3DSfinal

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

1/22

3DS / Digital Die Design System

1

3DS

Digital Die Design System

Final Report

March 2003

Contributors: The 3DS Consortium

Editor: Naomichi Mori / CIMTOPS CORPORATION

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

2/22


2

1. Summary of Project

1.1 Introduction

The 3DS project was carried out as part of the Intelligent Manufacturing Systems (IMS) program,

with research partners from Japan, the EU, Canada and Swiss.

The ultimate aim of the project is to develop a digital die design system (3DS) for sheet metal

forming processes. 3DS should be a software system capable to aid sheet metal stamping die

design, by carrying out the computer tryout, instead of the actual tryout. This will save time,

money and resources.

A number of CAD systems for designing sheet metal forming tools have been developed, mainly in

the automotive industry, some of them being incorporated with finite element software. They are

intended to predict the eventual occurrence of forming defects and to optimize the shape of

stamping tools in the design stage. However, the performance of such systems is still far below the

original expectations, in spite of the progress achieved in both the physical and numerical

modelling of the process. The main reasons of this partial failure are:

- use of non-standardized and generally poor methods of quantitative evaluation of forming

defects,

- lack of rigorously-controlled experimental data on the forming processes producing defects,

- lack of an unbiased evaluation of the ability of the available physical models and numerical

software to predict forming defects.

The present project was carried out with three objectives that are aimed at significantly improving

this state of the art and which are considered as crucial for constructing an intelligent die design

system.

The first objective of the project is to develop definitions and methods of quantitative evaluation of

geometrical forming defects. A user-friendly, graphical software library is developed to illustrate

and quantitatively evaluate the forming defects on the computer. This processor system will

significantly facilitate the comparison of CAD, experimental and simulation data, thus providing a

key tool for the computer tryout of stamping tools.

The second and main objective is to conceive and perform a comprehensive set of benchmark

tests which enables to evaluate the ability of numerical codes to predict forming defects. In such

benchmark tests, obtaining reliable reference experimental data plays a key role. It is, therefore,

intended to promote a strong cooperation between the consortium partners performing the same

tests, in order to adopt and promote uniform experimental conditions and similar procedures of

defect measurement and evaluation. Furthermore, different types of finite element codes is used

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

3/22


3

for simulating the benchmark tests, in order to appraise the capability of various mechanical

models and numerical algorithms to predict forming defects.

The third objective of the project is to develop guidelines for selecting the most appropriateelastoplastic constitutive models for predicting various forming defects, as well as realistic friction

models to be used in computer simulations. The selected elastoplastic laws is identified and

validated by using sequences of tensile and simple shear experiments on sheets of several steels

and aluminium alloys. The friction laws is determined by using experiments as closed as possible

to the real contact conditions occurring during sheet metal forming. A special attention was given

to the optimum implementation of the selected models in the finite element codes used for the

benchmark simulations.

The results of the present project are expected to form the basis for achieving the final aim of

constructing an intelligent die design system for sheet metal forming.

1.2 PROJECT OBJECTIVES

A number of CAD systems for designing sheet metal forming tools have been developed, mainly in

the automotive industry. Some of them are incorporated with finite element software. They are

intended to carry out "tryout" on the computer, predicting the occurrence of forming defects and

optimizing the shape of stamping tools in the design stage (see Figure.1). However, the

performance of these systems has been rather far below the original expectations.

Indeed, the forming defects, such as wrinkles or surface deflection (see Figure 2) are at present

evaluated merely by visual inspection of experienced engineers or by mechanical procedures,

such as digital touch and stoning (hand - flat grinding to reveal surface unevenness). Detailed

measurements on 3D benches are scarce, due to the price and duration of such measurements.

A rather subjective evaluation method is also most often applied to defects predicted by

simulation. Moreover, the very definition and characterization of forming defects seems to vary

from one plant to another, and this renders very difficult the comparison of the results. To

significantly improve this situation, it is essential to establish a widely accepted system of

definitions and measurement procedures of forming defects.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

4/22


4

Figure 1. Present state of die design manufacturing process

As for the present ability of numerical methods to simulate sheet forming processes, it is beyond

any doubt that no single software can predict all types of forming defects. There are many finite

element codes employing different methods for sheet forming simulation, such as the rigid-plastic

or the elastoplastic methods, employing explicit or implicit time-integration schemes, the one-step

inverse method, and so on. At several international conferences, for example the VDI International

Conference held at Zurich, Switzerland in 1991, NUMISHEET'93 held at Isehara, Japan in 1993,

and NUMISHEET'96 held at Dearborn, USA in 1996, benchmark tests were organized to appraise

the capability of such methods to predict forming defects. However, most of the benchmark

experimental results obtained by different participants disagreed greatly with each other and thus

provided very poor reference data to evaluate the software. These unsatisfactory results are

largely due to the diversity of the tools employed (state of wear, surface quality, lubrication) and to

the insufficient control of the processing parameters, e. g. the blank holding force, which plays a

very significant role in the amount of the resulting springback (see Figure 3). Moreover, most of the

benchmark problems focused on the prediction of strain distribution, which can express only one

type of forming defect. For these reasons, the evaluation of the ability of numerical methods and

software to simulate forming defects is still incomplete and hardly reliable.

Numerical results are also strongly affected by physical models such as the material and friction

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

5/22


5

models. It is therefore essential to improve these physical models in order to obtain satisfactory

accuracy, especially for forming processes involving double-sided control of the sheet, large

plastic deformations and/or strain-path changes.

Figure 2. Defects of sheet metal forming

BHL=190KN

BHL=95KN

BHL=25KN

Figure 3. Springback of a U-profile after deep-drawing of a steel sheet with

different blank holding loads (BHL)

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

6/22


6

1.3 Project Structure

The project partners have backgrounds in the product and process engineering and/or in thecomputer and engineering sciences. All partners have specific know-how in the area of sheet

metal forming processes. The inter-regional consortium consists of 14 industrial companies, 1

national research institutes or organizations and 5 universities, from 9 countries belonging to four

IMS regions. The technical background of the partners is indicated in Table 1. This rather strong

participation is required in view of the large amount of experimental work (benchmark tests,

identification of material and friction laws) and of the numerical simulations which are necessary

for achieving a high reliability of data.

Table.1 Technical Background of the Consortium Members

Region Consortium Member Technical Background

Canada Forming Technologies

Incorporated

Developing non-linear FE codes

ARCELOR (France) Producing metal sheets

EU Cockerill-Sambre R&D (Belgium) Producing metal sheets

DaimlerChrysler AG (Germany) Producing automobiles

ESI (France) Developing software for sheet metal forming

Pechiney CRV (France) Producing metal sheets

Renault (France) Producing automobiles.

Volvo Car Corporation (Sweden) Producing automobiles

UTS S.p.A. (Italy) Product and process engineering, mainly for

automotive industry

CNRS-LPMTM (France) Developing material models and implementing

them into FE codes

FEUP-DEMEGI (Portugal) Developing experimental devices for tests on

metal sheets

DEM-FCTUC (Portugal) Developing FE codes

FAMOTIK, Ltd. Producing CAD software

Japan NISSAN MOTOR Co., Ltd. Producing automobiles.

PRESS KOGYO Co., Ltd. Producing member parts for trucks and buses.

TSUBAMEX Co., Ltd. Producing tools for sheet metal forming and

related software

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

7/22


7

Osaka Institute of Technology,

Dept. of Mechanical Engng.

Producing FE codes

University of Tokyo, Institute ofIndustrial Science

Developing new technologies in the field ofsheet metal forming

GSIS of Tohoku University Developing advanced techniques for material

characterization

Switzerland AutoForm Engineering GmbH Developing software for sheet metal forming

2. Research of Work Package

2.1 Work Package Plan and Summary of Results

In the 3DS project, the following three work packages are proposed and carried out.

WP1: Development of user-friendly methods and software for evaluating forming defects.

WP2:Evaluation and improvement of the ability of numerical software to predict forming defects.

WP3: Selection of appropriate physical models and their identification.

All three work packages are very closely related with each other as shown in Fig 4.

Fig.4 Relation among Work Packages in the 3DS.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

8/22


8

Workpackage 1: Development of user-friendly methods and software for evaluating

forming defects

Scope and objectives

The existence of forming defects is currently checked by means of visual, tactile or mechanical

inspection, a process which can hardly be systematized, due to the difficulty of comparing actual

products and designed products on a quantitative basis.

Another problem concerns the use of numerical results obtained in forming process simulation to

evaluate formability and to make comparisons with designed products. For example, when

evaluating the amount of "springback" of a part that has a complicated three-dimensional shape, it

is very difficult to make a meaningful comparison between a resulting numerical shape and the

original designed shape without a sound methodology.

It is thus clear that the prediction and the quantitative evaluation of forming defects requires a

unified treatment of three different types of geometrical data:

CAD data as reference models, which are represented as surface models.

CAE data resulting from computer simulations, which are represented as nodal

co-ordinates of the mesh.

Measurement data from real physical objects, which are represented as co-ordinates of

some selected points.

The goal of WP1 is to establish a methodology for characterizing and evaluating the forming

defects. The methodology should be incorporated into a user-friendly, digital environment, a

numerical tool which could be possibly utilized even without possessing outstanding skills of sheet

metal forming processing.

To attain this goal, conventional evaluation methods need to be restructured into a new formalism

which should possess three essential properties: computer readable and repeatable

representation, simple implementation, and clear validation.

Description of the work

Task 1: Standardization of object data and necessary conditions for data acquisitionConventionally, the shapes of real formed products have been examined by visual inspection and

measurement, by using such tools as jigs, gauges, calipers, and so on. To make a quantitative

evaluation of forming defects and a meaningful comparison, it is essential that unified treatment of

three different types of geometry. In this task, we aimed at determining common formats for

geometrical data such as CAD data, CAE results, and measurements data and to develop the

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

9/22


9

matching method for co-ordinate systems of different types of data within this task. However, for

the common format mentioned above, the data acquisition method should be made under

standard conditions. These should consist of measurement procedures and of a method forpost-processing the measurement data.

Summary of Results:

The matching method for co-ordinate systems targeted specific shapes were developed. In the

Phase 2, further development will be made so that some other shapes can be treated.

Task 2: Definition of forming defects

It is essential to share clear and compatible definitions of forming defects between different

companies and institutes belonging to the consortium. A classification of forming defects and

definition of intrinsic values for surface and geometrical defects were developed. Self-sufficient

definitions of these features without redundancy was given by using certain extensions of the

differential geometry of surfaces. The surface of each defect model has some global features,

which describe overall distortions, such as the surface being "bent" or "twisted", and local features,

which describe local distortions and their locations.

Summary of Results:

Various type of forming defects appearing during press forming sheet were classified and defined

by European Partner and Japanese partner. It was separated into two categories, one directly

interesting in the project. Because a name and definition of defects vary according to countries, it

had modified and added and finally agreed about the contents.

Task 3: Characterization and evaluation of forming defects

Establishment of a reliable method for characterization and evaluation of forming defects is one of

the most important tasks of work package 1. A robust method for the extraction of intrinsic values

defined in task 2 from discrete point data such as measurement data or simulation results was

developed. A verification method, as well as algorithms for derivation of defect models from

examples of the format defined in task 1, were also proposed and tested. Task 3 includes also the

developing of a new filtering method for noisy measurement data.

Summary of Results:

One of important task, the evaluation methods were developed that allow us to grasp a cause of

defects quantitatively on the computer. In the Phase I, we developed Springback(2D) evaluation

method, Surface Strain evaluation method. With these evaluation methods, quantitative

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

10/22


10

evaluation became possible. In the Phase 2, we extended targets, a method for 3 dimensional

shape and twisting are carried out.

Task 4: Development of a defect evaluation processor

Software modules are needed to systematize the evaluation method of forming defects, because

they should replace complicated operations that are usually performed by experienced engineers.

The modules are consist of functions for calculating the characterization parameters and to

recognize the forming defects according to the definitions proposed in task 2.

Task 4 provides the basic modules for constructing a forming defect evaluation processor. This

software library also includes the graphic modules which can display the location of the forming

defects, thus allowing to estimate and control the product quality in the forming process.

Summary of Results:

The software incorporated evaluation methods developed in Task 3 were developed. Tried to

apply to actual forming process, we could confirm the effectiveness that this software was

applicable to actual forming products. However, applicable shape is limited to specific shape

targeted in the project. In the Phase 2, we are tackling with new target shape for practical

application.

Workpackage 2: Evaluation and improvement of the ability of numerical software to predict

forming defects


WP2 aims at evaluating and improving the ability of numerical codes to predict such forming

defects. An essential task of this workpackage is to establish, perform and thoroughly document a

set of reliable experimental benchmark tests for evaluating the ability of a numerical code to

predict forming defects.

We also investigate the characteristics of the numerical methods and codes developed and/or

used by the consortium partners, by using the results of the benchmark tests, in order to develop

the most appropriate numerical methods for evaluating forming defects during the product and tool

design stage.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

11/22


11


Task 1: Definition of a set of experimental benchmark tests for evaluating numericalmethods

In press stamping, a variety of parts, such as a very large and complex-shaped automobile body

panel, a thick and large truck frame member, or a medium-sized deeply drawn cup, are formed by

using tools that have different sizes, shapes and structures. On the other hand, in the press

stamping process, many different forming defects are observed, such as tearing, wrinkling,

surface deflection, springback, twisting, and surface damage. It is well known that no single

numerical software can simulate all stamping processes and/or predict all types of forming

defects. Therefore, appropriate standard benchmark tests are needed, in order to evaluate the

applicability of numerical software to a specific process for predicting defects with sufficient

accuracy. The aim of this task is to perfectly define the conditions of such tests.

To this end eight representative benchmark tests have been selected in order to study a large

variety of forming defects (see Fig. 5). The first five of these benchmarks make use of different

types of rails, which are expected to present respectively 2D-springback (change in shape along

the cross section), 3D-springback (change in shape along the cross direction and curvature along

the longitudinal direction), warping (curvature along the longitudinal direction), and twisting (twist

angle along the longitudinal direction), and a combination of these effects. The sixth test is a panel

with a central depressed part, which will present a surface deflection near the indent and a large

shape deviation from the CAD geometry before and after trimming, as well as wrinkles on the

panel surface. The last two tests consider axisymmetric deep drawing processes leading to

wrinkling, earing, or rupture (limiting drawing ratio).

On each defined type of tool, 15 different forming conditions was considered, by choosing three

different blankholder pressures and five different materials (a mild steel, a high-strength steel, a

dual phase steel and two aluminium alloys), as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Materials to be characterized and used for the benchmarks

Material Grade Thickness Provided b

Al allo 5xxx 5182-O 1 mm Pechine

Al allo 6xxx 6016-T4 1 mm Pechine

Mild steel DC06 0.7 mm ARCELOR

HSLA QSLE340 0.7 mm Cockerill-Sambre

Dual hase steel DP600 0.7 mm ARCELOR

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

12/22


12

Fig.5 Representation of the eight experimental benchmark tests

Summary of Results:

A set of experimental benchmark tests for evaluating numerical methods are defined. Foreach

defined type of tool, 15 different forming conditions was examined and defined, by choosing three

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

13/22


13

different blankholder pressures and five different materials (a mild steel, a high-strength steel, a

dual phase steel and two aluminium alloys)

Task 2: Carrying out the experimental benchmark tests and geometrical measurement of

the parts

The set of benchmark tests defined in task 1 were carried out, thus providing a comprehensive

database for the further evaluation of the software ability to predict forming defects

In order to ensure a high reliability of the results, each benchmark were carried out by several

partners. To avoid differences in tooling design and wear, all partners used new stamping tools, of

identical design, and produced by the same toolmaker. Furthermore, each contributing partner

performed five identical tests for each benchmark, in order to evaluate the consistency of the

results.

The pressed parts were thoroughly measured by each company performing the test, according to

the available facilities. For each part produced, experimental data e.g. the evolution of the forming

load vs. punch displacement, the thickness distribution along identified cross sections, and the

geometrical description of the part shape and defects were collected as reference data for

comparison with the results of numerical simulations. The measurements were obtained from

devices placed within the stamping tooling, the instrumentation of the press, and from

conventional metrology equipment, such as 3D co-ordinate measuring machines.

Any case of discrepancy were thoroughly analyzed and the incriminated tests were repeated with

the participation of other partners. This represents, of course, a considerable experimental effort,

since each test performed by a partner is necessitate the drawing and measurement of at least 75

press parts. Table 3 shows the tests that were carried out by the partners of the inter-regional

consortium.

Table 3. Participation of the inter-regional consortium to the experimental benchmarks

Benchmark No.Partner

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

ARCELOR x x x x

Cockerill-Sambre x x

DaimlerChrysler x x x

Volvo x x

Renault x x

Pechiney CRV x x x x x

FEUP x x x x

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

14/22


14

NISSAN x x

PRESS GOGYO x x x x x x

TSUBAMEX x x x x

Summary of results:

The set of benchmark tests defined in task 1 were carried out to provide a comprehensive

database for the further evaluation of the software ability to predict forming defects.

In order to have reliable results, each benchmark was carried out by several partners. Mostly we

could have satisfactory results of benchmark tests. However, we observed there were some

scattering in results of aluminum. In Phase 2, we continuously pursuing a mechanism of the

causes.

Task 3: Standardization of input-output data for benchmark tests

The input output data utilised for simulating the forming processes and for evaluating the

numerical results should be standardized. In particular, the content of the input data, including the

forming condition and the tool geometry must be unified in order to prevent some errors that occur

frequently in the evaluation of the numerical methods. This task is closely related to the data

formats discussed in WP1.

Summary of results:

In order to standardize the input and output data, first input-output data format was specified for

simulation of the benchmarks and the tool geometry data (for punch, die, blankholder) was

distributed to the partners performing numerical simulations. About the most appropriate finite

element type and size, contact, strategy, tool description / discretization and dynamic parameters

were considered.

Task 4: Evaluation and improvement of the ability of numerical methods to predict forming

defects

The consortium members numerically simulated the benchmark tests proposed in task 1, by using

the finite element codes listed in Table 4. It is worth noting that these codes cover almost all

numerical strategies currently employed in the simulation of sheet metal forming (dynamic explicit,

static explicit, semi- or fully implicit, one-step methods, etc.). On the other hand, the set of codes

used by the consortium members include extensively used commercial codes like OPTRIS,

AUTOFORM, PAM-STAMP and LS-DYNA, as well as a few codes developed by academic or

research institutions belonging to the inter-regional consortium.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

15/22


15

Table 4. Participation of the inter-regional consortium to benchmark simulations

Benchmark No.Partner FE codes used for

simulations 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8ARCELOR OPTRIS, AUTOFORM x x x x

Cockerill-Sambre OPTRIS x x

DaimlerChrysler LS-DYNA, INDEED x x x

Volvo LS-DYNA,

AUTOFORM

x x x x

Renault PAM-STAMP x x

Pechiney CRV OPTRIS x x x x

UTS OPTRIS x x x x x x xCNRS-LPMTM DD2IMP x x x

FCTUC PAM-STAMP, DD3IMP x x x

ESI OPTRIS x x x x x x x

AutoForm AUTOFORM x x x x

F.T.I. FAST Suite x x x x x x x x

NISSAN ITAS3D, AUTOFORM x x x x

PRESS KOGYO PAM-STAMP x x x x x x

Osaka Institute ITAS-Dynamic x x x x x

This provides an excellent background for a comprehensive and unbiased evaluation of the

ability of various types of numerical modelling to predict forming defects and for improving the

available numerical strategies. Each consortium partner develops the necessary interfaces

that is necessary for implementing the models of elastoplastic and friction behaviour selected

in WP3 and identified for the five materials. Furthermore, it was intended to perform - for a

limited number of the benchmark tests sensitivity studies concerning the influence of the

material and friction parameters and of the finite element mesh on the numerical results

obtained.

Summary of Results:

At first the procedure for evaluating the ability of a numerical method and software to predict each

type of forming defects were clearly defined. The simulations of the benchmark tests were carried

out. We could confirm validity of physical models developed in the WP3 and the accuracy.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

16/22


16

Workpackage 3: Selection of appropriate physical models and their identification


A variety of new sheet materials, such as high strength steels, aluminium alloys, titanium alloys,

copper alloys, laminated sheets and coated steel sheets, are on the market. New sheet materials

always cause technological difficulties in forming processes mainly because their mechanical and

tribological properties during sheet forming are unknown. 3DS could be a powerful tool to

overcome these difficulties by using simulations to establish optimum forming methods and

forming conditions. However, for the numerical simulation to provide realistic results, accurate and

efficient physical models are of primary importance.

Two major physical aspects are involved in sheet metal forming simulation. One is the

elastoplastic deformation of sheet metals and the other is the friction between the sheet and tools.

Both problems have been addressed by other research projects, too. The originality of our

approach is the attempt to obtain the best compromise between the accurate description of the

materials behaviour and the efficiency of the numerical simulations for steel and aluminium

sheets.


Task 1: Selection and identification of elastoplastic and friction models for the materials

and tools used in the benchmarks

The main constitutive models considered in this project is isotropic or anisotropic elasticity, initial

plastic orthotropy described by Hill48 model, isotropic and/or non-linear kinematic hardening,

rotation of the orthotropy axes at large deformations.

The initial anisotropy was determined by uniaxial traction and simple shear tests on specimens

oriented at different angles to the rolling direction. The deformation-induced plastic anisotropy was

characterized by first deforming large specimens in traction or simple shear, subsequently cutting

out small specimens at different angles to the preshear direction, and subjecting them to either

simple traction or simple shear. The results obtained was validated by using plane strain and

bulging experiments.

As far as friction is concerned, three different zones should be considered in the deep drawing of

sheets: the zone under the blank-holder, where the contact pressure is moderate and the relative

displacements between the sheet and the tools are large; the zone on the die radius, where the

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

17/22


17

contact pressure is high and the relative displacements are large, while the friction phenomena

combine with plastic deformation; finally, the zone under the punch, where the pressure is low and

the relative displacements are small. Therefore, the friction tests developed in this task simulatesas close as possible the contact conditions on these three zones for the tooling, the materials, and

the blank-holding pressures used in the experimental benchmarks.

Summary of results:

The anisotropy of the elastic constants by tensile tests on very stiff machines and by other

non-destructive techniques were determined. Uniaxial tensile tests and/or simple shear tests in

various directions of the sheet plane was performed in order to determine the initial anisotropy and

the hardening under monotonic loading. Large-amplitude, cyclic simple shear tests for the

investigation of the kinematic hardening were performed. Sequences of simple shear and tensile

tests with intermediate change of the loading direction for the investigation of the distorsional

hardening were performed. The strain rate sensitivity was determined. Appropriate constitutive

models for the 5 materials by using the experimental result were identified.

the development of mathematical formulation for the evolution of deformation induced texture for

the metal with BCC Lattice, the rotation of principal axes of plastic anisotropy caused by

pre-straining in polycrystalline sheet metal and material parameter identification methods for

elastic / Crystalline Viscoplastic finite element analysis were carried out.

Task 2: Selection of effective numerical algorithms for implementing the physical models

into numerical codes

The numerical methods employed in numerical codes make use of various time-integration

schemes. To incorporate the elastoplastic and friction models developed in Task 1 into the

numerical methods tested by all consortium partners, robust time integration algorithms was

developed, checked on standard numerical benchmarks, and optimized. A special contribution

was brought by ESI and Autoform, who developed and optimized the implementation of the

material and friction models into the commercial code OPTRIS, respectively AUTOFORM, which

are used by several partners. The implementation of the material and friction models into the other

codes used for numerical simulation were assured by Volvo for LS-DYNA, DaimlerChrysler for

INDEED, Renault for PAM-STAMP, CNRS-LPMTM for DD2IMP, FCTUC for DD3IMP, FTI for

FAST Suite, NISSAN for ITAS3D and Osaka Inst. for ITAS-Dynamic; this implementation will be

made available for the other partners using the same codes.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

18/22


18

Summary of results:

Effective numerical algortithms were selected for implementing the physical models into numerical

codes. At the same time, development of mathematical formulation for the evolution ofdeformation induced texture for the metal with BCC Lattice, the rotation of principal axes of plastic

anisotropy caused by pre-straining in polycrystalline sheet metal and material parameter

identification methods for elastic / Crystalline Viscoplastic finite element analysis were carried out.

Task 3: Verification of the appropriateness of the selected physical models for predicting

forming defects

The accuracy of the simulation results and efficiency of computation for the physical models

selected in task1 and the numerical algorithms implemented in task 2 were evaluated by using

sensitivity tests on the benchmarks defined and carried out within WP2.

Summary of results:

The appropriateness of the selected physical models were validated by using sensitivity tests

defined and carried out within WP2. Aiming for improvement of physical model, we are

implementing the development of physical model in loading process in Phase 2.

3. Project Administration

3.1 Project Management Structure

The project management was organised such as to ensure an extensive international

collaboration with minimal administrative cost and efficient use of time and resources. The

Inter-regional management structure of the 3DS project is shown in Figure 9.

Both inter-regional and European project management are structured with a project co-ordinator, a

steering committee, a technical committee, and working package leaders.

Within the 3DS consortium, the Steering Committee has the overall responsibility of the project. It

consists of the Regional Co-ordinating Partners,with Famotik Co., Ltd. acting as Inter-regional

Co-ordinating Partner.

The technical management is carried out by the Technical Committee, who set the research

directions according to the objectives of 3DS, and by the Work Package Leaders , who gave

advice on current research and certify the quality of the partial and final reports. The resolutions of

the technical committee were decided by unanimity.

The personal composition of the steering and technical committees and the leadership of the work

packages (WPs) is as follows.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

19/22


19

3.2 Administrative Structure

The 3DS Steering Committee have met at least twice a year and the Consortium membersattended at least one of these meetings. The Technical Committee met several times when

necessary. If the committee members wanted to meet, meetings were held at any time. During

steering and technical meetings, report reviews were made in order to make sure that the

expected results are obtained and no obscure points are left unsolved.

In order to maintain a continuous contact between Task Leaders and partners involved in a

particular work, the Task Leaders organised so-called video conference at intervals of one or one

and a half months, in order to have a clear view of what is on the way and to avoid

misunderstandings about the goals and the delays. This was also avoid postponing the necessary

decisions up to the next meeting.

A general meeting of all consortium partners were held at every milestone of the project.

Figure 6. The 3DS Management Structure.

3.3 Communication Infrastructure

In the preparation of project, we exchanged information among partners through the network of

electric mail. This solution was fast and worked very well. However, once project was started, a

size of data include experimental data, presentation data were became large and we faced

difficulties to exchange such as large size of data.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

20/22


20

In order to solve such problems, we constructed common server called Project Extranet Server

that permits us to share and to manage information. This server consists of Cabinet for upload

and download experimental data, meeting minutes etc., Bulletin Board for communication amongpartner, Scheduler for notification of schedule, Circulation for circulate information among

partners, and Forum for discussion among partners. With this server, regardless of country,

partners could obtained necessary information at any time. It can be not exaggerate to say that

this server facilitate global communication, that is one of important issue in the international

collaboration research. Thus an excellent and efficient research work environmental was realized.

4. Consortium Composition

4.1 Regions involved and ICP/RCP

Regions Involved:Japan, EU, Canada, Switzerland

International Coordinating Partner (ICP): Famotik Co., Ltd.

Regional Coordinating Partners (RCP) :

Japanese Region: Famotik Co., Ltd.

European Union Region: ARCELOR

Canadian Region: Forming Technologies Incorporated

Swiss Region: AutoForm Engineering GmbH

4.2 Consortium Partners

[Canada Region]

Industrial Partners:

Forming Technologies Incorporated

[European Union Region]


Cockerill-Sambre R&D (Belgium)

DaimlerChrysler AG (Germany)

ESI (France)

Pechiney CRV (France)

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

21/22


21

Renault (France)

ARCELOR (France)

Volvo Car Corporation (Sweden)UTS S.p.A (Italy)

Academic Partners:

CNRS-LPMTM (France)

FEUP-DEMEGI (Portugal)

DEM-FCTUC (Portugal)

[Japan Region]


FAMOTIK, Ltd.

NISSAN MOTOR Co., Ltd.

PRESS KOGYO Co., Ltd.

TSUBAMEX Co., Ltd.

Academic Partners:

Osaka Institute of Technology, Dept. of Mechanical Engng.

The University of Tokyo, Institute of Industrial Science

GSIS of Tohoku University

[Switzerland Region]


AutoForm Engineering GmbH

5. Dissemination of results

In accordance with IPR and Consortium Collaboration Agreement(CCA), the results of 3DS will be

disseminated through presentation at conferences, seminars and workshop, as well as

publications in scientific journals. The following deliverables will be public; Models identification,

Friction coefficients, Benchmark results, physical models verification and physical model reports.

8/13/2019 3DSfinal

22/22


22

*Note:

This final report is written by present ICP in Phase 2, Mr. Naomichi Mori of CIMTOPS Corporation.

Because the former ICP, Mr. Taizo Ono of Famotik. Ltd. faced severe company crisis and Famotikwas impossible to continue the project. Therefore, instead of Famotik, present ICP, CIMTOPS

Corporation took over ICP (include researchers).

3DSfinal

Documents

Transcript of 3DSfinal