Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: FE code and yield criterion used by each team, with (A) for an associated law, (NA) for a non-associated choice. For polycrystalline model, their use for identification (I) or forming simulations (F) is noted in last column. The source of the set of anisotropy parameters used (benchmark committee, own identification) is also indicated

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques:

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Coefficients of Yld2004–18p associated with the common choice of m = 8 (Line 1 from POSTECH, Line 2 from NTNU, both based on physical experiments, and Line 3 from NTNU based on virtual tests by Damask crystal plasticity simulations)

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques:

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Measured experimental points, CP modelling results and Yld2004–18p yield function cut as well as plastic strain directions: a Yield surface of biaxial stress state in RD-TD plane; b Direction of plastic strain rate in biaxial tension

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques:

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of the experimental yield locus and the predictions using Yld2000-2D and Yld2004–18p identified by POSTECH on physical experiments

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques: Comparison

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison of the experimental with the predictions using Yld2000-2D and Yld2004–18p identified by POSTECH on physical experiments: a normalized flow stress and b r -values

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques: Comparison

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Mechanical tests used for the phenomenological yield locus identification

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques: Shear

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison between experimental and predicted results by Yld2004–18p criterion with data set of POSTECH, using ABAQUS explicit (POSTECH VUMAT) and with data set of NTNU for their own UMAT implementation in ABAQUS (see “ ” Section (Table )): ( a ) punch force-displacement, ( b ) earing profile

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques: Comparison

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison between experimental and predicted results by Yld2004–18p criterion with the anisotropy coefficients provided by POSTECH and NTNU (see “ ” Section (Table )), using LS-DYNA (built-in; USiegen): a punch force-displacement, b earing profile

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques: Comparison

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: FE predictions of the anisotropy for uniaxial loadings according to Yld2004–18p criterion for the anisotropy coefficients, provided by POSTECH and NTNU (see “ ” Section (Table )), using LS-DYNA (USiegen) and ABAQUS (POSTECH): a uniaxial tensile flow stresses, b Lankford coefficients ( r -values)

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques:

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: Comparison between experimental and predicted results by Yld2004–18p criterion with the anisotropy coefficients identified based only in mechanical data or considering also computer experiments, as described in “ ” and “ ” Sections (Table ): a punch force-displacement, b earing profile

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques: Comparison

Journal: International Journal of Material Forming

Article Title: Analysis of ESAFORM 2021 cup drawing benchmark of an Al alloy, critical factors for accuracy and efficiency of FE simulations

doi: 10.1007/s12289-022-01672-w

Figure Lengend Snippet: FE prediction synthesis and error vs. experimental values for models using a blank discretization by solid elements. Global error values lower than 0.01 are highlighted in bold

Article Snippet: The models that predict 8 ears (the 2-D orthotropic yield criteria HomPol4, HomPol6, Yld2000-2D) and the 3-D orthotropic yield criterion Yld2004–18p (POSTECH data set and NTNU based on physical experiments and simulations conducted with their own implementations in the FE code ABAQUS) have an earing amplitude much lower than Hill48 or the experimental one (see Fig. or Tables and ).

Techniques: