Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
(OP)
I am trying to do deep drawing in ABAQUS. While to do this, I'm getting help to ABAQUS examples which is name Deep Drawing a Square Box. In my model look everything is ok. But my punch reaction force is very low. In addition I did this model experiment in our laboratory. For example my model max punch force 4000 N but in experiment real punch force for same material nearly 12000 N.Are there any mistake on my model? My model link is below:
http://yadi.sk/d/3HLYXvCmLHwfM
http://yadi.sk/d/3HLYXvCmLHwfM





RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
Are you new to this forum? If so, please read these FAQ:
http://www.eng-tips.com/faqs.cfm?fid=376
http://www.eng-tips.com/faqs.cfm?fid=1083
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
http://yadi.sk/d/EAj3JWBCLdvtM
http://yadi.sk/d/Nsk5I9I1Ldvxf
http://yadi.sk/d/sDvP-dPPLdw3d
http://yadi.sk/d/GyRybuefLdw4g
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
Explicit does work better when you have contact and elastic plastic material as the stability conditions aren't rigorously enforced. In the static analysis I ran there were problems reaching the final time with not enough increments and so on, but if you include contact controls and the right time step then it runs and runs much quicker than an explicit analysis.
In your model you have shell elements. How these behave when you have stresses exceeding yield through part of the thickness I'm not sure of. In the 2D axisymmetric model I ran, I could model the actual thickness and non linear stress distribution through that. Perhaps changing the elements in the 3D model to brick elements might produce better results, though this would be expensive computationally if you include enough elements through the thickness.
If your experimental results differ significantly for the different size blanks then use a 3D model but as a first step, and as a means of understanding the general behaviour, I'd recommend using a 2D axisymmetric model first. This can be generated relatively quickly from your existing 3D geometry. Using a 2D approach means you can assess the sensitivity of the results to changing various factors, such as element types, friction,etc. and also get results in a matter of minutes. Then try running the full kit and caboodle 3D model.
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
http://yadi.sk/d/7pHQ7sqZLjbBh
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing
In the axisymmetric model, which includes the actual thickness of the blank, the plate thickness reduces considerably at one point and presumably that must be the point of failure. Perhaps if you change your elements for the blank to 3D brick elements then you'd see the same effect. Presumably the material will fail once it reaches UTS for that large strain. You'll need about 6 elements through the thickness to model this if you're using linear elements. I'd also go back to the quarter symmetry model if you want the model to run in less than a day for a dynamic explicit analysis.
RE: Abaqus 3d Deep Drawing