Bulging limit of AZ31B magnesium alloy tubes in hydroforming with internal and external pressure

  • Xianchang Mao
  • Youping YiEmail author
  • Shiquan Huang
  • Hailin He


The bulging process of AZ31B magnesium alloy tubes in hydroforming with internal and external pressure (THFIEP) was simulated using the commercial finite element software Dynaform and considering plasticity theory and the yield criterion. The investigations focused on the influence of the processing parameters (the corner radius of the tool (r), the taper angle of the conical core (φ), the length of the bulging zone (l), the axial supplement of the tubes (s), the internal pressure (Pi), and the external pressure (Po)) on the maximum bulging diameter (dmax). The results showed that the dmax increased significantly with increasing r when r was less than 3 mm, and dmax remained stable with increasing r when r was larger than 3 mm. The influences of φ, l, s, Pi, and Po on the dmax were similar; the dmax first increased then decreased with increasing values of these parameters. The optimum bulging processing parameters were determined, r was 5 mm, φ was 12°, s was 10 mm, l was 37.5 mm, Pi was 34 MPa, Po was 17 MPa, and the obtained optimum dmax was 40.43 mm.


Magnesium alloy Tubes Processing parameters Numerical simulation Maximum bulging diameter 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


Funding information

The authors received financial support from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 51505504) and the Science Research Foundation of Guangxi Educational Department (Grant no. KY2016YB456).


  1. 1.
    Xie HY, Dong XH, Ai ZQ, Wang Q, Peng F, Liu K, Chen F, Wang JF (2016) Experimental investigation on electrically assisted cylindrical deep drawing of AZ31B magnesium alloy sheet. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 86:1063–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Somekawa H, Tsuru T (2017) Effect of alloying elements on grain boundary sliding in magnesium binary alloys: experimental and numerical studies. Mater Sci Eng A 708:267–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gronostajski Z, Kaczyński P, Polak S, Bartczak B (2018) Energy absorption of thin-walled profiles made of AZ31 magnesium alloy. Thin-Walled Struct 122(2):491–500CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Xia XS, Xiao L, Chen Q, Li H, Tan YJ (2018) Hot forging process design, microstructure, and mechanical properties of cast Mg–Zn–Y–Zr magnesium alloy tank cover. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 94:4199–4208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin P, Sun Y, Chi CZ, Wang WX (2017) Effect of plastic anisotropy of ZK60 magnesium alloy sheet on its forming characteristics during deep drawing process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 88:1629–1637CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hama T, Yi T, Uratani M, Takuda H (2016) Deformation behavior upon two-step loading in a magnesium alloy sheet. Int J Plasticity 82:283–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tang ZJ, Liu G, He ZB, Yuan SJ (2010) Wrinkling behavior of magnesium alloy tube in warm hydroforming. Trans Nonferrous Metals Soc China 20:1288–1293CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Xu JR, Zhou YQ, Cui JJ, Sun GY, Li GY (2017) Experimental study for rubber pad forming process of AZ31 magnesium alloy sheets at warm temperature. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89:1079–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang WR, Chen SC, Tao KH, Gao KX, Wei XC (2017) Experimental investigation of limit drawing ratio for AZ31B magnesium alloy sheet in warm stamping. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 92:723–731CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lin YL, He ZB, Yuan SJ, Wu J (2011) Formability determination of AZ31B tube for IHPF process at elevated temperature. J Mater Process Technol 21(4):851–856Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lorenzo RD, Ingarao G, Chinesta F (2010) Integration of gradient based and response surface methods to develop a cascade optimisation strategy for Y-shaped tube hydroforming process design. Adv Eng Softw 41(2):336–348CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cui XH, Mo JH, Li JJ, Xiao XT (2017) Tube bulging process using multidirectional magnetic pressure. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 90:2075–2082CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ge YL, Li XX, Lang LH, Ruan SW (2017) Optimized design of tube hydroforming loading path using multi-objective differential evolution. Int J Adv Manuf Techno 88:837–846CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang LF, Guo C (2008) Determination of stress–strain relationship of tubular material with hydraulic bulge test. Thin-Walled Struct 46(2):147–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ngaile G, Lowrie J (2018) Punch Design for Floating Based Micro-Tube Hydroforming Die Assembly. J Mater Process Technol 253:168–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang LF, Rong HS, He YL (2014) Deformation Behavior of a Thin-Walled Tube in Hydroforming with Radial Crushing Under Pulsating Hydraulic Pressure. J Mater Eng Performance 23(2):429–438CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu JW, Liu XY, Yang LF, Liang HP (2013) Determination of flow stress of thin-walled tube based on digital speckle correlation method for hydroforming applications. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 69(1–4):439–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yang LF, Hu GL, Liu JW (2015) Investigation of forming limit diagram for tube hydroforming considering effect of changing strain path. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 79(5-8):793–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Song WJ, Heo SC, Ku TW, Kim J, Kang BS (2010) Evaluation of effect of flow stress characteristics of tubular material on forming limit in tube hydroforming process. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50(9):753–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cui XL, Yuan SJ (2016) Determination of mechanical properties of anisotropic thin-walled tubes under three-dimensional stress state. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 87:1917–1927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cui XL, Wang XS, Yuan SJ (2014) Experimental verification of the influence of normal stress on the formability of thin-walled 5A02 aluminum alloy tubes. Int J Mech Sci 88:232–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Smith LM, Ganeshmurthy S, Alladi K (2003) Double-sided high-pressure tubular hydroforming. J Mater Process Technol 142:599–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Cui XL, Wang XS, Yuan SJ (2014) Deformation analysis of double-sided tube hydroforming in square-section die. J Mater Process Technol 214:1341–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cui XL, Wang XS, Yuan SJ (2015) The bulging behavior of thick-walled 6063 aluminum alloy tubes under double-sided pressures. JOM 67(5):909–915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Yuan SJ, Cui XL, Wang XS (2015) Investigation into wrinkling behavior of thin-walled 5A02 aluminum alloy tubes under internal and external pressure. Int J Mech Sci 92:245–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hashemi SJ, Moslemi Naeini H, Liaghat GH, Azizi Tafti R (2015) Prediction of bulge height in warm hydroforming of aluminum tubes using ductile fracture criteria. Arch Civil Mech Eng 15:19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    He ZB, Yuan SJ, Liu G, Wu J, Cha WW (2010) Formability testing of AZ31B magnesium alloy tube at elevated temperature. J Mater Process Technol 210:877–884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Liu G, Tang ZJ, He ZB, Yuan SJ (2010) Warm hydroforming of magnesium alloy tube with large expansion ratio. Trans Nonferrous Metals Soc China 20:2071–2075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hwang YM, Lin YK (2007) Evaluation of flow stresses of tubular materials considering anisotropic effects by hydraulic bulge tests. J Eng Mater Technol 129(3):414–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yuan SJ (2016) Modern hydroforming technology (second edition), vol 12. National Defense Industry Press, pp 26–27Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Xianchang Mao
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Youping Yi
    • 1
    • 3
    Email author
  • Shiquan Huang
    • 1
    • 3
  • Hailin He
    • 1
    • 3
  1. 1.College of Mechanical and Electrical EngineeringCentral South UniversityChangshaChina
  2. 2.School of Mechanical & Electric EngineeringHezhou UniversityHezhouChina
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of High Performance Complex ManufacturingChangshaChina

Personalised recommendations