Advertisement

Influence of Lubricants on Coefficient of Friction in Tube Hydroforming

  • S. P. Rudraksha
  • S. H. GawandeEmail author
Article
  • 2 Downloads

Abstract

In this paper, the effect of different lubricants on coefficient of friction in tube hydroforming using mathematical model is presented. To determine the minimum coefficient of friction in tube hydroforming, a mathematical model is used based on tube upsetting method. The presented models uses the given geometrical parameters of the tube to estimate optimized inner pressure (pi) and optimized initial thickness of the tube (S0) obtained from the mathematical model. Using optimized inner pressure (pi) and optimized initial thickness of the tube (S0), minimum COF (µ) between tube and die interface is determined. Experiments are carried out on manufactured component metal expansion bellows using different geometrical parameters, materials SS304, SS316 and SS316L with lubricants Enklo68, Enklo47, Enklo32, Enklo100 and ethylene glycol. The influence of these lubricants on COF for each material is investigated.

Keywords

Tube hydroforming (THF) Coefficient of friction (COF) Lubricants 

Abbreviations

S0

Initial wall thickness (mm)

S1

Wall thickness at the side of movable punch (mm)

S2

Wall thickness at the side of fixed punch (mm)

da

Initial outer diameter of the tube (mm)

di

Initial inner diameter of the tube (mm)

di1

Final inner diameter of the tube at the side of movable punch (mm)

di2

Final inner diameter of the tube at the side of fixed punch (mm)

h0

Initial height of tube (mm)

h

Final height of tube after deformation (mm)

C

Strength coefficient

n

Strength hardening exponent

pi

Inner pressure of tube

S0

Initial tube thickness

µ

Coefficient of friction

Notes

Funding

This work is not supported fully or partially by any funding organization or agency.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

References

  1. 1.
    Koç M, Altan T (2001) An overall review of the tube hydroforming (THF) technology. J Mater Process Technol 108(3):384–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dohmann F, Bieling P (1991) Theoretical basis and applications of high pressure forming. Bleche Rohre Profile 38(5):379–385Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dohmann F, Hartl C (1994) Liquid bulge forming as a flexible production method. J Mater Process Technol 45(1–4):377–382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dohmann F, Hartl C (1998) Hydroforming components for automotive applications. Fabricator, 30–38Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rudraksha SP, Gawande SH (2017) Optimization of process parameters to study the influence of the friction in tube hydroforming. J Bio Tribo Corros 3(4):56.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s40735-017-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Story JM, Jarvis GW, Murtha SJ (1993) Issues and trends in automotive aluminum sheet forming. SAE Publication Sp.- vol 944, pp 1–25Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rao KP, Wei JJ (2001) Performance of a new dry lubricant in the forming of aluminum alloys sheets. Wear 249:86–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Erdemir A, Fenske GR (1998) Clean and cost-effective dry boundary lubricants for aluminum forming. SAE Special Publication, NO. SP-1350, pp 9–17Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simonetti C (2000) Why are you lubricating on-site, Fabricating Equipment News, October, pp 55–57Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kang BH, Lee MY, Shon SM, Moon YH (2007) Forming various shapes of tubular bellows using a single step hydroforming process. J Mater Process Technol 194(1-3):1–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Limb ME, Chakrabarty J, Garber S, Mellor PB (1973) The forming of axisymmetric and asymmetric components from tube. In: Proceedings of the 14th international machine tool design and research conference, pp 799–805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee BH, Keum YT, Wagoner RH (2002) Modelling of the friction caused by lubrication and surface roughness in sheet metal forming. J Mater Process Technol 60(3):130–131Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hwang YM, Huang LS (2005) Friction test in tube hydroforming. Proc Inst Mech Eng B 219(8):587–593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dohmann F, Klass F (1987) “Liquid bulge forming of tubular work pieces. Striped Sheets Tubes 4(1):7–10Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mariela L, Bibiana ML (2008) Numerical simulation of the lubricant performance in tube hydroforming. J Mater Process Technol 198(1–3):372–380Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Prier M, Schmoeckel D (1999) Tribology of internal high pressure forming. In: Proceedings of international conference on hydroforming, Stuttgart, Germany, Oct 12–13Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Meyer W, Dohmann F (1997) Tribology in internal high pressure forming (in German), Blech Rohre Profile, 36–39, OctGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morgan B, Brownbeck P (2000) Lubricant interaction in hydroforming of tubes. Hydroforming J 11:14–16Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dalton G (1999) The role of lubricants in hydroforming. In: Proceedings of the automotive tube conference, Detroit, Apr 26–27Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ngaile G, Tibari K, Altan T (2000) Progress in tube hydroforming-formability, friction and design guidelines. In: Proceeding of international conference on innovations in THF Tech., Troy, June 13–14Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koc M (2004) Advance in tube hydroforming–An enabling technology for low-mass vehile manufacturing - material, lubrication, loading, simulation issues and alternatives. Tsinghua Sci Technol 9(5):527–545Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vollertsen F, Plancak M (2002) On possibilities for the determination of the coefficient of friction in hydroforming of tubes. J Mater Process Technol 125–126(9):412–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Plancak M, Vollertsen F, Woitsching J (2005) Analysis, finite element simulation and experimental investigation of friction in tube hydroforming. J Mater Process Technol 170(1-2):220–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering Department, P.E.S Modern College of EngineeringS. P. Pune UniversityPuneIndia
  2. 2.Industrail Tribology Laboratory, Mechanical Engineering Department, M.E.S. College of EngineeringS. P. Pune UniversityPuneIndia
  3. 3.Mechanical Engineering Department, Trinity College of Engineering and ResearchS. P. Pune UniversityPuneIndia

Personalised recommendations