Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

MRS-Thailand 2017

An Application for the Geometrical Based Optimization for a

Common Tool Design in Cold Forging Process
Nara Nakeenopakuna, Yingyot Aue-u-lanb*
a,b
Materials and Production Engineering program, Dept. of Mechanical and Process Engineering,
The Sirindhon International Thai-German School of Engineering (TGGS)
King Monkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok (KMUTNB), Thailand
Bangkok, Thailand

Abstract

Nowadays, the production time is a key to minimize the process sequence which leads to lower the whole product cost. One of
the leadtimes is the installation of the forming dies to the press. There are many methodologies having been developed to solve
this problem, such as a Single Minute Exchange Die System (SMED) which could minimize the setting up die to almost 25-30
percent. However, this system would not consider the minimization of the forming process or sequence. Most of the automotive
industries would lighten this problem by centralizing common parts which could be utilized with the same component dimension.
This part could be used in different car models. However, this technique could only reduce the time in development of the
forming processes/dies, but the number of the forming dies is still remain unchanged. Therefore, in this research the geometrical
based methodology integrated with Finite Element Modeling would be proposed to develop generalized common dies which
could be used with the same part configurations/shapes but difference in dimensions at some areas. This technique is applied and
validated with different pulley models. The results show that almost 60 percent of the forming dies would be reduced by this
technique
© 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of The First Materials Research Society of Thailand International Conference.

Keywords: Metal forming, Forging process, Geometrical based optimization, Finite element modeling

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +66 2555 2000; fax: +66 2587 4350.
E-mail address: nara.n-mpe2015@tggs-bangkok.org

2214-7853 © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of The First Materials Research Society of Thailand International Conference.
 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710 1703

1. Introduction

In the competitive manufacturing, companies need to produce products to supply their customers demand on
time. Not only the delivering, but the quality and the cost of products also are the essential factors. Nowadays, many
companies try to improve their processes to increase the capacity with lower cost. However, some of barriers which
obstruct their objectives are the setup time during the process. This challenges engineers to reduce them as much as
possible. In 1969, there was an engineer of Toyota named Shigeo Shingo proposed the very effective method to
reduce the setup time or changeover time, especially for the forming dies.[1] This method is called Quick
Changeover Dies System or Single Minute Exchange of Dies (SMED). The main idea of this method is the
converting an internal setup operation which is doing during the down time, to be an external setup which is
conducting in the run time.[2]

Changeover time (COT) is defined as the period between the last good product from previous production orders
leave the machine and the first good product coming out from the following production order.[4,5]There are many
techniques which were proposed by Shingo, such as standardization of the features, mechanization system,
intermediate jigs, and adopting parallel activities.[6]

In this case, the automotive companies are facing the problems of the COT in the cold forging process. This loss
is about 60 percent of the whole manufacturing time. This production is producing many models of the pulley; about
150 models with similar shape.

All finished products

Grouping

Sensitivity analysis

G1 G2 Gn

Fig. 1. flow chart of grouping product

According to Fig. 1, all finished products need to be classified into many groups which each group must have
some similar dimensions. So, to evaluate the dimensions that are able to be grouped, the sensitivity analysis is used
to analyze and determine the common dimensions of products. All product dimensions are collected from finished
part drawing. After that, a group of them are selected to be determined the common tool for this forging process.

This forming process has three steps for making a near net shape part. The initial raw material is the circular thick
sheet with the center hole. Initially, the circular blank with center hole is drawn to be a cup. Then, the bottom of the
cup is upset in the second forming and sent to machine to remove some excessive materials on the top tip. Later on,
they are sent to form in step three to achieve the final part dimension. (Fig. 2)

Fig. 2. forming shape in each forming step

1704 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710

In each forming step, it will contain four components: punch, mandrel, body die, and knock out. All the tools
would be assembled together to form one part. This would significantly consume the time during the changeover.
In this research, the application of the geometrical based optimization is proposed to standardize or determine the
common tooling which is used in the cold forging process only in the first step forming tool as seen in figure 4. A
group of pulleys which have six models with different two blank thicknesses are selected as an example for this
study and the reduction in a number of tooling is considered as an indicator in this research.

2. Methodology
The methodologies used to centralize the common tool design are divided into two steps. The first step is
grouping a product and the second is determining the common tool which can form all the products in one group.
 Grouping the products
Initially, all of the products need to be grouped to classify the whole models into many categories which have the
same dimensions. Pith Circle Diameter (PCD, dimension A) and Field Coil diameter (dimension B and C) are the
dimension used for grouping all of the models. (Fig. 3)

Fig. 3. Schematic of finished pulley and classification

dimensions

By these dimensions, all of products are categorized into thirty groups and details of each group is shown in table 1.

Table 1. categorized dimension of grouping

Field Coil diameter, mm PCD , mm (A)

B C 100 105 110 115 120

83.6 53.6 G11 G12 G13 G14 G15
86.2 53.6 G21 G22 G23 G24 G25
93.3 53.6 G31 G32 G33 G34 G35
96.4 63.6 G41 G42 G43 G44 G45
103.8 63.6 G51 G52 G53 G54 G55
105.4 65 G61 G62 G63 G64 G65
Then, the next step is the determination of the common tooling. In this case, G44 is selected as an example. This
group contains six models of pulley that has two different blank thicknesses, 12.25 and 13.50 mm, respectively.
 Determination of the common tooling
The calculation of the required volume of the finished product can be divided into 2 steps. The volume of the
forming part would be determined by offsetting the dimension of the finished product. In the commons practice, the
designed forming product would be easily done by offsetting the contour of the finished shape according to Fig. 5.
This is a common practice for designing the forged products obtained from the finished part. The finished part is
referred to the part after machining. For the calculation of the forming volume is done by using CAD software.
 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710 1705

Fig. 4. contour offset criteria in design of forming product

Height

BB

Fig. 5. Height and BB of pulley in forming step 2

Since all models in this group are formed with different blank thicknesses, so the volume calculation and
common tool determination would be performed separately. The volume calculation of the forming product are
performed firstly for forming step of two products which has the blank thickness of 12.25 mm. According to
geometry as seen in Fig.5, Height and BB are main concerned dimension in this case.
 Finite Element Modeling (FEM)
FEM is performed to simulate the deformation behaviour and determine the required volume of each section.
The dimensional classification is related to the size of the product at the inner and outer regions. The punch radius is
a significant parameter that controls the flow of the material on both sides. Thus, it is varied in FEM to determine
the effect on the volume and material flow, as seen in Fig.6.

Fig. 6. punch radii

For simplifying the simulation, FEM is set up as an axisymmetric with 3,000 elements at the blank. Blank
material is Carbon Steel (AISI1010). The friction coefficient (m) is assumed constant with 0.1. [3]
1706 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710

3. Result and Discussion

 Blank thickness 12.25 mm.
FEM is performed to investigate the deformation behaviour and determine also the volume in each deformation
zone. According to Fig.7, two deformed zones would be considered separately.

Height
volume

BB volume

Fig. 7. Forming step 1 part is divided into two zones, BB and Height

Three products which is 12.25 mm. of initial blank size, are created and calculated their volume in the BB and
the Height by CAD software as shown in table 2.

Table 2 volume calculation of BB and Height

Model Total volume BB volume Height volume

P12A 175877.1 90708.85 85168.25
Q12B 184199.18 91467.34 92731.84
R12C 181696.19 89026.86 92669.33
According to table 2, it can be seen that the model Q12B which has the highest volume, can be represented for
other models. So, this model is selected as a representative product.
According to the representative punch design of the model Q12B, the sensitivity analysis by varying the punch
radius would be performed. The volume of each punch radius is determined by FEM and compared with that of the
forming product as shown in table 3.

Table 3 volume comparison in BB and Height

Compared BB Compared Height

Punch radius BB volume Height volume
volume volume
2 81670.3 -10.71% 111954.7 12.86%
4 89831.1 -1.79% 103793.9 4.63%
6 97907.6 7.04% 95717.4 -3.51%
7.5 100507 9.88% 93118 -6.13%
Compared volume are plotted as seen in Fig.8 (a), and fitted by linear relation. So, the intersection point between
two fitted lines are 5.92 mm, which is the optimal punch radius for balancing the volume of BB and height.
 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710 1707

a B

Fig. 8. (a) linear fitted for determination of the optimal punch radius of 12.25 mm thickness blank, (b)
forming step 2 part without defects
FEM is modified by adjusting punch radius starting at the optimum value. To verify the optimal punch by radius,
the second forming step would be performed to check the volume. According to Fig.8 (b), it can be seen that the
forming part in step two has no any defects such as folding and under filling.
Then, three models with the blank thickness of 13.5 mm, are performed with the same as previous models but
changing the initial blank thickness from 12.25 mm. to 13.5 mm.
 Blank thickness 13.50 mm.

Table 4 volume calculation of BB and Height

Model Total volume BB volume Height volume

X13I 216494 107158.14 109335.86

Y13J 200287.37 107616.82 92670.55

Z13K 212572.97 101202.22 111370.75

According to table 4, Z13K is the model that has the highest volume among these three models. So, this model is
selected as the representative product.
According to Fig.9 (a), the optimal punch radius of 5.2 mm. would also be verified by conducting the forming at
the second step. According to the FEM result, the underfilled defect is occurred at the BB section as seen in Fig.9
(b).
The underfilled defect is caused mainly by the not enough volume at the BB section. Therefore, the punch radius
needs to be modified by using the new technique.
1708 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710

a b

Fig. 9. (a) linear fitted for determination of the optimal punch radius of 13.50 thickness blank, (b) forming step 2
with underfilled defect
Previously, the forming part is divided into two parts as seen in Fig. 7 but new modified technique would
separate the forming part into four parts; Height inside, Height outside, BB inside, and BB outside, as shown in
Fig.10.
Due to the underfilling on the BB inside, the volume of the BB inside have to be investigated by different punch
radii for each side. For the outside volume, it can be seen that there is enough material for forming. So, the outside
punch radius is fixed equal to 5.2 mm, and the inside punch radius is varied from 5.2 mm. to 10 mm.

Fig.10. Forming step 1 part is separated into four parts

According to Fig.11 (a), it is shown that the BB inside volume significantly is increased with the larger punch
radius. In order to achieve the good forming part without underfilling, the maximum BB volume is obtained by the
maximum punch radius of 10 mm. and then, FEM is adjusted for the punch radius which are inside punch radius of
10 mm. and outside punch radius of 5.2 mm.
 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710 1709

a b

Fig. 11. (a) comparison between punch radius and BB volume, (b) forming step 2 part with different punch
radius in each side

According to Fig.11 (b), the new modified forming part could be formed at step 2 without any defects, such as
underfilling and fracture.

4. Conclusion
This research aims to reduce the changeover time by proposing the common tooling technique based on
geometrical based optimization. According to the results, the number of the tools would be reduced around 66
percent as seen in table 5. This common tool has been verified in the product successfully.

Table 5 conclusion for tooling, current and common tooling

Common
Tooling Current
tooling
Push punch 6 2
Body die 6 2
Mandrel 6 2
Knock out 6 2
Total 24 8

According to table 5, there are 24 tools for six models of pulley. By using the common tooling, the number of
tooling in forming step one is reduced to 8, about 66 percent of reduction.

5. References
[1] B. M. Lixai Chen, "The application of setup time reduction in lean production," Asian Social Science, vol.
6, no. 7, pp. 108-113, 2010.
[2] S. Shingo, A revolutiona in manufacturing: The SMED system, Cambridge: Productivity Press, 1985.
[3] T. Altan, G. Ngalie and G. Shen, Cold and hot forging fundamentals and applications, ASM International,
2005.
1710 N. Nakeenopakun and Y. Aue-u-lan / Materials Today: Proceedings 17 (2019) 1702–1710

[4] K. S. Pablo Guzmán Ferradás, "Improving changeover time: a tailored SMED approach for welding,"
Procedia CIRP , vol. 7, pp. 598-603, 2013.
[5] G. Gest, S. J. Culley , R. I. Mcintosh, A. R. Mileham and G. W. Owen, "Review of fast tool change
systems," Computer Integrated Manufacturing, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 205-210, 1995.
[6] A. Abraham, G. K.N. and K. Motawani, "Setup time reduction through SMED tehcnique in a stamping
prodiction line," sasTECH, pp. 47-52, 2012.