See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/225421620

Finite element prediction of blanking tool cost

caused by wear

Article in International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology · October 2009

DOI: 10.1007/s00170-008-1859-9

CITATIONS READS

6 83

3 authors:

Ridha Hambli Damien Soulat

Université d'Orléans GEMTEX
149 PUBLICATIONS 1,277 CITATIONS 166 PUBLICATIONS 597 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

A. Chamekh
King Abdulaziz University
15 PUBLICATIONS 130 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Finite element model of skin aging View project

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate, Available from: Ridha Hambli
letting you access and read them immediately. Retrieved on: 24 October 2016
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656
DOI 10.1007/s00170-008-1859-9
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Finite element prediction of blanking tool cost caused
by wear
Ridha Hambli & Damien Soulat & Abdesselem Chamekh
Received: 9 April 2008 / Accepted: 20 November 2008 / Published online: 9 December 2008
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008
Abstract The total cost of a blanked part is determined by
a large number of factors, including the material cost,
manufacturing costs. Predicting the manufacturing costs of
a blanked part requires accurate estimation of tool cost
caused by wear. The aim of this paper is to develop a finite
element model allowing for the numerical prediction of the
blanking tool life which allows for the evaluation of the
cost rate of blanking tool caused by wear needed to assess
the total cost of a blanked part. A wear prediction model has
been implemented in the finite element code Abaqus in
which the tool wear is a function of the normal pressure and
some material parameters. In the present work, the tool is
modeled as rigid body hypothesis, and the wear variables
are computed in the contacting elements. The altered tool
contact surface and contact pressure tool shapes are updated
iteratively to simulate wear over a long period of time of
about 100,000 cycles. A damage model is used in order to
describe crack initiation and propagation into the sheet. The
distribution of the tool wear on the tool profile is obtained
and compared to industrial observations.
Keywords Blanking process . Tool wear . Tool wear cost .
Finite element method . Experimental tests
R. Hambli (*) : D. Soulat
Université d’Orléans, Polytech’Orléans—Prisme/LMSP,
8 rue Léonard de Vinci,
45072 Orléans, France
e-mail: ridha.hambli@univ-orleans.fr
A. Chamekh
ENIM-LGM,
Avenue Ibn El Jazzar,
5019 Monastir, Tunisia
1 Introduction
The estimation of tool wear in blanking operations is
important for scheduling tool changing times, for adaptive
process control, and tool cost evaluation. The costs of
forming tools usually cover a substantial amount of the total
manufacturing cost of forming parts [1–3]. The accuracy of
workpieces can be characterized by the following errors:
dimensional error, positional error, and form or shape error.
The errors on blanks are influenced by material, the tool
shape, process variations, and the machine. The form errors
represented in Fig. 1 are connected to the geometry of the
sheared edge such as the roll-over depth, the fracture depth,
the smooth-sheared depth, the burr formation, and the
fracture angle. Various experimental studies [4–9] which
showed that the mechanical and geometrical aspect of the
sheared edge during the blanking operation for a given
material are affected by some parameters like the blanking
clearance, the wear state of the tool, and the thickness of the
sheet.
Because of tool wear changes, the punch-die geometry
and clearance, the form of the sheared surface is
influenced. In addition, tool wear has adverse effects on
the dimensional accuracy and surface finish of the
product. The phenomena related to wear on the tools
have an important impact on the economy of industrial
metal blanking processes. Methodologies currently used
are based mainly on designer’s intuition and experience,
which are not the most adequate when considering the
complexity of the problem. Quantitative approach to tool
wear analysis would improve service life, leading to an
important reduction of manufacturing costs. Although
there are many papers dealing with sheet metal shearing
processes, there is still a lack of models allowing for the
tool wear prediction which affects blanked parts manu-
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656
Fig. 1 Geometry of the sheared
workpiece
facturing costs. The influence of the tool wear on the
accuracy of the blanked parts has been investigated in a
previous work [9]. However, the main purpose of the
present study is to propose a methodology to predict
blanking tool costs due to wear.
In order to contribute toward a development of a
system for blanking tool cost assessment caused by wear,
a finite element model has been developed and imple-
mented in the finite element code Abaqus [11] allowing
for the numerical prediction of tool wear evolution in
function of the various process and material parameters. To
illustrate the methodology, an example is presented based
on experimental tests.
2 Model for blanking tool cost
Basically, maximizing the production rate is equivalent to
minimizing the blanking time per part. Therefore, the
objective is to complete the production order as quickly
as possible. The total production cycle time for one part is
composed of three items: part handling time, blanking time,
and tool change time. The total production cycle time Tp for
one part can be expressed as:
Tp ¼ Th þ Tb þ Tm ð1Þ
where Th is the part handling time including clamp
preparation, sheet feeding, CNC program selection, etc.,
Tb is the blanking time, and Tm the nonproductive times
(maintenance, inspection, faults, etc.).
Blanking time is calculated by:
Tb ¼ Tud þ Tt þ Tch ð2Þ
where Tud, Tt, and Tch are respectively upstroke–downstroke
time of the punch, the material transfer time, and the
total tools changing time used for the whole production
given by:
Tch ¼ Tc Nc ð3Þ
Where Tc is the change time for a given tool, and Nc is
the number of tool changes.
649
Sheet
F Fracture
angle
Burr height
Fracture depth
Smooth-sheared Workpiece
depth
Roll-over depth
The total cost per part is composed of five items, part
handling cost, blanking cost, tool change cost, tool cost due
to wear and tool cost due to maintenance.
The total cost of producing one part Cp can be expressed
as:
Tm
CP ¼ Ch Th þ Cb Tb þ Cc Tc Nc þ Ctw þ Cm
Ntw
ð4Þ
where Ch is the cost rate for the part handling, Cb the cost
rate for blanking, Cc the cost rate for the tool change, Ctw
the cost for the blanking tool subjected to wear by blanked
part, Cm the maintenance cost rate, and Ntw is the number
of blanking tool per part.
The production cost Eq. 4 can be expressed as a function
of production time Tp by:
CP ¼ Cav Tp ð5Þ
where Cav is the average cost rate.
Eqs. 1 and 5 can be used as objective functions in
optimization algorithm to maximize the production rate and
minimize the production cost.
The cost rate for blanking tool Ctw can be estimated
according to the following relation:
Cpunch Cdie
Ctw ¼ þ ð6Þ
Npunch Ndie
Cpunch and Cdie represent, respectively, the costs of the
punch and the die. Npunch and Ndie represent, respectively,
the number of blanked parts produced by the punch and the
die tool till their total wear.
In general, the need for changing the shearing tool which
determine the number of blanking cycles for the punch and
the die (Npunch and Ndie) are determined on the basis of
allowable burr height on the final product with critical
value about 10% [9].
Within this framework, it is necessary to assess the tool
life due to wear (Npunch and Ndie). The following section
describes the proposed method of tool life prediction.
650
Fig. 2 Wear profile of blanking
tool [9]
Wear profile
Wear radius : R
New tool profile
3 Tool life prediction
3.1 Tool wear modeling
Abrasive wear most commonly occurs in blanking tooling
when the surface of the working material contains hard
particles, such as carbides or oxides. Several authors [10,
12–14] suggested that these carbide or oxide particles are
harder than the tooling components and will scratch the tool
when the working material slides over the tool surfaces. To
increase the abrasive wear resistance of blanking tool
materials, one can increase the working hardness of the
tool or choose a tool steel chemistry which forms hard
carbide particles itself.
The rate of wear is affected by parameters such as
tool material, blanked part material, punch-die clearance,
punch velocity, lubrication, and material thickness. The
quality of the workpiece is governed by the state of the
wear tool.
Different wear theories have been developed by
different authors [2, 3]. Adhesive wear actually seems to
involve over 25 variables, some of which are difficult or
impossible to measure. Sophisticated models require sever-
al parameters which need a long time of testing and not
always suitable from engineering point of view. In this
investigation, Archard wear model [10] has been retained
for its simplicity to describe the wear evolution. It is
expressed by:
V FN
Wad ¼ ¼k ð7Þ
s 3H
Wad is the adhesive worn volume per unit sliding
distance, V is the volume of the material removed by wear
from surface, k is a material constant that expresses the
probability of generating a wear particle (dimensionless), s
is the sliding distance, H is the hardness of the sheet, and
FN is the normal load applied on the tool. Observation of
Eq. 7 shows that the hardness H (HRC or HB depending on
the material hardness) is the only material property
appearing in the model. Typical values of the wear
coefficient k are given in [3] and [12] for a combination
of contacting materials.
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656
If the parameters of the wear model are assumed to be
constant through time, the above wear model can be
rewritten as:
V ¼ g w FN s ð8Þ
where γw denotes a wear coefficient depending on sliding
contact conditions. This parameter varies over the range of
10−2~10−7 mm2/N [3].
Based on the investigations presented in [14–16], the
wear causes the cutting edges to be rounded (Fig. 2). This
would reduce the sharpness of the punch during shearing
and increase the deformation of workpiece. Moreover, the
burrs of the parts become larger, the noise level in the press
becomes very high—the punch penetration.
3.2 Apparatus and materials
Experiments using devices equipped with displacement and
force transducer were performed using 4000 KN hydraulic
press at a speed of 100 strokes a minute. An automated
feeding-evacuation system ensures an advance speed of
approximately 20 mm s−1
The study involves AISI 1060 steel (sheet material),
AISI D2 (punch material), 3.5 mm (sheet thickness), and
circular blanking (die diameter=20 mm). A set of punches
was used with different four values of clearances of 5%,
10%, 15%, and 20%.
Three series of 100,000 blanked workpieces have been
performed for each clearance. The quantification of form
errors of the sheared workpieces is made by means of a
profile projector with a resolution of 0.05 mm.
4 Finite element approach
The law describing the material behavior should allow for
the description of the different stages of the process
observed experimentally starting from the elastic state and
ending in the final rupture of the sheet material. For this, a
constitutive law including damage and failure phenomena
Prescribed displ. :
U= 3.5 mm
Punch t
R1
Die (fixed)
Fig. 3 Axisymmetric model of blanking operation (R1=20 mm, t=
3.5 mm)
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656 651

Table 1 Material parameters

Parameters E (MPa) ν K (MPa) σel (MPa) n εD εR Dc

Value 210,000 0.3 980 250 0.20 0 0.8 0.45

must be chosen. In order to predict damage evolution into If the elastic prediction (Eq. 10) satisfies the yield
the sheet metal during blanking processes, the continuum condition f < 0, the prediction is true, and the local
damage mechanics approach has been applied in this work procedure is completed. Then it can be stated that:
as a means to describe the behavior of the sheet using
s nþ1 ¼ s Tnþ1 ð13Þ
Lemaitre damage model [17, 18].
The algorithms generally implemented in the finite Otherwise, this state must be corrected by means of a
element codes for integration of nonlinear constitutive plastic correction. For this purpose, the variables at
equations are the so-called radial return algorithms, and increment n+1 must satisfy the system:
they are used to solve the equations in an incremental form.
They are based upon the notion of an elastic predictor- f ¼0 ð14Þ
plastic corrector where a purely elastic trial state is followed
by a plastic corrector phase [11]. In this way, an implicit
algorithm has been developed which allows for the

s nþ1  ð1  Dn Þ Cel "n þ Δ"  "pl
n  Δ"
pl
¼0 ð15Þ
integration of the constitutive equations. The integration
methods of the nonlinear constitutive equations are based
on the use of a special algorithm which solves the equations  
in incremental form. For this purpose, during a small time ΔH a ¼ ha Δ"ij ; ðs ij Þnþ1 ; Hija ð16Þ
interval [tn, tn+1], it is assumed that the whole increment is
purely elastic, then an elastic prediction is defined as: H a , α=1, 2,.., n, is a set of scalar state variables and ha
is the hardening law for H a.
s Tnþ1 ¼ s n þ Δs ð9Þ The wear model given by Eq. 8, can be expressed in the
incremental form:
Eq. 9 can be written as:
h
 i d V ¼ g w d FN d s ð17Þ
s Tnþ1 ¼ ð1  Dn ÞCel ð"tot Þnþ1  "pl n ð10Þ
dV and dFN can be expressed as:
The superscript (·)T refers to trial test.Dn, Cel, (εtot)n+1,
d V ¼ d Dw d Ω ð18Þ
and (εpl)n denote, respectively, the damage state of the
material at iteration n, the elastic modulus tensor, total
strain tensor at n+1 and the plastic strain tensor at n. d FN ¼ P d Ω ð19Þ
The von Mises yield function coupled with damage is
given by: dDw is the depth of the wear, dΩ is the contact area, and P
the normal contact pressure acting on the tool.
f ¼ s eq  ð1  DÞðs el þ s 0 Þ ð11Þ By substituting Eqs. 18 and 19 into Eq. 17, we obtain:
σ0 is the strain hardening law of the material. d Dw ¼ g w P d s ð20Þ
The damage variable D is expressed by [17, 18]:
"  2 #
Dc 2 sH
 b2
D¼ ð1 þ n Þ þ 3ð1  2n Þ "eq d"eq
"R  "D 3 s eq
ð12Þ
This model depends upon material constants for damage Punch
properties, the hardening exponent β, and the Poisson’s
ratio ν.
εD is the threshold logarithmic strain at which damage
initiates, εR is the logarithmic strain value at fracture and Die

εeq the logarithmic plastic strain. Dc is the critical damage Fig. 4 Mesh used for the F.E. model (wear punch radius R=0.05 mm
value at fracture. scale 1:1) [9].
652 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656

Normal contact pressure (MPa)

2500

2000

3 1500
Distance : x
1000
2

2
1 500
1 2 3
0
0 0,3 0,6 0,9 1,2 1,5 1,8 2,1
Distance x (mm)
1 : Flat punch area.
2 : Rounded area.
3 : Free area.

Fig. 5 Normal contact pressure variation with location on the punch (wear radius R=0.05 mm) [9]

The wear depth Dw can be expressed in the following 5 Numerical simulation of a blanking operation
integral form:
Z s The problem studied here consists of an axisymmetric
Dw ¼ g w Pds ð21Þ punching operation of a 0.6% carbon steel sheet metal
0
(AISI 1060) with 3.5 mm thickness (Fig. 3). The
This equation can be approximated as follows: mechanical characteristics of the material obtained by a
X
n X
m tensile test in previous work [16] are given in Table 1.
Dw ¼ g w PΔs ð22Þ In order to reduce the CPU time and to update in a simple
i¼1 j¼1 way the tool wear profile of the tool, the punch and the die
m is the total number of time steps Δt, and n is the total was modeled by adopting a rigid body hypothesis with
number of nodes at the punch-part contact area. contact elements. The contact surface laws are defined by a
Within a time interval [tn, tn+1], the wear prediction Coulomb friction model with a friction coefficient value of
algorithm leads to the following incremental wear depth 0,1 [16]. Once the contact has been established, the sliding or
form: sticking contact status of the contacting nodes is determined,
and Archard wear model is assessed in each node.
The distortion of the mesh is restricted to a small area
ðDw Þnþ1 ¼ ðDw Þn þg w ½Pnþ1 ðsnþ1  sn Þ ð23Þ
near the die-punch clearance. Such distorted elements
where (·)n and (·)n+1 denote the approximation of the undergoes total damage, and hence, no remeshing tech-
variable values at increment n and n+1. nique was needed in this work.

Fig. 6 Wear profile of the

punch after 50,000 blanking
cycles [9]

Radius : R = 0.2 mm
Radius : R = 0.19 mm

0.4 mm 0.41 mm

0.161 mm
0.16 mm

-a- FEM calculation. -b- Experiment.

Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656
Fig. 7 Predicted and experi-
mental blanked profiles
corresponding to two states of
the punch wear (clearance =
10%) [9]
(i) Burr height=1%
Burr
(i) Burr height=9 %
The meshing of the model is carried out by means of
1,480 four-node axisymmetric elements (Fig. 4).
During the analysis, crack initiation is assumed to occur
at any point in the structure where the damage reaches its
critical value Dc. The crack propagation is simulated by the
propagation of completely damaged elements in the FE
model. This is taken into account in the FEM by a decrease
in the stiffness of the elements concerned.
The corresponding simulation time was equal to approx-
imately 15 min using 2 GB processor computer.
653
-a- New punch: R = 0.01 mm.
(ii) Burr height= 1.7%
-b- Used punch: R = 0.2 mm.
(ii) Burr height=8.5 %
6 Results and discussion
Figure 5 shows the variation of normal pressure on the
punch profile versus the distance (x). It can be observed that
the contact pressure at a particular state of the process
varies with distance (x) on the punch profile. The maximum
pressure value is concentrated in the rounded area.
Experimental investigation developed by Hambli [16]
showed that the wear evolution can be assumed to be
linear versus the number of produced blanked part.
654 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656

12 14

10 12
Burr height (%)

8 10

Burr Height (%)

6 8

4 6
2 4
0 2
0 0,05 0,1
Punch wear radius: R (mm)
Fig. 8 Evolution of the burr height versus the punch wear radius [9]
Therefore, the wear profile of the punch over time can be
obtained using the wear model given by Eq. 7. Starting
from the numerical results plotted in Fig. 5, at each node ‘I’
of the contact elements of the punch mesh, the local wear
volume of the material can be expressed as:
Xn Z 
Vi ¼ ðg w Þi ð PÞi d Ωi si ð24Þ
1 Ω i
where P is the normal contact pressure acting on the punch,
and n is the number of parts produced by the same tool.
The tool is modeled as rigid body, and the wear variables
are computed in the contacting elements. The worn tool
contact elements of the tool are updated iteratively to
simulate wear evolution versus blanked number of parts.
Figure 6 shows the wear profile of the punch obtained by
the numerical prediction and the experimental results after
50,000 blanking cycles. It can be observed that the wear
profile predicted by the proposed wear model give good
results compared to experimental ones. The comparison
between the experimental and the predicted wear profiles
shows that the deviations do not exceed 10%. Wear
resulting from punch/sheet contact causes the cutting edges
to be rounded; hence, it affects the quality of the parts
produced and generate the burr formation [3, 8, 16]. The
influence of the tool wear on the blanking process can be
modeled in a simplified manner by changing the value of
12
10
Experiment
Experiment
Simulation
0,15 0,2 0,25 0
0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000
Blanking cycles
Fig. 10 Predicted burr height versus blanking cycles (clearance=
10%) [9]
the punch edge radius R. Several calculations were
performed in order to compare the numerical results with
experimental data. The two blanked profiles obtained by
the finite element calculation and the experiment
corresponding to a new punch with a cutting edge radius
R=0.01 mm and a used punch with R=0.2 mm which
correspond to 50,000 blanking cycles, are shown in Fig. 7.
As it can be expected, in the case of a used punch, the
profile of the part boundary presents a bad quality due to
the presence of a burr with a height about 9%.
The numerical results, compared with the experimental
ones, show the reliability of the finite element model in
describing the influence of punch wear in the case of
blanking operation processes.
The failure of the sheet is obtained for a punch
displacement about 70% of the sheet thickness. A good
correlation can be observed between the finite element
prediction and the experimental results (Fig. 7).
Figure 8 shows the evolution of the burr height versus
the punch wear radius obtained by experiments. This curve
is compared with that obtained by the different FEM
calculations corresponding to different edge radii of the
punch. It can be shown that results are in good agreement
60000
50000
Punch life cycles

40000
Burr height (%)

8 Simulation

30000
6

20000
4

2 10000

0 0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25
Clearance (%) Clearance (%)

Fig. 9 Burr height versus clearance (wear radius R=0.05 mm) [9] Fig. 11 Predicted punch wear life cycles versus clearance
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656
with deviations of 9% between predicted and experimental
values (Fig. 8). Figure 9 shows that burr height grows
nonlinearly as clearance increases. Numerical results are in
good agreement with experimental ones obtained by the
proposed wear algorithm.
From an industrial point of view, the need for regrinding
of the tool is determined on the basis of allowable burr
height (about 10%) on the final product [16]. Therefore,
based on this criterion, the tool life can be predicted as the
number of punching cycles corresponding to a maximum
burr height increase of 10%.
For a given clearance, the burr height evolves according
to blanking cycles as it can be seen in Fig. 10 for a clearance
value of 10%. The results shows that critical value of the
burr height (10%) is reached for a blanking cycle about
Npunch =50,000 which correspond to the punch life. Figure
11 represents the punch life evolution versus clearance. It
can be noticed that the punch life increases for a clearance
range located between 5% and 10%. The maximum is
reached for a clearance value about 10%. For smaller
clearances, the sliding distance is reduced. However, the
contacting stresses are very high which explain the reduced
tool life cycles. For a clearance values greater then 10%, it
can be observed that the tool life decreases linearly. In this
range, the sliding distance is increased, and the contacting
stresses are reduced compared to a small clearance values.
When making decisions on the blanking process,
economic aspects will includes the punch rate cost
assessment versus parts production rate and some process
parameters (mainly tool clearance) [1–4]. Several inves-
tigations have been made to estimate tool costs from an
engineering point of view [1–4, 19–22]. They are based on
analytical techniques to predict costs based on certain
known physical principles [3, 4]. All input factors such as
product design specifications, materials, energy, labor,
capital equipment, tool cost, and other factors consumed
by the process must be considered and calculated for all
process steps.
Since the cost rate for a blanking tool Cb can be
estimated according to the Eq. 6 which depends on tool
cycle life related to wear (Npunch,), tool cost rate can be
predicted using FEM results and Eq. 6.
Based on the proposed method, the rate cost evolution
versus parts production rate for different clearances values
(giving different punch life cycles) is plotted in Fig. 12. The
results are plotted for a reference punch cost of 10,000
euros [16].
For the given workpiece specifications, it can be
observed that the cost rates are very sensitive for a low
number of blanked parts. For a number greater then 15,000
parts, the cost rates reach asymptotes which depend on the
tool clearance. One can notice that the clearance value have
a strong effect on the blanking tool life. It is therefore
655
10
Punch rate cost (euro/part)
c=5%
8
c=10%
6
c=15%
c=20%
4
2
0
1000 10000 19000 28000 37000 46000 55000
Parts production rate
Fig. 12 Punch rate cost versus parts production rate
possible to evaluate the influence of critical parameters on
process costs and quality.
7 Conclusion
A wide range of studies have been performed on the
modeling of blanking process. But the efforts of most of
these works are concentrated on the development of finite
element models to predict the crack initiation and propaga-
tion which affects the sheared edge. These studies focused
on the blanked parts behavior and was performed by using
some fracture criteria or damage mechanics approaches.
The aim of this paper is to introduce a finite element
model allowing for the numerical prediction of the
manufacturing blanking costs generated by tool wear. A
wear model has been implemented in the finite element
code ABAQUS in which the tool wear is a function of the
normal pressure and some material parameters. In the
present work, the tool is modeled as rigid body hypothesis,
and the altered tool contact surface and contact pressure
tool shapes are updated iteratively to simulate wear over a
long period of time. The wear evolution is described by
Archard model in which the wear is a function of the
normal pressure and some material parameters. The
numerical results compared with the experimental ones,
show the reliability of the finite element model in
describing the influence of punch/sheet wear on the punch
wear profile. A constitutive law including damage and
failure phenomena has been implemented in order to
simulate crack initiation and propagation.
The proposed model can be used in order to assess the
manufacturing costs related to tool wear and contribute
toward the development of optimization procedure to
reduce costs of blanked parts. The engineer, however, can
increase the product reliability and minimize the cost of
these repeated prototype fabrications and testing if mechan-
ical strength reliability procedures are used at the design
stage prior to production.
656
References
1. Faura F, Sebastián MA, Zamora R (2001) A decision support
system for sheet metal blanking process parameters selection. J
Mater Process Technol 118(1–3):371–376
2. Kalpakjian S (1991) Manufacturing processes for engineering
materials, 2nd edn. Addison Wesley Publishing Company
3. Kurt L (1985) Handbook of metal forming. McGraw-Hill Book
Company
4. Choy CM, Balendra R (1996) Experimental analysis of parame-
ters influencing sheared-edge profiles. p: 101-110, The 5th Inter.
Conference on Sheet Metal, University of Twente, Netherland, 1–
3 April
5. Hambli R, Potiron A (2000) Finite element modeling of sheet-
metal blanking operations with experimental verification. J Mater
Process Technol, 257–265
6. Kasuga Y, Tsutsumi S, Mori T (1979) Investigation into shearing
process of ductile sheet metals. Mem. Fac. Eng. Nagoya Univ.,
Japan, pp 1–46
7. Jana S, Ong NS (1989) Effect of punch clearance in the high-
speed blanking of the thick metal using an accelerator for
mechanical press. J Mech Work Technol 19:55–72 doi:10.1016/
0378-3804(89)90066-1
8. Stegeman YW, Goijaerts AM, Brokken D, Brekelmans WAM,
Govaert LE, Baaijens FPT (1999) An experimental and numerical
study of a planar blanking process. J Mater Process Technol 87(1–
3, 15):266–276
9. Hambli R (2001) Blanking tool wear modelling using the finite
element method. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 41(12):1815–1829
10. Archard JF (1953) Contact and rubbing of flat surfaces. J Appl
Phys 24:981–988 doi:10.1063/1.1721448
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2009) 44:648–656
11. ABAQUS/Standard (2007) HKS, theory manual-Version 6.7
12. Carter WT (1994) A model for friction in metal forming. J Eng
Mater Technol 113:8–13 doi:10.1115/1.2904260
13. Hortig D, Schmoeckel D (1999) Analysis of local loads on the
draw die profile with regard to wear using the FEM and
experimental investigations. The 7th Inter. Conference on Sheet
Metal, Erlangen, Germany, 25–28 Sept, pp 193–202
14. Jensen MR, Damborg FF, Nielsen KB, Danckert J (1998)
Applying the finite element method for determination of tool
wear in conventional deep-drawing. J Mater Process Technol
83:98–105 doi:10.1016/S0924-0136(98)00047-8
15. Hambli R, Potiron A (1999) Finite element analysis of sheet-metal
punching processes. The 7th Inter. Conf. on Sheet Metal,
Erlangen, Germany, 25–28 Sept, pp 153–159
16. Hambli R (1996) Etude expérimentale, numérique et théorique du
découpage des tôles en vue de l’optimisation du procédé, (In
french), Thesis dissertation, ENSAM d’Angers, Oct
17. Lemaitre J (1985) A continuous damage mechanics model for
ductile fracture. J Eng Mater Technol 107:83–89
18. Lemaitre J, Desmorat R, Sausay M (2000) Anisotropic damage
laws of evolution. Eur J Mech A/Solids 19:187–208
19. Pugh S (1991) Total design: integrated methods for successful
product engineering. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA
20. Dewhurst P, Boothroyd G (1988) Early cost estimating in product
design. J Manuf Syst 7:183–191 doi:10.1016/0278-6125(88)
90003-9
21. Advanced Composite Cost Estimating Manual (ACCEM)
(1976) Northrop Corporation, Technical Report AFFDL-TR-
76-87, Vol. I
22. Noton N (1989) Cost drivers in design and manufacture of
composites structures. In: Reinhart T (ed) Composites: engineered
materials handbook. American Society of Metals