed a number of modeling studies of the SPR process and the structural behavior of the resulting joints [Stühmeyer (2005); Sommer and Maier (2008)]. The main limitation of these modeling/ simulation studies is that they focus on particular aspects of the process or joint performance. In other words, no attempt is made to relate the SPR process parameters to the SPR-joint mechanical performance as well as with the construction of SPR-joint line connectors used in large-scale computational simulations.
 
Solids and Structures (SAS) Volume 3 , 2014 www.seipub.org/sas 21
 
FIG. 1. A SCHEMATIC OF THE FOUR BASIC STAGES OF A SINGLE SPR PROCESS CYCLE, CALLED: (A) CLAMPING; (B) PIERCING; (C) FLARING; AND (D) RELEASING.
 The main objectives of the present work include: (a) finite-element modeling and simulations of the SPR process; (b) determination of the mechanical properties of the resulting SPR joints through the use of three-dimensional, continuum finite-element- based numerical simulations of various mechanical tests performed on the SPR joints; and (c) determination and parameterization of the constitutive relations for the simplified SPR connectors, using the results obtained in (b). The availability of such connectors is mandatory in large-scale computational analyses of whole-vehicle crash or even in simulations of vehicle component manufacturing, e.g. car-body electro-coat paint- baking process. In such simulations, explicit three-dimensional representation of all SPR joints is associated with a prohibitive computational cost.
Spr Process Modeling
Problem Definition
The problem analyzed in this portion of the work involves finite-element analysis of a prototypical SPR  joining process.
 Modeling and Computational Analysis 1)
 
Geometrical Model
An example of the geometrical model/ computational domain for the problem analyzed in this portion of the work is depicted in Figure 1(a). Since the tools (i.e. the punch, the pad and the die) undergo only (small) elastic deformation, they are modeled as rigid bodies, while the rivet and the two sheets are considered as elasto-plastic deformable bodies. Furthermore, due to the inherent axisymmetric nature of the region surrounding the rivet axis, the geometrical domain is treated as being axisymmetric. It should be noted that in order to reveal interior details of the computational model, a 300°, rather than 360°, angular portion of the model is shown in Figure 1(a).
2)
 
 Meshed Model
The mesh size, within different components, used in the SPR-process modeling was determined by carrying out a mesh-sensitivity analysis and represents a compromise between the computational efficiency and accuracy. Typically, the meshed model contained between ca. 30,000 and 10,000 quadrilateral plus triangular axisymmetric elements with finer elmements being used in the top/bottom sheet regions near the rivet.
3)
 
Computational Algorithm
All the calculations carried out in this portion of
 
www.seipub.org/sas Solids and Structures (SAS) Volume 3 , 2014 22
 
the work are based on a transient, displacement- based, purely-Lagrangian, conditionally-stable, explicit finite-element algorithm [Grujicic
et al.
 (2007, 2013)]. Since the SPR process is generally not associated with significant thermal effects, such effects are neglected in the present work.
4)
 
Initial Conditions
At the beginning of the analysis, all the components of the computational model are assumed to be stationary, and the deformable components are assumed to be stress-free.
5)
 
Boundary Conditions
The following boundary conditions were applied to the computational domain: (a)
Punch
 – A time-dependent downward (–
z
-direction) displacement was prescribed. (b)
Pad
 – A time-dependent downward holding-force was applied. (c)
Die
 – Completely fixed with respect to all its translational and rotational degrees of freedom. (d)
Rivet, top sheet and bottom sheet
 – Only the  boundary conditions consistent with the axisymmetric character of the problem are prescribed.
6)
 
Contact Interactions
 Punch/rivet, pad/top-sheet, top-sheet/bottom-sheet, rivet/sheets and bottom-sheet/die interactions are all modeled using the penalty-type normal-contact algorithm combined with a generalized Coulomb friction law [Grujicic
et al.
 (2012a, 2014)].
7)
 
 Material Models
Since the punch, pad and die are all treated as rigid  bodies, and a dynamic analysis was carried out, the only material property required for these components is their mass density. The mechanical response of the rivet and sheets is assumed to be governed by the same isotropic (linearly) elastic, and (strain-hardenable, strain-rate sensitive, thermally-softenable) plastic constitutive model (with different parameterizations). Furthermore, it is assumed that this response can  be mathematically represented using the Johnson-Cook material-model formulation. To enable piercing of the top and bottom sheets by the rivet, in addition to the deformation model, a progressive damage model had to be defined for the sheets to be joined. This was accomplished by employing the classical Johnson-Cook progressive-damage/ductile-failure model.
Typical Results
The results presented in this subsection were obtained for the following set of process/material parameters [Porcaro
et al.
 (2006b)]: (a) sheets material: A 6060 T4 and T6; (b) sheet thicknesses – 2 mm; (c) Boellhoff rivet C 5 x 6 made of high strength steel; (d) Boellhoff DZ 090 2025 die; (e) stroke-control piercing as defined in Figure 2; and (f) time-dependent clamping force as defined in Figure 2.
Time, s
     P    u    n    c     h     S     t    r    o     k    e ,    m    m     C     l    a    m    p     i    n    g     F    o    r    c    e ,     k     N
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25-6-5-4-3-2-10-14-12-10-8-6-4-20Punch StrokeClamping force
 
FIG. 2. PROCESS-MODELING INPUT FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS SHOWING TEMPORAL EVOLUTION OF PUNCH STROKE AND CLAMPING FORCE.
Spatial distribution of the attendant materials during the SPR process is shown in Figures 1(a)–(d). The four previously mentioned stages of this process can be readily identified by examining the results displayed in these figures. Figure 3 depicts the results pertaining to the functional relationship between the punch force (output) and the punch stroke (input). Examination of the results displayed in Figure 3 reveals that initially, as the rivet is piercing the top sheet, the increase in the magnitude of the (negative) punch force is relatively small. However, as the rivet penetrates the bottom sheet, approaches the rigid die, and begins to flare, the punch-force magnitude increases at a progressively higher rate.
Virtual Mechanical Testing of SPR Joints
The self-piercing riveting process is associated with a relatively large number of process and material parameters (e.g. rivet geometry and material, top and  bottom sheet-metal materials and thicknesses, die

Puaskan Keingintahuan Anda

Segala yang ingin Anda baca.
Kapan pun. Di mana pun. Perangkat apa pun.
Tanpa Komitmen. Batalkan kapan saja.
576648e32a3d8b82ca71961b7a986505