Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71

Optimising the variables when deep-drawing C.R.1 cups

M.T. Browne*, M.T. Hillery
Department of Manufacturing and Operations Engineering, University of Limerick, Ireland
Received 18 April 2001; received in revised form 29 November 2001; accepted 17 September 2002

Abstract

One of the most important, yet simplest deep-drawing operations on a flat blank of sheet metal is the production of a cylindrical cup. The
mechanics of forming are quite complicated and there are many different factors affecting the successful drawing of a blank. In order to further
investigate the process of deep-drawing an instrumented tool was designed for operation on a Norton, 20 t, double-acting hydraulic press.
Previous work carried out on this experimental tool yielded relatively good results [Effects of punch and die geometry, blank-holding and
deformation velocity on deep-drawing, IMC-15, 1998, p. 135]. This paper investigates the variation and effects of punch and die geometry,
blank-holding pressure, top-ram pressure, lubrication, and drawing speed in the deep-drawing of C.R.1 steel cups of 0.9 mm thickness. These
effects were investigated by drawing a series of cups using DOE, where a screening experiment was conducted and the desired factors were
varied at different levels. The chosen responses were punch load and wall thickness variation. This paper deals with the experimental work
being carried out in order to investigate these effects and provides the optimum levels for each of the factors.
# 2002 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.

Keywords: Deep-drawing; Variables; Design of experiments; Optimisation

1. Introduction cal basis of comparison between different drawing condi-

Sheet metal forming by deep-drawing is a common
manufacturing process used in many industries, especially
the automotive industry. Despite this broad application, the
design of the drawing tools, selection of sheet materials,
lubricants, etc., is still based on trial and error which is a very
expensive process [1]. In today’s demanding environment
this is extremely undesirable due to shorter production and
turnaround times. Therefore, it is necessary to identify the
variables present in the deep-drawing operation. There are
two classifications of drawing, deep-drawing and shallow
drawing. With deep-drawing, the drawn cup is deeper than
one-half its diameter, whereas in shallow drawing it is less
than one-half its diameter. Thinning of the walls tends to be
more of a problem with deep-drawing as opposed to shallow
drawing [2].
In the field of deep-drawing much experimental and
research work has been published, most notably that by
Chung and Swift in 1951 [3]. The results were claimed to be
sufficiently accurate to provide a basis of reference for
theoretical treatments of cup-drawing, as well as an empiri-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: þ353-61-202900; fax: þ353-61-202913.
E-mail address: mark.browne@ul.ie (M.T. Browne).
tions. The conditions examined included methods of blank-
holding, drawing ratio, punch and die profile radii, punch–
die clearance, and blank thickness.
Deep-drawing, for the purposes of this paper, will involve
the conversion of a circular blank, of diameter 72.28 mm,
into a flat bottomed seamless cup by drawing it through a
draw die with the aid of a punch of known diameter. The
shape of the cup will be determined by the form of the punch
and die. The die and punch must have sufficient radii on their
edges so that shearing of the blank does not occur. When
drawing sheets of thin section a blank-holder is required to
hold the blank in position by applying a force which is
sufficient to prevent wrinkling and buckling during radial
drawing, but this force must be small enough to allow the
blank to slip between the pressure plate and die, so that it
does not interfere with the free drawing process [2].
Experimental design is one approach that has been imple-
mented for this paper. With experimental design the effects
of numerous variables on a particular process can be deter-
mined. Taguchi [4] developed methods to optimise the
design of products and production processes in a cost-
effective manner. Using these principles any process can
be examined and information obtained on the main factors
involved. An L8 orthogonal array has been used to carry out
the experiment within this paper.

0924-0136/02/$ – see front matter # 2002 Published by Elsevier Science B.V.

PII: S 0 9 2 4 - 0 1 3 6 ( 0 2 ) 0 0 9 3 4 - 2
 M.T. Browne, M.T. Hillery / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71
Fig. 1. The deep-drawing operation.
1.1. The deformation process
The flat blank for use in the analysis of deep-drawing may
be divided into three zones, X, Y, and Z [5], as shown in Fig. 1.
As the punch is lowered into the die opening, several distinct
phenomena occur. X, the outer annular zone consists of
material in contact with the die. Y, the inner annular zone is
not initially in contact with either the punch or the die, and Z,
the circular zone is only in contact with the flat bottom of the
punch. As the deep-drawing operation proceeds, the outer
flange portion of the blank, zone X, will be subjected to a
radial drawing tensile stress as it is drawn progressively
inwards towards the die profile and the effect of continu-
ously decreasing the radius in this zone is to induce a
compressive hoop stress, resulting in an increase in material
thickness [2]. Then when the magnitude of these stresses
exceeds a certain critical value, wrinkling and buckling of
the flange may occur if the blank-holder pressure is not high
enough. The material in the inner parts of zone X is thinned
by plastic bending under tensile stress as it passes over the
die profile. The inner parts of zone X are thinned further by
tension between the punch and die, resulting in an increase
in thickness for the outer parts of zone X. Zone Y is subject to
bending and sliding over the die profile, stretching in tension
between the punch and die and finally to bending and sliding
over the punch profile. Zone Z is subject to stretching and
sliding over the punch head [5].
In summary from Johnson and Mellor [5], five processes
take place during the course of deep-drawing:
1. Pure radial drawing between the die and blank-holder in
zone X, causing the blank to thicken due to the resultant
hoop stress.
2. Bending and sliding over the die profile, r2, which will
cause some thinning of the metal.
3. Initial stretching in zone Y. This will cause thinning of
the material at the intersection of the bottom of the cup
65
and its side-wall. If a cup fails to form it is invariably
due to tensile failure in zone Y.
4. Bending and sliding over the punch profile radius, r1,
thinning to some degree occurs here.
5. Stretching and sliding over the punch nose in zone Z,
where again some thinning occurs.
According to Mielnik [2], the actual maximum axial
drawing force for an ideally plastic material is
2pr1 sf D0
Fmax ¼ ln (1)
Z d1
where Fmax is the maximum axial drawing force, d1 the
punch diameter, sf the yield tensile stress of the material, Z
the deformation efficiency factor which accounts for fric-
tion, bending, etc., and D0 the blank diameter.
2. Drawing tool
The tool being used existed in the University of Limerick
and is operated by a Norton, double-acting 20 t straight-
sided press. This allows a blank-holding pressure to be
applied by the bottom ram while maintaining movement
from the top-ram to the punch, thus providing the deforma-
tion of the cup. Strain gauges have been attached to the top-
ram, punch and blank-holding pins and are connected to
WSM D-2000 digital indicators so that the induced forces
(in kN) on the elements can be recorded at any instant. The
press has a bed size of 320 mm deep  600 mm between the
sides. The top-ram speed can be varied from 0 to 300 mm/
min, in increments of 100 mm/min, for a stroke of up to
700 mm. The tool is shown in Fig. 2.
A blank size (D0) of Ø72.28 mm was used for C.R.1 steel
sheet of 0.9 mm thickness, as the existing punches and dies
had been manufactured for this size. This gave a drawing
ratio (D0/d1) of just under 1.84, when using a punch (d1) of
66 M.T. Browne, M.T. Hillery / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71
Fig. 2. The experimental deep-drawing tool.
Ø39.3 mm. The produced cup has a nominal outside dia-
meter of 41.1 mm. Allowing a 20% clearance, which is
closely in line with recommendations by Swift [6], this
results in a die diameter of 41.46 mm. The drawing force
was calculated to be just under 5 t from Eq. (1), using a value
of 400 N/mm2 for the yield stress and 0.65 for Z, the
deformation factor.
2.1. Punch and die inserts
There were four punch inserts of Ø39.3 mm made from
D2 tool steel. The profile radius, r1, as shown in Fig. 1 was
varied in steps of 2 mm, from 2 to 8 mm. A slight taper was
machined on the punch to facilitate easy removal of the
finished cup from the punch. Four die inserts of outside
diameter 86 mm were also manufactured from D2 tool
steel. The inside diameter of the die inserts was 41.4 mm
with their profile radii, r2, as shown in Fig. 1 increasing
from 2 to 8 mm in steps of 2 mm. Both the punches and
dies were hardened and tempered in a vacuum furnace to
58Rc.
2.2. The die-set
The moving parts of the tool were built on a four pillar
Ø25 mm die-set where the top and bottom bolsters were
300 mm  160 mm and had a thickness of 38 and 48 mm,
respectively. A 24 mm mild-steel plate was used for the
blank-holder, which was recessed to a depth of 0.5 mm for a
diameter of 75.5 mm in order to locate the blanks. Cold
rolled mild-steel of Ø150 mm was used for the die holder.
Four hardened and ground Ø12 mm shoulder bolts were
used to guide the blank-holder to the die holder. Then four
Ø19 mm mild-steel pressure pins were used to provide the
blank-holding pressure.
The punch holder was manufactured from Ø100 mm cold
rolled mild-steel to an overall height of 50 mm and was
assembled to the bottom bolster, both of which remain
stationary. The punch inserts located in a Ø22 mm hole
drilled through the length of the punch holder. This hole also
reduced the section of the punch holder allowing sufficient
elastic deformation, enabling strain measurements to be
recorded for the force acting on the punch.
 M.T. Browne, M.T. Hillery / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71 67

2.3. Instrumentation ‘‘The number of factors differs from experiment to experi-

Pressure gauges were available on the press indicating the
load on both the bottom and top-ram, but it was decided that
a more accurate method of load measurement would be
required. Therefore, a Ø75 mm mild-steel coupling flange
was attached to the top-ram and connected to the active
elements of the tool. A groove was machined half way along
the flange length in order to reduce the diameter to facilitate
the fitting of strain gauges for load measurement. Strain
gauges were added to the four blank-holding pressure pins
and connected in series. The strain gauge signals were
amplified and connected to WSM Digital Indicators, model
no. D-2000. The input to the digital indicators was millivolts
and they were then calibrated to read kN. This allowed the
deforming pressure (top-ram) and blank-holding pressure to
be accurately adjusted and maintained at their desired
values. The punch holder also had strain gauges attached
so that the maximum punch load could be recorded. The
signals from the strain gauges on the punch were also fed
through a digital indicator, reading in kN. All strain-gauged
components could be easily removed for calibration on an
Avery-Denison tensile/compression machine.
2.4. Strain gages
Kwoya KFG-2-120-C1-11 and Kwoya KFG-5-120-C1-11
gages were used due to their compactness. These have a
resistance of 120 O and a gage factor of 2.11. The gage
lengths were 2 and 5 mm, respectively. These were used in a
half bridge circuit with separate identical compensation
gauges attached to a plate of mild-steel to provide tempera-
ture compensation.
3. Results
Taguchi’s L8(27) orthogonal array was used as a screening
experiment to determine the effect of many of the factors
influencing the deep-drawing process. According to Taguchi
[4]:
ment, but from the standpoint of effective application of
design of experiments, it should be at least seven or eight,
and in general it does not matter how many more one
uses.’’
Seven factors were included in this array, namely punch
profile, die profile, blank-holding pressure, top-ram pres-
sure, drawing speed, lubrication, and position of lubrica-
tion—either die side or punch side. The dependent
(response) variables were chosen as follows: one of the
desired results was to ascertain what levels of each inde-
pendent variable (factors) would provide the lowest punch
load and the other being the least variation in thickness
distribution within the drawn cup. Results were obtained
using the parameters shown in Table 1. C.R.1 steel blanks of
0.9 mm thickness and Ø72.28 mm were used. The punch
was Ø39.3 mm and the die was Ø41.4 mm.
3.1. Punch load
Using Taguchi’s L8(27) orthogonal array, five replications
were conducted, resulting in the drawing of 40 cups. Fig. 3
shows the cups as drawn for replication no. 1. For the
experiment the lubrication was poured onto the blank and
allowed to spread evenly over it, then any excess lubricant
was allowed to drip off. The burr formed on the blank edges,
due to the blanking operation, was not removed from the
blank edge. The blanks were kept in their original state, i.e.
they were not washed and the mill oil was left on to simulate
normal production practices, as was practised by Eary and
Reed [7]. The blanks were fed by hand into the blank-
holding recess, and on completion of the draw they were
again removed manually.
The values for punch load from Table 1 were analysed
using SPSS software. An ANOVA (analysis of variance) was
chosen. It can be seen from the ANOVA of Table 2 that there
are five factors that are significant, i.e. they have the greatest
influence on punch load (any value in significance column
that is <0.05). These are die profile, lubrication, position of
lubrication, punch profile and top-ram pressure.

Table 1
L8(27) orthogonal array as used in experiment

Experiment Punch Die B-H-P T-R-P Speed Lubrication Position Punch load (kN)
number (mm) (mm) (kN) (kN) (mm/min) (type) (side)
Run 1 Run 2 Run 3 Run 4 Run 5
1 2 2 12 60 100 Lubysil Die 35.7 35.33 35.86 35.6 35.4
2 2 2 12 80 300 Duchams Punch 35.28 36.96 36.81 36.75 39.33
3 2 6 24 60 100 Duchams Punch 33.46 30.01 29.46 32.16 32.35
4 2 6 24 80 300 Lubysil Die 36.55 34 39.43 35.43 39.85
5 6 2 24 60 300 Lubysil Punch 28.02 29.82 32.06 29.08 32.26
6 6 2 24 80 100 Duchams Die 36.54 41.4 37.63 37.96 41.85
7 6 6 12 60 300 Duchams Die 33.12 33.47 33.15 33.28 33.31
8 6 6 12 80 100 Lubysil Punch 31.9 32.04 32.33 31.91 34.1
68 M.T. Browne, M.T. Hillery / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71

 Lubrication type: lubysil, duchams, and plastic (PE).

 Position on blank: die side, punch side, and both sides.

Table 3 summarises the optimum levels of each significant

factor for the lowest punch load when a full factorial
experiment was carried out. In total 243 experiments were
run (35) with the above table giving the six best results.
Values for other factors are as follows: speed, 300 mm/min;
blank-holding pressure, 12 kN.

3.3. Thickness distribution

Fig. 3. Drawn cups, experiments 1–8 (top left to bottom right), from run 1
of screening experiment.
3.2. Full factorial experiment for punch load
A full factorial experiment is an experiment where the
significant factors are tested for all possible combinations, to
determine the optimal parameters for each of the factors
tested. Having obtained the factors that significantly influ-
ence punch load, a full factorial experiment can be con-
ducted, to determine the optimum levels for each of these
factors. Five factors were deemed significant, therefore each
of the five factors was tested at three levels, as shown below:
 Punch profile: 2, 4, and 6 mm.
 Die profile: 2, 4, and 6 mm.
 Top-ram pressure: 60, 70, and 80 kN.
The L8(27) orthogonal array as in Table 1 was also used to
determine whether the factors had an effect on the thickness
distribution within the drawn cups. The thickness results
obtained tend to agree well with the theory as written in
Section 1.1. The outer flange of the cups were found to be
thicker, then thinning as the material passed over the die
profile. The thinning continued with the most extreme
thinning being found on the side-wall of the cups, this being
a result of the material stretching in tension between the
punch and die. This can be seen in Table 4. The factors
which affected the thickness distribution within the cups
were determined by measuring each cup at nine different
positions as shown in Figs. 4 and 5, and then by analysing the
data using an ANOVA, in SPSS.
Five runs of the L8(27) array were carried out, resulting in a
large number of measurements, therefore only the thickness

Table 2
Results of ANOVA for effect on punch load

Unique method

Sum of squares d.f. Mean square F Significance

Punch load, main effects (combined) 338.67032 7 48.38147429 18.053075 1.81587E09
B-H-P 0.12321 1 0.12321 0.0459746 0.831582482
Die 36.55744 1 36.55744 13.64105 0.000821628
Lubrication 19.18225 1 19.18225 7.157669 0.011664947
Position 117.92356 1 117.92356 44.00203 1.14966E07
Punch 23.37841 1 23.37841 8.723426 0.005846593
Speed 0.65536 1 0.65536 0.2445412 0.624323345
T-R-P 140.85009 1 140.85009 52.55684 8.73983E09
Model 338.67032 7 48.38147429 18.053075 1.81587E09
Residual 85.75864 32 2.6799575
Total 424.42896 39 10.88279385

Table 3
Relevant results from 35 full factorial experiment for punch load

Punch (mm) Die (mm) B-H-P (kN) Position (side) Lubrication Load 1 (kN) Load 2 (kN) Load 3 (kN) Average (kN)

4 6 80 Both Plastic 20.4 21.73 22.49 21.54

4 6 70 Both Plastic 21.28 22.09 22.16 21.84
4 6 60 Both Plastic 21.64 22.71 22.41 22.25
4 6 80 Die Plastic 22.83 24.07 23.62 23.51
4 6 60 Die Plastic 22.85 23.95 24.42 23.74
2 4 80 Both Plastic 23 24.6 24.15 23.92
 M.T. Browne, M.T. Hillery / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71 69

Table 4
Thickness values for experiment no. 2, run no. 2, in mm

Position

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Thickness 0.93 0.87 0.68 0.65 0.72 0.77 0.86 0.86 0.86

Fig. 5. Position of wall thickness dimensions (in mm).

5
Fig. 4. A selection of cups from the 3 full factorial experiment for punch
load.
values for experiment no. 2, run 2 are given in Table 4. As the
thickness values were taken at nine different positions, nine
individual ANOVA had to be conducted in order to analyse
each position separately. A summary of these results is shown
in Table 5. It can be seen from Table 5 that three factors are
common to all nine positions, except for position no. 2, which
excludes B-H-P (blank-holding pressure). Therefore these
three factors have been deemed as the significant factors.
3.4. Full factorial for thickness distribution
For the full factorial experiment for thickness distribution
three factors were deemed significant, therefore each of the
three factors was tested at three levels, as shown below:
 Top-ram pressure: 60, 70, and 80 kN.
 Blank-holding pressure: 12, 18, and 24 kN.
 Speed: 100, 200, and 300 mm/min.
A punch profile of 4 mm, die profile of 6 mm, and plastic
applied to both sides of the blank were the values used for the
other factors. Fig. 6 depicts the 27 cups that were drawn for
the full factorial thickness experiment. All cups drawn were
cut down the centre and measured at nine different positions,
as shown in Fig. 5. It can be seen from Fig. 6 that three cups
were not cut and measured; this was because the cups were
not fully formed.
The results obtained are shown in Table 6, with an ‘‘x’’
representing the unmeasured cups. The variation was ana-
lysed using an appropriately chosen signal-to-noise (S/N)
ratio, as recommended by Taguchi [4]. The chosen S/N ratio
was
Smaller the better:
!
1X n
2
SNs ¼ 10 log y (2)
n i¼1 i
Using this S/N ratio the results in the S/N column of Table 6
were obtained. It can be seen from this table that experiment

Table 5
Results from ANOVA on factors that influence the thickness distribution (B-H-P: blank-holding pressure; T-R-P: top-ram pressure)

Position

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
B-H-P Die B-H-P B-H-P B-H-P B-H-P B-H-P B-H-P B-H-P
Die Lubrication Die Lubrication Die Die Die Die Lubrication
Speed Position Lubrication Position Punch Lubrication Lubrication Speed Position
T-R-P Punch Position Punch Speed Position Position T-R-P Punch
Speed Punch Speed T-R-P Speed Speed Speed
T-R-P Speed T-R-P T-R-P T-R-P T-R-P
T-R-P
 70
Table 6
Results from full factorial thickness experiment

M.T. Browne, M.T. Hillery / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71
Experiment T-R-F B-H-F Speed 1 (mm) 2 (mm) 3 (mm) 4 (mm) 5 (mm) 6 (mm) 7 (mm) 8 (mm) 9 (mm) m m2 s s2 S/N
number (kN) (kN) (mm/min)

1 60 12 100 1 0.99 0.94 0.9 0.87 0.84 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.905555556 0.82 0.057687 0.003327 0.846
2 60 12 200 1 0.95 0.94 0.89 0.86 0.84 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.898888889 0.808 0.052546 0.00276 0.9127
3 60 12 300 0.99 0.97 0.95 0.86 0.85 0.83 0.87 0.86 0.87 0.894444444 0.8 0.05876 0.00345 0.9523
4 60 18 100 x x x x x x x x x x x x x
5 60 18 200 0.96 0.95 0.9 0.86 0.86 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.884444444 0.7822 0.043906 0.00193 1.057
6 60 18 300 0.95 0.94 0.9 0.85 0.86 0.84 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.882222222 0.7783 0.039299 0.00154 1.0807
7 60 24 100 0.97 0.94 0.91 0.85 0.87 0.83 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.886666667 0.78618 0.044721 0.002 1.0349
8 60 24 200 x x x x x x x x x x x x x
9 60 24 300 x x x x x x x x x x x x x
10 70 12 100 0.97 0.95 0.91 0.86 0.86 0.84 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.885555556 0.7842 0.046398 0.00215 1.04509
11 70 12 200 0.93 0.92 0.9 0.85 0.86 0.82 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.873333333 0.7627 0.035707 0.001275 1.1699
12 70 12 300 0.92 0.92 0.87 0.81 0.84 0.81 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.861111111 0.7415 0.039826 0.001586 1.2905
13 70 18 100 0.93 0.92 0.88 0.83 0.82 0.8 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.858888889 0.7377 0.043716 0.00191 1.311
14 70 18 200 0.97 0.94 0.89 0.85 0.87 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.883333333 0.78027 0.043012 0.00185 1.068
15 70 18 300 0.96 0.94 0.9 0.86 0.85 0.84 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.88 0.7744 0.043301 0.001875 1.101
16 70 24 100 0.95 0.94 0.89 0.84 0.86 0.85 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.878888889 0.77245 0.039826 0.001586 1.1134
17 70 24 200 0.98 0.96 0.92 0.86 0.87 0.85 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.892222222 0.7961 0.048677 0.00237 0.979
18 70 24 300 0.97 0.94 0.91 0.85 0.86 0.83 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.882222222 0.7783 0.046845 0.002194 1.0775
19 80 12 100 0.97 0.95 0.89 0.87 0.88 0.85 0.87 0.88 0.87 0.892222222 0.7961 0.040242 0.001619 0.9827
20 80 12 200 0.99 0.95 0.91 0.88 0.89 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.88 0.904444444 0.818 0.039721 0.00157 0.8649
21 80 12 300 0.98 0.95 0.9 0.87 0.87 0.85 0.88 0.87 0.87 0.893333333 0.79804 0.043301 0.001875 0.9267
22 80 18 100 0.98 0.96 0.92 0.89 0.87 0.85 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.897777778 0.806 0.045491 0.002069 0.9267
23 80 18 200 0.95 0.93 0.92 0.84 0.86 0.84 0.86 0.86 0.86 0.88 0.7744 0.041533 0.001725 1.1017
24 80 18 300 0.95 0.93 0.9 0.86 0.86 0.82 0.87 0.87 0.86 0.88 0.7744 0.04 0.0016 1.1023
25 80 24 100 0.96 0.92 0.89 0.85 0.84 0.83 0.86 0.87 0.87 0.876666667 0.76855 0.041231 0.001699 1.1347
26 80 24 200 0.95 0.93 0.89 0.86 0.85 0.82 0.87 0.86 0.86 0.876666667 0.76855 0.04062 0.001649 1.135
27 80 24 300 0.97 0.95 0.91 0.87 0.87 0.85 0.87 0.88 0.87 0.893333333 0.79804 0.041231 0.001699 0.9715
 M.T. Browne, M.T. Hillery / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 136 (2003) 64–71
Fig. 6. Array of 27 cups used for 33 full factorial thickness experiment.
no. 13 maximises the S/N ratio. Therefore, it can be stated
that the optimum levels for the three significant factors, for
the most even wall thickness distribution, are top-ram
pressure, 70 kN; blank-holding pressure, 18 kN, and speed,
100 mm/min.
4. Conclusion
Taguchi’s L8 orthogonal array was used as a screening
experiment to determine the optimum levels of individual
factors, for lowest punch load and least variation in wall
thickness distribution, when deep-drawing C.R.1 cups of
0.9 mm. The structure of this experiment is shown in Table 1.
The results obtained were favourable and gave an insight
into the main factors affecting the successful drawing of
cups. The results also agreed closely with previous work that
had been carried out with this experimental tool.
From Table 2 it was shown that top-ram pressure, punch
and die profile, lubrication, and position of lubrication are
significant factors when measuring the punch load induced.
The 35 full factorial experiment on punch load gave a good
insight into the optimum parameters for reduced punch loads.
Of the three lubricants tested, plastic gave consistently lower
loads. The use of lubrication on both punch and die side was
proved best, although lubricating the die side only, gave
consistently better results than lubricating the punch side
only. This would be agreeable with work previously done
in this area. From Table 4 it can be seen that the optimum
levels are: punch, 4 mm; die, 6 mm; top-ram pressure, 80 kN;
lubrication, plastic; and position, both sides.
The analysis on the factors affecting the thickness dis-
tribution within the drawn cups was somewhat more com-
71
plicated, due to the number of different positions for
measurement. From Table 5, it was evident that the thickness
distribution within the cup was dependent on many factors,
but these factors varied at different positions throughout the
cup. It can be seen from this table that three factors are
common to all but one of the positions, position 2. These
factors being blank-holding pressure, speed, and top-ram
pressure. To determine the optimum levels for the least
variation in material thickness a 33 full factorial experiment
was conducted. From this it was found that the optimum
parameters to provide the least variation in wall thickness
distribution are, top-ram pressure, 70 kN; blank-holding
pressure, 18 kN; and speed 100 mm/min.
Having determined the optimum parameters for deep-
drawing C.R.1 sheet steel, further work is being conducted
in modelling the process using finite element analysis
(FEA). ELFEN software is being used for this purpose.
References
[1] M.J. Saran, Numerical and experimental investigations of deep
drawing of metal sheets, Trans. ASME 112 (1990) 272–277.
[2] E.M. Mielnik, Metalworking Science and Engineering, McGraw-Hill,
New York, 1991.
[3] S.Y. Chung, H.W. Swift, Cup-drawing from a flat blank, Proc. Inst.
Mech. Engrs. 165 (1951) 199–228.
[4] G. Taguchi, System of Experimental Design, vols. 1 and 2, UNIPUB/
Kraus International Publications, US, 1987.
[5] W. Johnson, P.B. Mellor, Engineering Plasticity, Van Nostrand
Reinhold, New York, 1973, pp. 292–315.
[6] H.W. Swift, Drawing tests for sheet metal, Proc. Inst. Automobile
Engrs. 34 (1939–1940) 361.
[7] D.F. Eary, E.A. Reed, Techniques of Pressworking Sheet Metal, 2nd
ed., Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1974.