mfg 03 cost reduction on input material through blank amw

7/25/2019 MFG 03 Cost Reduction on Input Material Through Blank AMW

1/11

Simulation Driven Innovation 1

Cost Reduction on Input Material Through Blank Optimization & Nestingby Using Altair HyperForm.

Mr. Mohan Raj. HDeputy Manager

AMW Auto Components Ltd.34 km, Bhachau Road

Bhuj-370020 India

Mr. Thirunavukkarasu. KDeputy Manager


Bhuj-370020 India

Mr. Udayakumar. ADeputy Manager


Bhuj-370020 India

Mr. Sivalingam. TDeputy Manager


Bhuj-370020 India

Abstract

To obtain the demand of Low cost product with High Quality is the main MANTRA of each & every organization to keep their business

successful on the competitive global market. Even though this MANTRA has been set by management/customer, to execute & thrive

on this, engineering should initiate and realize Value engineering and Improvement proposals for making the products more cost

competitive. Simulation based virtual validation of engineers concepts are engrossed to the triumph of MANTRA.

Process validation study was made on stamping parts of Truck COWL. The purpose of this study is:-

1. To reduce input material by optimized strip layout,

2. To reduce lead time on Blank shape & size finalization,

3. To validate & predict the user concept design to control spring back,

4. And making First Time Thru (FTT) on Tool design.

To carry out the study of process validation we used of Altair HyperWorks.

COWL- Connecting Bracket Part:

Fig. 1


2/11


Process Methodology:

Process Flow: (Total 4 Stages carried out to complete the product)

This is the process method of connecting bracket manufacturing. Each and every operation plays a

major roll to get a quality product. The following parameters/issues to be taken care on each operations.

Fig. 2

Blanking :

First Forming:

Final Forming:

Piercing:

This is first operation, Blank shape & size leads to trim lineconfirmation of the final product dimensions,

This is second operation, in this positioning of the blank is mostimportant which decides the entire geometry of the final product,

This is third operation, which forms 100% of final product profile& dimensions. (Critical zone: Forming shape, Wrinkle, Crack &Dimensional variations)

This is final operation, Clamping location/Datum holes arepierced.


3/11


Blank Optimization:

Like above mentioned product, we have more products with more complex profile on this project. For

complicated & irregular profile parts, we faced problems for finalizing the Blank shape. Even though Radioss

One step Analysis provides the blank shape in a single click but still we cant able to take into consideration

as a final blank shape. To achieve the exact final shape we used the tool, Blank Optimization which helps us

to freeze the blank shape thru virtual simulation itself. The developed blanks thro optimizer is matching 98%

of actual component & this gives confident to implement & manufacture the Blanking tool without any trials.

When the trim edges are dimensionally important for any fit & functional requirements, then we may

require an additional trimming operation after forming to get the required product dimensions. And also it

requires an excess material for trimming allowance. By using optimization tool we can get the perfect trim

edge dimensions directly after forming without any additional operation & material.

In blank optimization, precise capturing of the final part profile after performing an incremental

forming analysis, the deviation between the final part edge from the analysis and the targeted part edge is

measured and applied to original blank profile. A new blank shape is then generated based on the applied

deviation. Material is removed or added in areas corresponding to deviations of the part edge with respect to

the target edge.

Results & Discussions:

Setup for First Forming Results for First Forming

Fig. 3 Fig. 4


4/11


Setup for Final Forming

Results for Final Forming

Fig. 5 Fig. 6

Process for Blank Optimization:

Input for Blank Optimization

Fig. 7


5/11


Generated Trim line on Formed State File (STA) matching with actual

Fig. 8

Fig. 9

Generated Trim line on Initial Blank

Fig. 10 Fig. 11


6/11


Spring Back Analysis:

Even though the designer develops the tools with good formability & thinning, there is another painful area,

which is to control the spring back on the components. Our Altair HyperWorks also address these issues and

it can predict and validate the spring back on the component for the conceptual design developed by the

designer. Altair HyperWorks not only supports the formability validation it also help us to achieve the

functional parameter of the components like fitment condition.

Fig. 13

Fig. 12 Fig. 14

We have done the forming simulation for all the components along with the spring back analysis. On the

simulation results we have got a spring back around 1.2mm (0.6mm/side) with the regular flat forming punch

(Fig 13). To control the spring back we have done several iteration with various design. At last we have

controlled the spring back within 0.1mm through the corner setting method with ironing groove in forming

punch (Fig 14). If we have done the same thing as practical, surely it takes long time to prove this concept.

Whereas thru, our Altair HyperWorks we have achieved the solution in an hours.


7/11


Simulation Result:

Fig. 15 Fig. 16

Before Spring Back Analysis with Regular Flat Punch After Spring Back Analysis with Regular Flat Punch

Fig. 17 Fig. 18Before Spring Back Analysis with Ironing Groove Punch After Spring Back Analysis with Ironing Groove Punch

Almost we had 25 parts with the similar kind of `U Bending products in this project, Hence we planned to

validate the Simulation vs. Actual for 1 part before applying the concept to all the parts. In our validation

process we have validated both flat punch & Ironing groove punch and the results are co-relates to the

simulation in both the cases.

Actual Result:

Spring Back on Flat punch No Spring Back on Ironing Punch

Fig. 19 Fig. 20


8/11


Nesting:

Blank Nesting is one of the most important things in the stamping die design, which determines the optimal

material usage through geometric nesting of blanks. If the nesting has been made in manual, there we can

only validate the target percentage of material utilization. But we cant able to find whether it is the best

optimal nesting. Whereas in Altair HyperWorks we can get the optimal strip layout in a single click and helps

us, to reduce input material cost & strip layout design time.

In manual nesting its very difficult to have various kinds of iterations, like rotating & mirroring the part and

nesting it to the maximum yield. Here in Blank nesting we make various kinds of iteration easily and selected

the best yield for the blanking tool design.

Generic method Strip layout:

Fig. 21

Strip width 71.8mmand the Pitch 39.2mm. Yield percentage 72.5%

As a theory, when the yield percentage is more than 65%, then it will be called as economic strip layout.

When, we designed with generic strip layout, designer will always look up to get more than the targeted

percentage of 65%. In Fig. 21 the layout gives yield percentage of 72% hence it looks to be a good design.

But we are not sure it is the best optimal design.

In such kind of situation HyperWorks Blank nesting supports us to get the optimal layout design. For the

same part we have done in blank nesting tool, there we got the yield percentage of 77%. It is 5% more thanthe designers idea.


9/11


Thru Blank nesting tool method Strip layout

Fig. 22

Strip width 71.0mmand the Pitch 37.2mm. Yield percentage 77.34%

This is a simple example shown here to understand the power of Blank nesting. We have done the blank

nesting for all the parts, there we have saved yield percentage of 5% to 12% for various products when

compared to designers concepts. It is huge savings in input material cost.


10/11


Benefits Summary:

1 2 2

2 3 0.5

3 & 0% ( ) %

4 2

5 2

6

1

3 10 ( )

10

11 3 1

12 3 4 1

In general Process design method it take lead time of 4 days for finalize the process whereas

thru simulation we can complete it in 2 days with more confidence with verification results.

For 1 part we saved 2 days on process finalization, as a project (55 parts) we have saved

around 110 mandays. Thru this new product development lead time was reduced.

Challenges:

In Blank optimization tool, we faced problem on getting the final part edge when the part have a curvature

and placing blank on non-normal to the Z-axis. For such kind of product we cant able to use the blank

optimization tool, Hence we gone more iteration with different blank size to confirm the dimensions of the

product.

In Blank Nesting tool, if we do nesting with 2 blanks we get the results within 5 to 10 minutes. While using

more than 2 blanks it takes more hours to calculate the same. When we have a same sheet thickness parts,

we have planned to have 3 or 4 blanks in single blanking tool to reduce process cost & increase the

productivity. In such areas when we tried the nesting it has taken huge time to conclude the layout.

Future Plans:

Earlier we have done only wheel based products, right now we used for our COWL project and implemented

successfully short span of time. So we planned to apply it for all our stampings business like Cabin Project,

White goods Businesses also.


11/11


Conclusions:

HyperWorks-Blank Nesting & Optimization we have saved input material cost by using optimized strip layout

design. The HyperWorks analytical software validates our innovations & provides confident to implement the

same in work shop physically. It saved our time by eliminating lot of tool trials. It also helps us to overcome

the resource availability for process development.

mfg 03 cost reduction on input material through blank amw

Documents