Forging Process Analysis and Preform Design

By

Harshil Parikh, Bhavin Mehta*, Jay Gunasekera

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701

Rob Mayer, President

Queen City Forging Company, Cincinnati, Ohio 45226

Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to optimize the forging process and reduce the required force
to forge the final product. A complex 3- dimensional part was provided by Queen City
Forging Company, Cincinnati, Ohio. Simulation results predicted that the complex 3D
part could be forged in one step, using at least a 900 ton capacity press or higher. Since
Queen City Forging Company has an 800 ton press, the task was to design a preform and
two die sets to manufacture the part using the existing press. SolidEdge was used to
model the dies while MSC.SuperForge was used to simulate the forging process. Several
different preforms were designed and analyzed to obtain the final product in two stages
with a maximum load of less than 750 tons.

* Associate Professor and Director of CAD/CAE Lab

Department of Mechanical Engineering
Ohio University, Athens, Ohio 45701
E-mail: mehta@ohio.edu
Please address all correspondence to him.
Introduction

Forging is defined as the process in which metal is plastically deformed with application
of temperature and pressure. It is used to change not only the shape but also the
properties of the metal because it refines the grain size and therefore improves its
structure. Forging is a cost-effective way to produce net-shape or near-net-shape
components. Forged parts are used in high performance, high strength and high reliability
applications where tension, stress, load and the human safety are critical considerations.
They are also employed in a wide range of demanding environments, including highly
corrosive and extreme temperatures and pressures.

Various parameters such as complexity of the part, friction between dies and workpiece,
type of press, die and workpiece temperature, material of workpiece govern the forging
process. Forging process is said to be successful if die cavity is completely filled and
stress in the workpiece is less than ultimate stress corresponding to the workpiece
material, with minimum force.

Forging analysis software packages like MSC.SuperForge is very helpful in optimizing

the forging process. Die design is very expensive. With these packages forging process
can be simulated. Various dies can be tried and forging process can be analyzed closely.
Optimum die set for which die cavity fills completely while maintaining a lower stress
can be selected.
Methodology
For Single Die

Modeling in CAD System

3-D modeling software SolidEdge is used to model part, billet and dies. SolidEdge has an
option by which volume of the drawn part can be found. So final part is modeled and
required material for the part is found. Final part is as shown in Figure 1.

Figure1: Part

SolidEdge provides option of boolean operation by which specific shape can be

subtracted or added to the other shape. If the part is simple, boolean operation can be
used to design the upperdie and lowerdie. For this part lowerdie can be obtained by
boolean operation but due to partial hole in the part, upperdie cannot be obtained by
boolean operation. For this project lowerdie and upperdie are modeled without boolean
operations. Even though MSC.SuperForge allows dies and billets to move in X, Y and Z
directions and rotate about X, Y and Z directions it causes lot of problems in positioning,
if they are aligned manually. So care must be taken while modeling dies and billet in
SolidEdge. The upperdie and the lowerdie are shown in Figure 2.
 (a)

(b)
Figure 2: (a) UpperDie (b) LowerDie
As the given part has circular cross-section along Z-axis, a cylindrical billet is used.
Because forging height to diameter ratio is a very critical parameter for proper die fill,
billets with various heights and diameters are tested.

Dies and billets are drawn in such a manner that they are Z-axis aligned. As SuperForge
accepts only ‘*.STL’ files, upperdie, lowerdie and billets are saved with ‘STL’ extension.
Analysis in MSC.SuperForge

All the files of dies and billets with ‘STL’ extension are imported to MSC.SuperForge
database. While importing parts units should preferably be inches. Although
MSC.SuperForge provides options for other units like meter, millimeter, foot, it works
very well and accurately only for inches. It does not matter the unit in which the part is
drawn, MSC.SuperForge can convert that unit into inches if that option is selected.
Appropriate forging parameters like material of die and work piece, type of press, type of
friction, friction coefficient, initial die temperature, initial work piece temperature, length
of stroke, are provided. Values of the process parameters are given in Appendix A.
Forging process is modeled in MSC.SuperForge. Different billets (different heights and
diameters but constant volume) are tried and results are shown in the result table. Once
the simulation is done SuperForge provides various options for viewing the results (force-
time graph, stress, strain temperature, shape) at any point of time during the stroke.
Results show that cavity is completely filled. Final part is shown in Figure 3(b).

(a) (b)
Figure 3: (a)SuperForge simulation at the end of stroke (b)Workpiece at the end of stroke
Force-Time graph is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4: Force-Time Graph

From the graph is clear that the maximum force required for the process is 7.631*106 N
which is 857.76 tons.
For Multiple Dies

Force required to produce a final shape of the part in one step is very large. Thus it was
decided to start with a preform for reducing the force requirement. From the Force-Time
graph it is clear that required force increases significantly after 29.22 seconds.
MSC.SuperForge provides options to view the shape of the work piece at any point of
time during the stroke. Shape of the work piece after 29.22 seconds is found. It is shown
in Figure 5(a).

(a) (b)
Figure 5: (a) SuperForge simulation after 24.88 seconds (b) Simplified preform

If this shape is selected as a perform, it might reduce the force. That shape is simplified
so that it is easy to forge and less expensive to manufacture dies. Simplified shape is
shown in the Figure 5(b).There is one more difference in this preform. Upper face of the
preform is without hole. From Figure 5(a) it is clear that only little cavity is left at the
bottom which is having smaller diameter. So there is no need of applying force on the
whole face of the bigger diameter. From various simulations it was found that material
movement in Z-direction requires a small force. As the upper face of the preform is solid,
force will be applied on smaller area of bigger diameter. And when upperdie penetrates
the preform the same amount of the material will be pushed down in Z-direction and very
small amount of the material will move in lateral direction till the cavity is filled.

Several other preforms have been tried. But it does not reduce force that much. Various
preforms are shown in Appendix B.

Modeling on the CAD System

Upperdies and Lowerdies, to produce preform and final shape, are modeled in 3-D
modeling software, SolidEdge. As the final part is same as the previous case, appropriate
billet from previous section is selected for this process. All the dies and billet are saved
with STL extension.
Analysis in MSC.SuperForge

All the files of dies and billet with ‘STL’ extension are imported in MSC.SuperForge
database. Appropriate forging parameters like material of die and work piece, type of
press, type of friction, friction coefficient, initial die temperature, initial work piece
temperature, length of stroke, are provided. Values of process parameters are given in
Appendix A. Two different forging processes, one to produce preform and the other one
is to produce final shape, are modeled. Forging process is simulated and results are
analyzed. Final shapes at the end of the stroke are shown in the Figure 6.

(a) (b)

(c) (d)
Figure 6: (a) SuperForge simulation at the end of the stroke (preform) (b) Preform at the
end of the stroke (c) SuperForge Simulation at the end of the stroke (final shape) (d)
final shape at the end of the stroke.
Force-Time graphs are shown in Figure 7. It is clear from the graphs that force required
for both the processes are 4.211*106 N which is 473.33 tons and 2.417*106 N which is
271.68 tons.

(a) (b)

Figure 7: (a) Force-Time graph for preform (b) Force-Time graph for final shape

Results and Discussion

Result Table for Single Die:

Number Billet (inches) Stress(Pa) Force(N) Observation

Diameter Height
1 1.69 5 2.05*108 4.31*105 Incomplete
2 2.6 2.53 2.24*108 7.631*106 Fully Filled
3 3 1.9 2.185*108 6.697*106 Fully Filled

From the above result table it is clear that diameter to height ratio affects significantly the
force requirement.

The first simulation could not complete. The reason might be the length of billet. As the
slender ratio is very large for this billet, it buckles first. Reverse flow of material might be
the reason for incomplete simulation. The second and third simulations were completed
but force requirements were very large.
Result Table for Multiple Dies (Preform):

Number Shape Stress(Pa) Force(N) Observation

1 Preform1 2.001*108 5.648*106 Fully filled
Final Shape 2.082*108 3.307*106 Fully filled
2 Preform2 1.99*108 6.59*106 Fully filled
Final Shape 2.15*108 7.168*105 Fully Filled
3 Preform3 1.94*108 4.21*106 Fully Filled
Final Shape 2.16*108 2.417*106 Fully Filled

From the above result table it is clear that for case 3 force requirements are minimum to
produce preform and final shape. For the second case force required to produce final
shape is very less but force required to produce that preform itself is very high.

Conclusion

From the above discussion it can be concluded that

• Force requirement for a part is very high for a single set of dies.
• Force requirement for the same part can be reduced by selecting appropriate
preform shape.
• If company has large capacity press, a single set of dies can be used to forge the
part.
• If company has small capacity press, part can be forged by selecting multiple dies.
• Analysis is completed satisfactorily by SuperForge.
• SuperForge is found to be very helpful in simulating and analyzing forging
process and selection of appropriate preform shape.

References
• Jamie Corcoran, Erik Hahn, Barrett Marion, Jonathon Pangbom and
Jeffrey Spencer (2000), “Computer-Assisted Design of Pre-Form and
Finisher Dies for Cold Forging of Aluminum”.
• Catarina Castro, Luisa Sousa, C.A.C. Antonio and J.M.A Cesar de Sa
(2001), “An efficient Algorithm to estimate optimal preform die shape
parameter in forging”.
• Queen City Forging Company, “ www.qcforge.com”.
• SolideEdge, “www.solidedge.com”.
• SuperForge, “http://simulate.engineering-e.com/tutorial/sfviewlets.cfm”.
 Appendix A

Forging parameters

Die Material : DIN_1.3505 (Steel)

Work Piece Material : AA_6062 (T=20C) (Aluminum)
Press Type : Hydraulic Press
Velocity of ram : 2 mm/sec
Friction Type : Constant Friction
Coefficient of Friction : 0.2
Die Temperature : 300 Fahrenheit
Work Piece Temperature : 900 Fahrenheit
Appendix B

Preform1

Preform2

Preform3
 Appendix C

Final shape using one die set

Preform

Final shape using two dies