Finite element simulation of springback for a channel draw process with drawbead using different hardening models

The objective of this work is to predict the springback of Numisheet’05 Benchmark#3 with different material models using the commercial finite element code ABAQUS. This Benchmark consisted of drawing straight channel sections using different sheet materials and four different drawbead penetrations. Numerical simulations were performed using Hillʹs 1948 anisotropic yield function and two types of hardening models: isotropic hardening (IH) and combined isotropic-nonlinear kinematic hardening (NKH). A user-defined material subroutine was developed based on Hillʹs quadratic yield function and mixed isotropic-nonlinear kinematic hardening models for both ABAQUS-Explicit (VUMAT) and ABAQUS-Standard (UMAT). The work hardening behavior of the AA6022-T43 aluminum alloy was described with the Voce model and that of the DP600, HSLA and AKDQ steels with Hollomonʹs power law. Kinematic hardening was modeled using the Armstrong–Frederick nonlinear kinematic hardening model with the purpose of accounting for cyclic deformation phenomena such as the Bauschinger effect and yield stress saturation which are important for springback prediction. The effect of drawbead penetration or restraining force on the springback has also been studied. Experimental cyclic shear tests were carried out in order to determine the cyclic stress–strain behavior. Comparisons between simulation results and experimental data showed that the IH model generally overestimated the predicted amount of springback due to higher stresses derived by this model. On the other hand, the NKH model was able to predict the springback significantly more accurately than the IH model.