<th id="5nh9l"></th><strike id="5nh9l"></strike><th id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><th id="5nh9l"></th><strike id="5nh9l"></strike>
<progress id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><th id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">
<th id="5nh9l"></th> <strike id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><span id="5nh9l"></span>
<progress id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><span id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><span id="5nh9l"></span><strike id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><strike id="5nh9l"></strike>
<span id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">
<span id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">
<span id="5nh9l"></span><span id="5nh9l"><video id="5nh9l"></video></span>
<th id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><th id="5nh9l"></th>
<progress id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">

不同的多點成形工藝方式對回彈的影響

Influence of different technology modes on spring-back in multi-point forming

  • 摘要: 采用有限元數值模擬手段針對多點成形過程中產生的回彈現象進行了探討.主要對比了多點模具成形和多點壓機成形兩種不同工藝,分析了不同的工藝條件對回彈的影響.采用先顯式方法計算成形,后隱式方法計算回彈,對1mm與2mm厚度的球形曲面件進行了數值模擬.結果表明:在沖頭為10×10的多點模具成形方式下,采用無壓邊成形,成形1mm厚度的板料時,曲率半徑為400mm的成形件回彈量沿縱向最大為1.22mm;但在相同條件下,用多點壓機成形工藝的成形件,回彈量僅為0.24mm,即一次成形時,多點壓機成形的板料比多點模具成形的板料回彈量僅為1/5;多點壓機成形厚度為2mm的板料回彈約為0.多點壓機成形方式比多點模具成形方式成形效果好,回彈量明顯減小.

     

    Abstract: Finite element method was used to numerically simulate spring-back in multi-point forming (MPF). By contrasting two forming modes of multi-point die (MPD) and multi-point press (MPP), the influence of different forming modes on spring-back was analyzed. Firstly figuration was simulated by explicit method, and then implicit method was imported to calculate the spring-back of the spherical parts of 1 mm and 2 mm in thickness. The results indicate that when forming a figuration piece of 400 mm in curvature and 1 mm in thickness by the MPD forming mode of 10×10 array without hold blank, its spring-back value is 1.22 mm up to the most. But under the same condition, the spring-back value only is 0.24 mm by MPP. Namely the spring-back value of a metal sheet by MPP is 1/5 that by MPD. Moreover the spring back value is approximately 0 when forming a spherical part of 2 mm in thickness by MPP. It is concluded that MPP is better for MPF than MPD, and spring back value is sharply reduced.

     

/

返回文章
返回
<th id="5nh9l"></th><strike id="5nh9l"></strike><th id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><th id="5nh9l"></th><strike id="5nh9l"></strike>
<progress id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><th id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">
<th id="5nh9l"></th> <strike id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><span id="5nh9l"></span>
<progress id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><span id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><span id="5nh9l"></span><strike id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><strike id="5nh9l"></strike>
<span id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">
<span id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">
<span id="5nh9l"></span><span id="5nh9l"><video id="5nh9l"></video></span>
<th id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l"><th id="5nh9l"></th>
<progress id="5nh9l"><noframes id="5nh9l">
259luxu-164