Magnesium Forged Components

for Structural Lightweight Transport

Applications

Contract #: COLL-CT-2006-030208
Document type: Deliverable report
Title: Deliverable D5.1.6 Process modeling and optimization
Deliverable D5.2.1. Process simulation
Authors: T. Pepelnjak (UL–FME), R. Werkhoven (TNO)
Issued by: Dr. ing.Ion Bădoi (INTEC, WP5 leader)
Dissemination level: RE

Collective Research Project funded by the European Community within the Framework of the
Specific Research and Technological Development Programme “Integrating and Strengthening
the European Research Area” (Sixth Framework Programme 2002–2006)
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION
2. SPECIFIC INPUT FOR MAGNESIUM FORGING
SIMULATION
2.1. Specific input for Magnesium Forging Simulation
2.2. List of Simbols
3. MG-ALLOY MECHANICAL PROPERTIES – FLOW CURVES
3.1. Stage of flow curves of anisotropic material
3.2. Flow curves as a function of position in feedstock
3.3.a. Results of evaluation of the flow curve of ZK60
over the slab cross section – Longitudinal
direction
3.3.b. Results of evaluation of the flow curve of ZK60
over the slab cross section – Transverse - axial
direction
4. MATERIAL MODEL FOR FEM SIMULATIONS
5. DETERMINATION OF THE FLOW CURVE EQUATION FOR
AZ80 USING STATISTICAL METHODS
6. FEM SIMULATIONS OF FLOW CURVES
6.1. Flow curves according to the modified Field-
Backoffen equation – longitudinal according to
the feedstock axis
6.2. Cubic B – spline approximations of the flow curves
– at 45 degrees according to the feedstock axis
7. INFLUENCE OF ANISOTROPY, STRAIN RATE AND
TEMPERATURE ON AZ80 FLOW CURVES
7.1. Flow behavior of AZ80, T=300⁰C, strain rate from
0.1 to 10 s-1
7.2. AZ80 flow curves – analyses of anisotropic
material behavior
8. FLOW CURVE EQUATIONS FOR AZ80 OBTAINED BY
USING STATISTICAL METHODS AS AN INPUT FOR FEM
CODES
8.1. Material properties of analysed AZ80 T5 feedstock
with 28 mm diameter
8.1.a. Thermal conductivity
8.1.b. Friction properties
9. FRICTION MODEL AND EXPERIMENTAL PROPERTIES
9.1. Friction model and experimental details
10. CASE STUDY: SHOCK ABSORBER FEM COMPARISON
10.1. General and material data for forging
simulation
10.2. Die data for forging simulation
11. FLOW CURVES OF AZ80 ALLOY AT DIFFERENT STRAIN
RATES AND TEMPERATURES
12. FORCE PREDICTION INVOLVED FEM CODES:
SUPERFORGE, DEFORM 3D, FORGE,
SIMUFACTFORMING
13. PREDICTION OF FLOW EVOLUTION FOR AZ60 ALLOY
WITH DIFFERENT FEM CODES: SUPERFORGE, DEFORM
3D, FORGE
14. PREDICTION OF FLOW EVOLUTION FOR AZ60 ALLOY
WITH DIFFERENT FEM CODES: ABAQUS, SIMUFACT
15. COMPARISON OF FORGING SAMPLE FOOTPRINT
WITH FEM PREDICTED SHAPES
16. EVALUATIONS OF SOME IMPORTANT CRITERIONS OF
DIFFERENT FEM CODES
17. CONCLUSION
 1. INTRODUCTION
The process simulation represents in nowadays industrial work reliable tool for prediction of forming
processes for sheet metal forming as well as for the bulk metal forming;
Several commercial programmes are on the market which can be divided into: specialized
programmes like Forge, Deform, PamStamp etc. and general programmes like ABAQUS.
The first group is divided into programmes for sheet-metal forming (PamStamp, Autoform
etc.) and bulk-metal forming (Deform 3D, Forge 3D, Q-Form, SuperForge etc.);
The simulation of magnesium forging represents challenge for simulations since the
material express high anisotropic behavior;
Since the forging of the Mg-alloys represent termo-elasto-plastic problem where not only
the flow curve of the material shall be exact described but also the thermal conditions
during the forming like the heating of the material, thermal conductivity and heat transfer
from the workpiece to the die have to be considered;
The direct description of the material’s flow curve at various temperatures and strain rates
with a formula where the parameters “K”, “n” and “m” are to
determine as non-constant ones;
The selected FEM programme has to be capable to consider the variation of the flow curve
with temperature and strain rate;
The friction among the tool and the die is described commonly with two friction laws:
Coulomb friction law with friction coefficient at lower contact pressures and constant
shear law with factor m at higher pressures;
 1. INTRODUCTION
Since the anisotropy of the magnesium alloys current represent problem for most
computer programmes the benchmark on aluminium alloy was selected for the first
evaluation phase;
Used FEM programme was : MSC Superforge (Special-purpose forging programme),
Abaqus (General-purpose programme), Deform 3D (Special-purpose extrusion/forging
programme), Forge 3D (Special-purpose forging programme), SimuFact (Special-purpose
forging programme);
The relevance for the selection of proper FEM programme was analysed on following
evaluation parameters;
Estimation of reliability of results (forming force, prediction of the final geometry);
Existing database of materials (number of material in the database, number of lightweight alloys in the
database, estimated time to insert new material into the database);
Costs (for commercial license), calculation costs;
Price of the software (commercial license) with all modules necessary to perform FEM
simulation of multi step forging process;
Yearly maintenance costs (commercial license) and user friendliness;
Parametric connection of CAD software and determination to which software the
connection is possible;
Module of CAD design, Module for automatic optimization and Command menus aspect;
Other usable menus.
 2. SPECIFIC INPUT FOR MAGNESIUM FORGING SIMULATION

2.1. Specific input for Magnesium 2.2. List of Simbols

Forging Simulation
Name Symbol Unit
Mechanical properties Temperature T °C
flow curves properties and Strain rate -/s, s-1
anisotropy Diameter D mm
density (literature) Length L mm
true stress σ MPa
Young modulus (MagForge) true strain , -
Poisson’s modulus (MagForge) exponent e
Thermal properties: heat capacity Cp J/kgK
coefficient of linear expansion density ρ kg/m3
(MagForge) thermal conductivity λ W/mK
thermal conductivity – from thermal diffusivity α m2/s
coulomb friction coefficient μ -
thermal diffusivity (MagForge) von misses friction coefficient m -
specific heat (literature) press speed, ram speed v, v_ram m/s, mm/s
inelastic heat fraction (literature) shear stress MPa
Tribological properties: thermal expansion α /°C
friction properties Modulus of elasticity E MPa, GPa
contact definition. Poison ratio ν -
anisotropic factors r0, r45, r90 -
 3. MG-ALLOY MECHANICAL PROPERTIES – FLOW CURVES
3.1. Stage of flow curves of anisotropic material

a – without material softening Mg-alloy flow curve

b - with material softening at warm forging above 250⁰C
Hexagonal close packed (h. c. p.) crystal
cell and pre-extrusion of the feedstock
material results in orientation of the
crystallographic structure  material
properties an not equal in different
directions according to the feedstock
longitudinal axis  anisotropic
material properties
 3. MG-ALLOY MECHANICAL PROPERTIES – FLOW CURVES
3.2. Flow curves as a function of position in feedstock
GOAL: determination of the material properties according to the position in the cut-off bar
Test pieces were analysed according to the below presented plan:
T = 300⁰C, strain rate = 1 s-1

Dimensions Φ240 x 85 mm
 3. MG-ALLOY MECHANICAL PROPERTIES – FLOW CURVES
3.3.a. Results of evaluation of the flow curve of ZK60 over the slab cross section –
Longitudinal direction

150

140

130
L41
120 L75
L109 - "inner"
110

100
L7 L1 = 7mm
90 "outer"
L2 = 7mm
True stress [MPa]

L5 = 41mm
80
L6 = 41mm
L9 = 75mm
70
L10 = 75mm
60 L13 = 109mm
L14 = 109mm
50

40

30

20

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
True strain [/]
 3. MG-ALLOY MECHANICAL PROPERTIES – FLOW CURVES
3.3.b. Results of evaluation of the flow curve of ZK60 over the slab cross section –
Transverse - axial direction
130

120
150 mm - "inner"
110
189 mm -
100

90
228 mm - "outer"

80
True stress [MPa]

70 Ta1 = 150mm
Ta2 = 189mm
60 Ta3 = 228mm

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
True strain [/]
 3. MG-ALLOY MECHANICAL PROPERTIES – FLOW CURVES

3.3.c. Flow curve of ZK60 over the slab cross section with 240 mm in diameter

Material properties are non-homogenous according to the slab’s cross-section

Scatter of material properties is more emphasised in the longitudinal direction – flow
curves varies up to 25%  differences of the flow curves in inner and outer area of
the slab can not be neglected
Scatter of material properties in the transverse direction is not so significant – flow
curves varies up to 10%

Conclusions: FEM forging simulation of Mg-alloys demands diameter-dependant

description of flow curves
– use of various sections with different flow curves or
– mathematical description of flow curve as a function of location in slab ( f = f(r))
 4. MATERIAL MODEL FOR FEM SIMULATIONS

• Determination of the material model for FEM simulations

The flow curve of AZ80 was up to now determined only with

measured values and indirectly calculated Zenner-Hollomon
parameters
FEM programmes demand models which are able to calculate the
stress-strain relationship during the simulation directly
Based on the measured data of AZ80 the relationship in the form

was sought
Based on the measured data of AZ80 the relationship of f as a
function of temperature and strain rate based on spline curves was
sought.
5. DETERMINATION OF THE FLOW CURVE EQUATION FOR AZ80
USING STATISTICAL METHODS

Goal: all flow curves should be determined with unique equation in the form

For the entire range of the measured flow curves (T=250 450ºC, = 0 to 1,
it is not possible to determine the flow curve with constant
parameters “K”, “n” and “m”.
Using statistical analysis and linear regression tools following equation were selected
as the best optimisation for the entire evaluated range of the measured flow curves:
 6. FEM SIMULATIONS OF FLOW CURVES
6.1. Flow curves according to the modified Field-Backoffen equation –
longitudinal according to the feedstock axis

1 1 1
e 0.01 s e 0.1 s e 1 s

continuous line ... measured values

e 10 s 1 dotted line ... predicted flow curves

Conclusion:
At higher strain rates is the prediction less accurate
 6. FEM SIMULATIONS OF FLOW CURVES
6.2. Cubic B – spline approximations of the flow curves – at 45 degrees
according to the feedstock axis

1 1 1
e 0.01 s e 0.1 s e 1 s

continuous line ... measured values

dotted line ... predicted flow curves

Conclusion:
e 10 s 1 Predictions are very accurate at all strain rates
 7. INFLUENCE OF ANISOTROPY, STRAIN RATE AND
TEMPERATURE ON AZ80 FLOW CURVES
300
AZ80 flow curves - 300
300

250
True stress (MPa)

Temperature 300 deg. C

AZ80 flow curves - longitudinal
250
250

200 Temperature 300 deg. C

True stress (MPa)

200
200

150
150
150

100
100
100

50
50 50

0
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0

True strain (/) 0 0

0.2
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.6
0.80.8
1.0 1

True strain (/)

long. / str.rate 10 s
-1
long. / str.rate 10 s
-1
.
10
. -1
45 deg. / str.rate 10 s
-1
45 deg. / str.rate 10 s
-1 = 10 s
-1
= 0.1 s
trans. / str.rate 10 s
-1 -1 . -1 . -1
trans. / str.rate 10 s =1s = 0.01 s

Influence of of anisotropy Influence of strain rate

Strains decrease with

the temperature -
optimal conditions
have to be sought to
minimise forging forces
at still good forgeability.

Influence of temperature
 7. INFLUENCE OF ANISOTROPY, STRAIN RATE AND
TEMPERATURE ON AZ80 FLOW CURVES
7.1. Flow behavior of AZ80, T=300⁰C, strain rate from 0.1 to 10 s-1
 7. INFLUENCE OF ANISOTROPY, STRAIN RATE AND
TEMPERATURE ON AZ80 FLOW CURVES

7.2. AZ80 flow curves – analyses of anisotropic material behavior

► The flow curves at 45 degrees lie below the transverse and longitudinal
obtained one.
► The ratios between the longitudinal (selected as a reference), transverse and
45 degrees was evaluated for all analysed combinations of strain rate (0.01 to
10 s-1) and temperatures (250 to 400⁰C)
► The ratios rt and r45 calculated as
rt = f,trans / f,long and r45 = f,trans / f,long

are varying between 0.6 and 1.2 except the peak values at low strains bellow
value of e=0.1 where they can reach the values from 0.3 to 2.5
► most values of rt and r45 express an slightly increasing trendline from
e = 0.1 onwards except at the highest analysed strain rate of 10 s-1 where a
trendline can not be observed
8. FLOW CURVE EQUATIONS FOR AZ80 OBTAINED BY USING
STATISTICAL METHODS AS AN INPUT FOR FEM CODES

► Unique determination of the flow curve equation represents very

complex problem when the optimal fitting to the measured flow
curves is desired on the entire range of all measured conditions
► Fitting can be improved with very comprehensive equations – it is
doubtable if this equations are to implement into the FEM codes
► possible solutions:
– determination of the technologically favourable conditions of
the flow curves
– determination of the optimal curve fitting for the entire range
of the flow curves using spline techniques, the application of
the analytical equation of the flow curve is not possible, this
solution can be used for improvement of the tabular data for
FEM simulations
 8. FLOW CURVE EQUATIONS FOR AZ80 OBTAINED BY USING
STATISTICAL METHODS AS AN INPUT FOR FEM CODES

8.1. Material properties of analysed AZ80 T5 feedstock with 28 mm diameter

 8. FLOW CURVE EQUATIONS FOR AZ80 OBTAINED BY USING
STATISTICAL METHODS AS AN INPUT FOR FEM CODES

8.1.a. Thermal conductivity

Thermal diffusivity results, together with specific heat capacity (cp) and density (r)
values, can be used in many cases to derive thermal conductivity (l), according to the
relationship:

Thermal conductivity of AZ80 was derived from thermal diffusivity for the contact pair
of AZ80 and steel as it appears at forging applications
Based on thermal diffusivity results the heat transfer coefficient between magnesium
and tool steel is estimated as:
● Ideal contact, without lubrication, high pressure: >10000 W/m2K
● Lubricated contact: 3.000 to 6000 W/m2K
● Filthy, rough, lubricated contact: <2000 W/m2K
 8. FLOW CURVE EQUATIONS FOR AZ80 OBTAINED BY USING
STATISTICAL METHODS AS AN INPUT FOR FEM CODES

8.1.b. Friction properties

Friction is a complex physical phenomenon that involves the characteristics of the
surface such as surface roughness, temperature, normal stress, and relative velocity.
The modelling of friction in simulation codes has basically been simplified to two
idealistic models:
● Coulomb friction
● Shear friction
When the normal force or stress becomes large, the Coulomb friction model may not
correlate well with experimental observations. This is caused by the fact that the
Coulomb model predicts that the frictional shear stresses increase to a level that can
exceed the flow stress or the failure stress of the material. As this is not physically
possible, a different friction calculation should be applied such as a shear friction model.
If both high and low normal forces occur a combination of Coulomb and Shear friction
model can be used.
Coulomb and shear friction models (or a combination of both) are available in forging
simulation codes
 9. FRICTION MODEL AND EXPERIMENTAL PROPERTIES

Coulomb friction
– Low pressure contact areas (contact pressure 25% of yield stress)

Shear friction
– High pressure contact areas (contact pressure yield stress)

*Pictures borrowed from msc manual

 9. FRICTION MODEL AND EXPERIMENTAL PROPERTIES

Ring-compression tests – set-up (1)

Ring is compressed plastically between two flat platens

Changes in shape yields information on tribological conditions )

Sample geometry: OD:ID:H = 28:14:9.33 mm (6:3:2)

Tribological systems
● un-lubricated graphite f: uncoated and coated (DLC and DLC-IBAD)
● oil-based graphite lubricants: Thermex GO8400 and Thermex R7-271-03
● water-based graphite free lubricant: Thermex WW920 (concentration 15%)

) Male A.T., Cockroft M.G.

 9. FRICTION MODEL AND EXPERIMENTAL PROPERTIES

Ring-compression tests – set-up (2)

Further experimental details

● forging parameters: sample/die temperature
(T = 200 C, 300 C, 400 C), deformation
(ε = 0.4, 0.8, 1.4), press speed (v= 1, 8, 15
mm/s)
● three samples per corner point
● rings dipped in lubricant and heated in die
Friction co-efficient μ determined with chart )

) Kalpakjian S.; Manufacturing Engineering and Technology;

Addison-Wesley (2nd edition, 1992): 964-966.
 9. FRICTION MODEL AND EXPERIMENTAL PROPERTIES
9.1. Friction model and experimental details
Ring-compression tests AZ80
Friction co-efficient depends on
temperature and deformation, but
not on press speed
Differences between tested
tribological systems
● oil-based graphite lubricants
GO8400 and R7-271-03: low
friction (0.03 ≤ μ ≤ 0.05);
magnesium surface severely
polluted at 400°C
● water-based graphite-free
lubricant WW920: medium friction
(0.05 ≤ μ ≤ 0.2); water evaporates
fast at 400°C
● dies with DLC coating (dry): high
friction (0.3 ≤ μ ≤ 0.5)
Ring-compression tests ZK60
Friction co-efficient depends on
temperature and deformation, but
not on press speed
Differences between tested
tribological systems
● oil-based graphite lubricants
GO8400 and R7-271-03: low
friction (0.04≤μ≤0.12); magnesium
surface severely polluted at 400 C
● water-based graphite-free
lubricant WW920: medium friction
(0.1≤μ≤0.3); lubrication system
breaks up at 400 C
 9. FRICTION MODEL AND EXPERIMENTAL PROPERTIES

9.1. Friction model and experimental details

Frictional properties (Coulomb) based on ring compression of magnesium and

H13 tool steel with roughness between 0.2 and 0.4 um

Frictional properties (Shear) based on ring compression of magnesium and

H13 tool steel with roughness between 0.2 and 0.4 um
 10. CASE STUDY: SHOCK ABSORBER FEM COMPARISON
10.1. General and material data for forging simulation
Material properties
● Material properties are determined
with flow curves at different
temperatures and strain
(deformation) rates
Thermal properties
● Thermal conductivity
● Specific heat
● Coefficient of thermal expansion
● Heat transfer to ambient
● Emissivity radiation factor to
ambient
Process parameters
● Type and specification of forging
machine
● Initial work-piece temperature
● Initial dies temperatures
● Temperature of ambient
Friction
● Friction model (coulomb model,
shear model) and friction
coefficient
CAD models (in general .STL file type of
CAD-model is used)
● Work-piece model
● Upper and lower die model
 10. CASE STUDY: SHOCK ABSORBER FEM COMPARISON

10.1. General and material data for forging simulation

Material and thermal setting up simulation data for AZ80 alloy
• Material and thermal data defined as constants
Work-piece data

Tool data
 10. CASE STUDY: SHOCK ABSORBER FEM COMPARISON
10.2. Die data for forging simulation

Tool was defined as rigid

Tool movement
● Top die was moving towards the fixed bottom die with
constant speed
of 500 mm/s
● Top die stroke was 45 mm
● At the end of tool stroke a gap of 2 mm remained between
top and bottom die
Ambient temperature was defined as 25 C
The friction between the work piece and the tool was modelled as a combined
Coulomb and Shear friction according to:
= min ( nσn, m yield)
- friction stress,
n =0,3 - the Coulomb friction co-efficient,
σn - the normal stress,
m=0,3 - the shear-friction factor
yield - the plastic shear stress
● In Deform the Coulomb friction model was used because only Coulomb or Shear
friction model can be defined in Deform respectively
 10. CASE STUDY: SHOCK ABSORBER FEM COMPARISON

10.2. Die data for forging simulation

Simulation was carried out on a INOFER shock absorber head

Shock absorber
head 3D-model

Tool and work-piece geometry and placement of a work-piece in the tool

● Work-piece geometry was: Ø47x140 mm
 11. FLOW CURVES OF AZ80 ALLOY AT DIFFERENT STRAIN RATES
AND TEMPERATURES

Strain rate 0.001 s-1 Strain rate 0.1 s-1

125

200
100 Kf 0.1-200
Kf 0.001-200 175
flow stress [MPa]

flow stress [MPa]

Kf 0.001-250 150 Kf 0.1-250
75
125 Kf 0.1-300
Kf 0.001-300
50 100
Kf 0.001-350 Kf 0.1-350
75
25 Kf 0.001-400
50 Kf 0.1-400

0
Kf 0.001-450
Strain rate 0.01 s-1 25
0
Kf 0.1-450

0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1

0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
strain [-]
150 strain [-]
Kf 0.01-200
125
flow stress [MPa]

Kf 0.01-250
100
Kf 0.01-300
75
Kf 0.01-350
50
Kf 0.01-400
25
Kf 0.01-450
Strain rate 1 s-1 0 Strain rate 10 s-1
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
250 strain [-] 275
225 250
200 Kf 1-200 225
flow stress [MPa]

Kf 10-200

flow stress [MPa]

175 200
Kf 1-250
150 175
Kf 10-250
125 Kf 1-300 150
100 125 Kf 10-300
Kf 1-350
75 100
50 Kf 1-400 75 Kf 10-350
25 50
Kf 1-450 25 Kf 10-400
0
0
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1
strain [-]
strain [-]
 12. FORCE PREDICTION INVOLVED FEM CODES:
SUPERFORGE, DEFORM 3D, FORGE, SIMUFACTFORMING

Superforge: Deform 3D:

Load-stroke Load-stroke
1800
2500
Fmax=2275 1600 Fmax=1710
kN kN
1400
2000

upper tool force [kN]

upper tool force [kN]

1200
1500 1000

800
1000
600

500 400

200
0 0
0,0 10,0 20,0 30,0 40,0 50,0 0 10 20 30 40 50
stroke [m m ] stroke [m m ]

SimufactForming:
Forge:
Load-stroke Fmax = 2175
3000 kN
Fmax = 2613
2500 kN
upper tool force [kN]

2000

1500

1000

500

0
0 10 20 30 40 50
stroke [m m ]
 12. FORCE PREDICTION INVOLVED FEM CODES:
SUPERFORGE, DEFORM 3D, FORGE, SIMUFACTFORMING
Deform 3D: Forge:
Load-stroke
3000 Load-stroke

Fmax=2490 3000
2500
kN Fmax = 2613
2500
upper tool force [kN]

kN

upper tool force [kN]

2000
2000
1500
1500
1000
1000

500
500

0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
stroke [m m ]
stroke [m m ]

SimufactForming:

Fmax = 2466
kN
 13. PREDICTION OF FLOW EVOLUTION FOR AZ60 ALLOY WITH
DIFFERENT FEM CODES: SUPERFORGE, DEFORM 3D, FORGE

Prediction of material flow evolution

Superforge: Deform 3D: Forge:

13. PREDICTION OF FLOW EVOLUTION FOR AZ60 ALLOY WITH
DIFFERENT FEM CODES: SUPERFORGE, DEFORM 3D, FORGE

Superforge: Deform 3D: Forge:

Material flow during the forging of the absorber

head (top) and real forged part (bottom)
 14. PREDICTION OF FLOW EVOLUTION FOR AZ60 ALLOY WITH
DIFFERENT FEM CODES: ABAQUS, SIMUFACT

Prediction of material flow evolution

Simufact:
Abaqus: Simulation stopped
after few steps
14. PREDICTION OF FLOW EVOLUTION FOR AZ60 ALLOY WITH
DIFFERENT FEM CODES: ABAQUS, SIMUFACT

Material flow during the forging of the

absorber head simulated by Simufact (left)
and real forged part (bottom)
 15. COMPARISON OF FORGING SAMPLE FOOTPRINT
WITH FEM PREDICTED SHAPES
Comparisons of the simulation results between different FEM codes for AZ80
MSC Superforge Simufact Forming Simufact Forming

Deform 3D Forge
Deform 3D Forge
Footprint of a real forging
sample forged at initial
temperature 240 C and
initial top die temperature
110 C and bottom die
temperature 80 C
16. EVALUATIONS OF SOME IMPORTANT CRITERIONS OF
DIFFERENT FEM CODES
16. EVALUATIONS OF SOME IMPORTANT CRITERIONS OF
DIFFERENT FEM CODES
 17. CONCLUSIONS

With new setting up simulation parameters better

prediction of material flow evolution was performed

For magnesium alloy some new corrections and studies

should be performed in sense of setting up simulation
parameters, material testing and improvements of solvers
of forging codes as well