A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods

Eren Billur, Muammer Koç

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Hydraulic bulge testing is a material characterization method used as an alternative to tensile testing with the premise of accurately representing the material behavior to higher strain levels (̃70% as appeared to ̃30% in tensile test) in a biaxial stress mode. However, there are some major assumptions (such as continuous hemispherical bulge shape, thinnest point at apex) in hydraulic bulge analyses that lead to uncertainties in the resulting flow stress curves. In this paper, the effect of these assumptions on the accuracy and reliability of flow stress curves is investigated. The goal of this study is to determine the most accurate method for analyzing the data obtained from the bulge testing when continuous and in-line thickness measurement techniques are not available. Specifically, in this study the stress-strain relationships of two different materials (SS201 and A15754) are obtained based on hydraulic bulge test data using various analysis methods for bulge radius and thickness predictions (e.g., Hill's, Chakrabarty's, Panknin's theories, etc.). The flow stress curves are calculated using pressure and dome height measurements and compared to the actual 3-D strain measurement from a stereo optical and non-contact measurement system ARAMIS. In addition, the flow stress curves obtained from stepwise experiments are compared with the ones from above methods. Our findings indicate that Enikeev's approach for thickness prediction and Panknin's approach for bulge radius calculation result in the best agreement with both stepwise experiment results and 3D optical measurement results.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationProceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008
Pages59-65
Number of pages7
Volume1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2009
Externally publishedYes
EventASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008 - Evanston, IL, United States
Duration: 7 Oct 200810 Oct 2008

Other

OtherASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008
CountryUnited States
CityEvanston, IL
Period7/10/0810/10/08

Fingerprint

Plastic flow
Hydraulics
Testing
Thickness measurement
Strain measurement
Tensile testing
Domes
Experiments

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
  • Mechanical Engineering

Cite this

Billur, E., & Koç, M. (2009). A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods. In Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008 (Vol. 1, pp. 59-65) https://doi.org/10.1115/MSEC_ICMP2008-72238

A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods. / Billur, Eren; Koç, Muammer.

Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008. Vol. 1 2009. p. 59-65.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Billur, E & Koç, M 2009, A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods. in Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008. vol. 1, pp. 59-65, ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008, Evanston, IL, United States, 7/10/08. https://doi.org/10.1115/MSEC_ICMP2008-72238
Billur E, Koç M. A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods. In Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008. Vol. 1. 2009. p. 59-65 https://doi.org/10.1115/MSEC_ICMP2008-72238
Billur, Eren ; Koç, Muammer. / A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods. Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008. Vol. 1 2009. pp. 59-65
@inproceedings{c6f87c3b9edf427382a6a39bb7a3c661,
title = "A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods",
abstract = "Hydraulic bulge testing is a material characterization method used as an alternative to tensile testing with the premise of accurately representing the material behavior to higher strain levels (̃70{\%} as appeared to ̃30{\%} in tensile test) in a biaxial stress mode. However, there are some major assumptions (such as continuous hemispherical bulge shape, thinnest point at apex) in hydraulic bulge analyses that lead to uncertainties in the resulting flow stress curves. In this paper, the effect of these assumptions on the accuracy and reliability of flow stress curves is investigated. The goal of this study is to determine the most accurate method for analyzing the data obtained from the bulge testing when continuous and in-line thickness measurement techniques are not available. Specifically, in this study the stress-strain relationships of two different materials (SS201 and A15754) are obtained based on hydraulic bulge test data using various analysis methods for bulge radius and thickness predictions (e.g., Hill's, Chakrabarty's, Panknin's theories, etc.). The flow stress curves are calculated using pressure and dome height measurements and compared to the actual 3-D strain measurement from a stereo optical and non-contact measurement system ARAMIS. In addition, the flow stress curves obtained from stepwise experiments are compared with the ones from above methods. Our findings indicate that Enikeev's approach for thickness prediction and Panknin's approach for bulge radius calculation result in the best agreement with both stepwise experiment results and 3D optical measurement results.",
author = "Eren Billur and Muammer Ko{\cc}",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1115/MSEC_ICMP2008-72238",
language = "English",
isbn = "9780791848517",
volume = "1",
pages = "59--65",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - A comparative study on hydraulic bulge testing and analysis methods

AU - Billur, Eren

AU - Koç, Muammer

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Hydraulic bulge testing is a material characterization method used as an alternative to tensile testing with the premise of accurately representing the material behavior to higher strain levels (̃70% as appeared to ̃30% in tensile test) in a biaxial stress mode. However, there are some major assumptions (such as continuous hemispherical bulge shape, thinnest point at apex) in hydraulic bulge analyses that lead to uncertainties in the resulting flow stress curves. In this paper, the effect of these assumptions on the accuracy and reliability of flow stress curves is investigated. The goal of this study is to determine the most accurate method for analyzing the data obtained from the bulge testing when continuous and in-line thickness measurement techniques are not available. Specifically, in this study the stress-strain relationships of two different materials (SS201 and A15754) are obtained based on hydraulic bulge test data using various analysis methods for bulge radius and thickness predictions (e.g., Hill's, Chakrabarty's, Panknin's theories, etc.). The flow stress curves are calculated using pressure and dome height measurements and compared to the actual 3-D strain measurement from a stereo optical and non-contact measurement system ARAMIS. In addition, the flow stress curves obtained from stepwise experiments are compared with the ones from above methods. Our findings indicate that Enikeev's approach for thickness prediction and Panknin's approach for bulge radius calculation result in the best agreement with both stepwise experiment results and 3D optical measurement results.

AB - Hydraulic bulge testing is a material characterization method used as an alternative to tensile testing with the premise of accurately representing the material behavior to higher strain levels (̃70% as appeared to ̃30% in tensile test) in a biaxial stress mode. However, there are some major assumptions (such as continuous hemispherical bulge shape, thinnest point at apex) in hydraulic bulge analyses that lead to uncertainties in the resulting flow stress curves. In this paper, the effect of these assumptions on the accuracy and reliability of flow stress curves is investigated. The goal of this study is to determine the most accurate method for analyzing the data obtained from the bulge testing when continuous and in-line thickness measurement techniques are not available. Specifically, in this study the stress-strain relationships of two different materials (SS201 and A15754) are obtained based on hydraulic bulge test data using various analysis methods for bulge radius and thickness predictions (e.g., Hill's, Chakrabarty's, Panknin's theories, etc.). The flow stress curves are calculated using pressure and dome height measurements and compared to the actual 3-D strain measurement from a stereo optical and non-contact measurement system ARAMIS. In addition, the flow stress curves obtained from stepwise experiments are compared with the ones from above methods. Our findings indicate that Enikeev's approach for thickness prediction and Panknin's approach for bulge radius calculation result in the best agreement with both stepwise experiment results and 3D optical measurement results.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77951285228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77951285228&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1115/MSEC_ICMP2008-72238

DO - 10.1115/MSEC_ICMP2008-72238

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:77951285228

SN - 9780791848517

VL - 1

SP - 59

EP - 65

BT - Proceedings of the ASME International Manufacturing Science and Engineering Conference, MSEC2008

ER -