0
Research Papers: Gas Turbines: Manufacturing, Materials, and Metallurgy

Prediction of Burst Pressure in Multistage Tube Hydroforming of Aerospace Alloys

[+] Author and Article Information
M. Saboori

National Research Council of Canada,
École de technologie supérieure,
Montréal, QC H3T 2B2, Canada

J. Gholipour, P. Wanjara

National Research Council of Canada,
Montréal, QC H3T 2B2, Canada

H. Champliaud

École de Technologie Supérieure,
Montréal, QC H3C 1K3, Canada

A. Gakwaya

Laval University,
Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada

J. Savoie

Pratt & Whitney Canada,
Longueuil, QC J4G 1A1, Canada

Contributed by the Manufacturing Materials and Metallurgy Committee of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR GAS TURBINES AND POWER. Manuscript received October 3, 2015; final manuscript received November 30, 2015; published online March 8, 2016. Editor: David Wisler.

J. Eng. Gas Turbines Power 138(8), 082101 (Mar 08, 2016) (5 pages) Paper No: GTP-15-1473; doi: 10.1115/1.4032437 History: Received October 03, 2015; Revised November 30, 2015

Bursting, an irreversible failure in tube hydroforming (THF), results mainly from the local plastic instabilities that occur when the biaxial stresses imparted during the process exceed the forming limit strains of the material. To predict the burst pressure, Oyan's and Brozzo's decoupled ductile fracture criteria (DFC) were implemented as user material models in a dynamic nonlinear commercial 3D finite-element (FE) software, ls-dyna. THF of a round to V-shape was selected as a generic representative of an aerospace component for the FE simulations and experimental trials. To validate the simulation results, THF experiments up to bursting were carried out using Inconel 718 (IN 718) tubes with a thickness of 0.9 mm to measure the internal pressures during the process. When comparing the experimental and simulation results, the burst pressure predicated based on Oyane's decoupled damage criterion was found to agree better with the measured data for IN 718 than Brozzo's fracture criterion.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

FE model of the dome height test along with the undeformed and deformed shapes of the IN 718 specimens

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

FE model of the preforming process (a) initial stage and (b) final stage

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

FE model of the THF process (a) initial and (b) final stages

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Flowchart used for predicting the burst pressure

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparison of burst tube obtained from experiment and simulation using (a) Brozzo's and (b) Oyane's damage criteria for 0.9 mm thick IN 718

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In