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

net/publication/294686671

Local Contact Conditions in Sheet Metal Forming and their Simulation in

Laboratory Test Methods

Article  in  Production Engineering · January 2004

CITATIONS READS

7 459

3 authors, including:

Jan Filzek Gernot Nitzsche

FILZEK TRIBOtech Hydro Aluminium
11 PUBLICATIONS   25 CITATIONS    9 PUBLICATIONS   93 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

...Tribological Testing for Bulk Metal Forming View project

Tribological Testing for Sheet Metal Forming View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jan Filzek on 28 August 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Technische Universität Darmstadt, Institute of Production Engineering and Forming Machines

Local Contact Conditions in Sheet Metal Forming and their

Simulation in Laboratory Test Methods
Peter Groche; Jan Filzek; Gernot Nitzsche

Abstract
The knowledge of tribological behavior is of utmost importance for enlarging the process limits and ensuring process
stability in sheet metal forming. However, it is difficult to study the tribological characteristics in the real process. For
testing wear behavior of dies and work pieces in a laboratory test method, the local contact conditions of the real
process have to be reproduced as exactly as possible. Therefore, FE analyses of local contact conditions in different die
sections, such as drawing edge and draw bead were carried out. In addition, the influence of tool geometry, sheet
strength, sheet thickness, friction and blank holder normal load was studied. As a major result, characteristic load
distributions were identified. Furthermore certain parameters, such as sheet thickness or sheet strength demonstrate
major influence on local contact conditions. Finally, an easy replication of the significant load peak distribution was
achieved by simulating the contact of a simple cylinder-plane-tool. Using such a die geometry for a laboratory test
method, the mostly undesired influence of the basic sheet material can be minimized.

Keywords: Production Process, Sheet Metal Forming, Load Distribution

Introduction
In the automobile industry the demand for low vehicle weight has
increased during the past years. In particular the area of sheet
metal forming aims at this by the processing of larger and
multiple-function integrated components, a higher material
utilization and the application of high strength steel [1]. Thus, the
requirements on the manufacturing process become even more
extensive and complex. Nevertheless, the process limits with the
sheet metal forming have to be enlarged. In addition, the stability
of the forming process has to be optimized.
In this connection the forming process is determined essentially by
the tribological conditions in the forming zone [2]. Efforts are made
to optimize the friction and wear behavior. Suppliers of the
forming industry develop numerous sheet coatings, tool coatings
and lubricants. Thus, the number of combination possibilities of
tribological components rises significantly. For optimization of
the forming process, however, the knowledge of the operating
behavior of the numerous tribological combinations is of utmost
importance.
But it is not possible to investigate the tribological characteristics
in the real process. Instead, the industry relies on model test
procedures for assessing the functional behavior of single
components and for reaching a secured decision on their
suitability. In this connection, it is a problem that no uniform test
method exists for all requirements and applications. In addition,
the results of the different test methods aren't accepted generally.
Thus, the definition of uniform specifications and criteria of
suitability is not possible. Nevertheless, it is of importance
likewise for sheet metal forming industry, sheet metal
manufacturers and lubrication industry as well as tool
manufacturer and coating industry to have a standardized and
uniform test method for assessing objectively the functional
behavior and suitability of different products.
For this reason a new, uniform test method was developed in
cooperation with the German automobile industry, the European
steel industry and further automobile suppliers. This integral
assessment method should offer the possibility to judge properties
of single tribological components with regard to its effects on
friction behavior and tool wear as well as on the abrasion of sheet
metal coatings.
Tribology in Sheet Metal Forming
When drawing complex body parts for a passenger car, stretch
drawing and deep drawing are applied simultaneously. The tool
geometry is designed in such a way, that due to the punch impact,
the blank slides from the blank holder area into the die. The blank
holder is used only to prevent the formation of wrinkles. In certain
tool areas however, the amount of stretching should be increased.
By using a locking bead and beading rods or by applying a
sufficient high blank holder force, the blank holder acts as a brake
on the blank to slow down flow of material.
Fig. 1: Sheet Metal Forming Process [3]
The quality of the forming process is determined by the
tribological conditions in the forming zone [5]. During forming
operation, sliding friction conditions with lubrication occur.
Depending on the component geometry, it could be necessary to
increase the friction in certain tool areas for controlling the
material flow. In most of the tool areas, however, low friction
between sheet metal and tool must be achieved to guarantee that
high strains are obtained without tearing the sheet metal.
Friction also results in undesirable complex wear mechanisms at
the contact surfaces between die and drawing part. Especially
under high contact stress conditions and low lubrication, adhesion
and abrasion occur, causing the forming operation to fail and
requiring the tool to be refinished [6, 7]. Especially the drawing
edge of deep- and stretch-forming dies is exposed to high contact
normal pressure and long sliding distances. Dies often show
adhesive contamination of the tool surface or abrasive wear in this
contact zone.
Additionally, when forming zinc coated sheet material, an
undesirable abrasion of the coating may occur [8]. Those abrasion
particles may result in an additional tool wear, too [9].
Therefore, lubrication is used to reduce friction and to minimize
wear of tool and drawn part. In practice the application of
appropriate die materials, together with process-optimized
lubricants, result in high drawing ratios and reduce the wear of
forming dies significantly.
Both for technical and economic reasons it is not possible to
investigate the tribological characteristics in an actual process.
Instead, simulation in a model test considering the characteristics
of the forming process has proven to be reasonable. Therefore,
suitable model tests must be developed, which enable the direct
measurement of the friction. To examine the influence of
individual parameters, it must be possible to vary them separately.
Considering the special characteristics of the forming process,
those tests must reproduce the tribological system relevant for the
respective forming process.
Several studies provide good overview on the usual principles in
sheet metal working [10, 11]. Substantial result is that the request
for instrumentation accessibility contradicts with transferability on
the real process. For the selection of a test principle a suitable
compromise between all requests must be found.
To quantitatively model tribology, systems are generally used
which represent a certain tool section. Thus, strip drawing tests
were developed by pulling the sheet metal through a fixed tool. To
judge the locally varying tribological characteristics at certain
specific areas, those tests reproduce different individual tool
sections (fig. 2).
Fig. 2: Strip Drawing Tests Reproducing Different Tool Sections [12]
Very important for choosing the right tool section is the objective,
whether friction, tool wear or abrasion of the sheet coating should
be subject of research. Tool wear, for example, always occurs at
sections with high normal load and relative motion between sheet
and die. For judgment of the friction behavior, in contrast, the flat
contact area under the blank holder is of major interest, because
the forming result is influenced primarily by the friction forces
acting in that area. Instead, abrasion problems of sheet coatings
occur in sections, where the sheet surface is encountered to both,
high contact normal stress and high surface strain. These
conditions are acting especially in the area of drawing beads.
The existing test stands can only be used to simulate a certain tool
area, because each tool section contains different test geometries
and conditions. Either a test stand offers a plane pulling
movement or it pulls the strip vertically along a drawing edge
[13]. In the same way, a test stand enables either a single strip
drawing test for frictional investigations or an intermitting durable
test for investigations of the steady behavior of tools or coatings
[14]. Finally, all test stands work either with single strips or from
a coil. No test stand exists, which enables a durable attempt for
wear tests on single strips.
For this reason, the Institute for Production Engineering and
Forming Machines has developed a new integral strip drawing test
stand, which enables both single friction tests and intermitting
steady tests. The development took place within a joint project
with the German automobile industry, the European steel industry
and further automobile suppliers.
This integral assessment method should offer the possibility to
judge properties of single tribological components with regard to
its effects on friction behavior and tool wear as well as on the
abrasion of sheet metal coatings.
Theoretical Analysis
For the development of effective wear tests, knowledge about the
local tribological loads is essential. Several studies aimed at
optimizing the geometric draw die profile with regard to wear
[15]. In this study a finite element approach was performed to
identify the characteristic distribution of local loads and surface
strains in certain tool sections.
The finite element method has turned out to be an appropriate tool
for accelerating the development of part geometries and drawing
tools. Using finite element codes for forming simulations is state
of the art. Examining the local tribological stress requires a very
fine discretization of the tool surface and the use of an elastic die
model and elastic-plastic sheet metal behavior. This cannot yet be
done economically for a whole deep drawn part today. In order to
explore the basic effects taking place in the contact zones of a
deep drawing die, the interesting areas must be modeled as single
areas.
FE-Simulation of a Drawing Edge
It is already well known, that the load distribution especially at the
drawing edge is highly inhomogeneous [13]. Fig. 3 shows the
representing model. A zoomed section of a parallel strip is used to
calculate the basic contact properties. The model geometry allows
the required fine discretization of the contact zones and contains
the basic contact features occurring in real dies. In areas turning
out as areas with high load gradients further local mesh
refinements were realized.
blank holder
die
sheet strip
drawing
direction
Fig. 3: Finite Element Model of the Drawing Edge
The condition of displacement is a constant drawing velocity at
the end of the strip. The blank holder has a normal pressure load
in vertical direction. The other degrees of freedom of the blank
holder are restricted. The material properties of the metal strip are
characterized as elastic-plastic and isotropic strain-hardening. The
dies are modeled as elastic bodies (Young’s modulus E = 2.1 105
N/mm²). Relative displacement of the interacting nodes of sheet
material and tool surface causes variances of the calculated
contact forces in different increments. As the process is stationary,
temporary deviations can be leveled out by averaging. After a
specific number of increments stationary contact conditions are
reached. To verify the convergence, calculations are made with
models using half- and double-sized elements. In order to
guarantee convergence, the use of the fine discretized mesh
presented is necessary.
Besides the local loads, the total amount of drawing force, friction
force on die and blank holder and force of deformation are
calculated. Fig. 4 shows the distribution of contact normal stress
at the drawing edge. The contact pressure shows a very uneven
distribution with characteristic local peaks. The maximum normal
stress is located in the transition zone between the flat blank
holder zone and the draw die radius nearly at 0°, where the sheet contact stress distribution for different sheet thickness and its
is bended. Behind this maximum, the local load on the draw die strong dependence.
surface decreases quickly. A second peak is observed at an angle
of about 50 to 65°. Then, the contact-pressure decreases to zero drawing edge blank holder
90° 45° 0°
before reaching the 90° angle. This means that the sheet metal
does not abut on the end of the drawing edge because of the

contact normal stress [N/mm²]

backward bending. -40
x
drawing edge blank holder -80  95 N/mm²
Sheet thickness
90° 45° 0°
0,7 mm
contact normal stress [N/mm²]

-120
1,0 mm 140 N/mm²
 
1,3 mm
-160
blank
holder
x 1,6 mm
 200 N/mm²
-200 drawing edge radius: 5mm
0°
sheet material: DC 04
drawing friction: µ =0,1  240 N/mm²
edge -240 blank holder pressure: 15 N/mm²
x
90°

drawing edge radius: 5mm Fig. 6: Distribution of Contact Stress for Different Sheet Thickness
sheet material: DC 04
sheet thickness: 1,3 mm
friction: µ =0,1 Especially the maximum contact stress at the beginning of the
blank holder pressure: 15 N/mm² drawing edge rises extremely with increasing sheet thickness, as
Fig. 4: Characteristic Distribution of Contact Stress indicated in fig. 7. This fact corresponds with the bending theory
of equation (1).
The most essential fact is the distinct maximum of the normal 300
stress at the beginning of the drawing edge. A similar peak of the
normal stress is observed on the opposite side at the beginning of 250
max contact stress [N/mm ²]

the blank holder. In this zone the required bending moment is

applied resulting in this distinct peak of the contact normal stress. 200
The bending moment MB can be estimated with initial yield stress
kf, sheet thickness s and sheet width b:
150
k f b  s2 (1)
MB 
4 100
This bending moment results in a couple of contact forces, which
drawing edge radius: 5mm
has to be supported by the tool (fig. 5). 50 sheet: DC 04 (kf = 170 N/mm²)
At the end of the drawing edge the sheet has to be bended back. friction: µ =0,1
blank holder pressure: 15 N/mm²
But there the sheet is not clamped exactly because of the absence 0
of a blank holder, so that the contact force is propped up 0,7 0,8 0,9 1 1,1 1,2 1,3 1,4 1,5 1,6
sheet thickness [mm]
undefined with a broader distribution at the tool.
Fig. 7: Dependence of Maximum Contact Stress on Sheet Thickness

As indicated already in equation (1), the major influencing

parameter, beside the sheet thickness, is the material strength or
the initial yield stress kf respectively.
This means that both a higher geometrical stiffness of the sheet
(higher sheet thickness) and a higher mechanical stiffness (higher
strength) result in a distinct higher maximum of the contact stress
at the beginning of the drawing edge.
300

250
max contact stress [N/mm ²]

200

150
Fig. 5: Theory of Resulting Contact Stress
100
To analyze the significant parameters, which influence the
distribution and especially the maximum value of the contact drawing edge radius: 5mm
50 sheet thickness: 1,0 mm
stress, an extensive study was done with separate variation of friction: µ =0,1
different parameters such as friction, blank holder normal force, blank holder pressure: 15 N/mm²
0
sheet thickness, material strength and radius of the drawing edge. 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
All variations confirm the uneven distribution of the contact stress initial yield stress [N/mm²]
with the characteristic local peaks. The maximum value appears Fig. 8: Dependence of Maximum Contact Stress on Sheet Strength
without exception at the bending point at the beginning of the
drawing edge. There, the contact stress reaches values somewhere In addition, the radius of the drawing edge can be identified as
in the order of the yield stress. As first influence, fig. 6 shows the third important influencing parameter.
 200
The results are based on the same theoretical conditions as the
180 simulation model of the drawing edge. The essential tests of
convergence were conducted for this model in the same way.
max contact stress [N/mm ²]

160

140
radius
90° 45° 0° plane area [mm]
120 0
100

contact normal stress

-40
80
sheet material: DC 04 -80
60
sheet thickness: 1,0 mm
40 sheet: DC 04 (kf = 170 N/mm²) friction: µ =0,1
sheet thickness: 1,0 mm blank holder pressure: 10 N/mm² -120
20 friction: µ =0,1 draw bead radius: 5 mm
blank holder pressure: 15 N/mm² blank holder radius: 3 mm -160
0
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 190 N/mm²
-200
radius of drawing edge [mm]
bending points
Fig. 9: Dependence of Maximum Contact Stress on Drawing Edge Radius
blank
90°
On the other hand, the remaining parameters friction and blank 
 0° holder
holder pressure (or back holding force) don’t influence the 0° 180°
draw front
maximum value. bead die
draw bead circumference [mm]
Experimental Verification of the Contact Stress Distribution 0° 45° 90° 135° plane area [mm]
0 0
-20

contact normal stress

The finite element simulation results were verified by an -40

contact normal stress

-40
experimental strip drawing test with bending. Carrying out a wear -60 -80
test, significant wear marks were analyzed directly at the points of 80 N/mm² -120
-80
local stress peaks at 0° and about 60° [13].
-100 -160
-120
drawing edge tool with multilayer coating 140 N/mm² -200
-140 220 N/mm²

drawing Fig. 12: Characteristic Distribution of Contact Stress

direction
Considering the analyzed distribution of contact stress in fig. 7,
significant peaks of the contact stress can be evaluated similar to
the drawing edge at all locations of sheet bending. Similar values
wear at 0°
of contact stress peaks of up to 220 N/mm² are calculated. The
contact stresses at the draw bead, however, are lower (up to 140
N/mm²).
Carrying out the same study of parameter variation as with the
drawing edge model, the influences of sheet strength, sheet
thickness, friction and tool geometry were analyzed. Substantial
result is, that the maximum contact stresses at the bending points
wear at 60°
are influenced significantly by the sheet thickness and material
Fig. 10: Verification of Contact Stress Peaks properties in the same way as at the drawing edge.
Fig. 13 demonstrates exemplarily the distribution of contact stress
FE-Simulation of a Draw Bead at the blank holder for different sheet materials. The peak value
increases distinctly with rising sheet strength (initial yield stress).
The acting contact stress is the most substantial influence for tool
wear. However, the surface strain of the sheet coating could have 0° 45° 90°
0
an additional influence [19]. A high and alternating strain of the AlMgSi1
-40 blank
coating is generated in the section of draw beads. Thus, a strip 0° holder AlMg2,5
drawing test using a draw bead tool should be used for an abrasion 90° DC04
-80
test of sheet coatings.
max. contact stress [N/mm²]

draw front
A finite element simulation of a draw bead was conducted for bead ZStE260BH
-120 die
theoretical analysis of the tribological conditions in such a draw
bead (fig. 11). -160 DP500
AlMgSi1

-200 AlMg2,5
DC04
-240 ZStE220BH
ZStE260BH
-280
DP500
-320
Fig. 13: Distribution of Contact Stress at Blank Holder Radius

Fig. 14 evaluates the peak values at the different bending points in

dependence on initial yield stress.
Those sheet metal induced deviations have to be recognized when
studying the tool wear behavior of different sheet configurations.
Fig. 11: FE-Model of Draw Bead and Locations of Max. Contact Stress
A more comprehensive analyze and comparison of the different
parameters was done in [16].
400
350
max. contact stress [N/mm²]
Developed Test Stand
Based on the experimental experience and the theoretical analysis
of the separate loads the following test principles can be chosen
back die
draw bead (1. peak)
for the different investigations:
draw bead (2. peak)  Friction: plane-plane tool

front die
300
blank holder  Tool wear: cylinder-plane tool
250  Sheet coating abrasion: draw bead tool
200
Substituting the load conditions at the drawing edge with a
cylinder-plane-geometry for wear investigations, the test stand
150 could be designed in such a way that all strip movements are
100 carried out horizontally. The different tool geometries can be
installed by an exchangeable tool unit.
50 1:1

0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350
initial yield stress kf,0 [N/mm²]

Fig. 14: Max. Contact Stress at Bending Points of Draw Bead

Replication with a Cylinder/Plane-Geometry

In order to eliminate bending influences and to realize a flat

drawing direction similar to the friction test, an approach was
done representing the substantial load distribution at the drawing
edge using a simple line contact of a cylinder-plane tool. Based on
calculations of a line load (Hertz) a cylinder radius of 258 mm was
chosen. The finite element model for calculation of the resulting
maximum contact stress is plotted in the following figure.

40 mm

Fig. 17: Developed Test Stand [16]

Upper and lower tool fitting are located on piezoelectric

dynamometers. Thus, the reaction forces (normal load and friction
force) can be measured separately at each tool.
Fig. 15: Cylinder-Plane FE-Model The complete drive train of the test stand is carried out via
asynchronous motor with frequency converter control. Both, the
The FE-result of the contact stress distribution in fig. 16 shows pulling movement of the metal and the normal load are transferred
similar normal stress peaks like in the calculation of the drawing mechanically.
edge or draw bead. Depending on the normal load on the The asynchronous motor generates the closing movement of the
cylindrical tool a certain desired maximum value of the peak can tool and the strip pulling movement with cam discs for ensuring
be achieved. an exact synchronization of all movements.
[mm]
Using oscillating arms and connecting rods, the rotation of the
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10 cam discs is transformed into a horizontal movement of pneumatic
grabs, which are stored on two gib sledges. In a similar way the
normal force strength is generated by a lever and packages of leaf
-40
springs.
The strip is fed horizontally to the test stand. The movements of
contact stress [N/mm²]

-80 the lever and grabs are synchronized, so that a flat pulling
normal force
movement of the sheet takes place by the working grab after a
4000 N
-120 defined drawn up of the tool. This working stroke is realized on a
8000 N ¾ turn of the cam disc. The tool then opens over the time period
-160 16000 N of the last ¼ turn of the cam disc, and the second grab (feeding
24000 N grab) carries the strip simultaneously without load through the
opened tool, in order to feed new lubricated material. Meanwhile,
-200 32000 N
drawing direction the working grab returns into its initial position and the next
40000 N operation may start. The sliding velocity of the strip can be
-240
adjusted by the rotational speed of the asynchronous motor.
Fig. 16: Distribution of Contact Stress
Both individual tests and intermitting duration tests can be carried
out through this automated sequence of synchronized working
cycles.
In addition, the test stand should offer the possibility of working
either with single strips or from a coil (endless strip). Therefore an
extensive peripheral device was designed with an automatic
stacking. The stacking unit can be substituted optionally by an
uncoiling unit. Both options feed the sheet metal to an automated
cleaning and oiling unit. In order to ensure constant and
reproducible strip conditions for the tribological test.
Testing Procedure
In opposite to friction investigations the wear test consists of an
intermitting duration test of up to 15000 strokes. This represents a
friction length of 1500 m. As mentioned before, the cylinder-plane
tool is used in order to simulate the same distribution of contact
normal stress at the drawing edge. Based on the results of the
theoretical analysis a cylinder radius of 258 mm was chosen as
standard geometry.
cylinder-plane-tool wear mark at plane area
Fig. 18: Cylinder-Plane Tool for Wear Tests
For comparing and judging the wear behavior of different
tribological systems the roughness of the tool is measured before
and after the tests. Advantage of the plane geometry of the lower
tool is that the wear mark (fig. 18) can be measured easily three-
dimensionally. So the abrasion depth or the abrasive wear volume
can be calculated.
In addition, several parameters such as friction forces and normal
forces are measured during the test. The roughness of the strip
after passing the tool is measured as well, in order to get
information about the changing surface condition of the tools.
Thus, the wear behavior of tools can be tested with reproducible
conditions. However, the influence of other parameters, such as
lubrication or sheet topography as well as technological
parameters, can be studied.
Summary
Knowledge of friction and wear behavior of tribological systems is
of utmost importance for optimizing process limits and process
stability in sheet metal forming. Therefore, laboratory test stands
have to be used which simulates the tribological behavior of the
real process.
For right simulation of the essential process conditions, especially
for tool wear, the local load in a real tool must be known.
Therefore, a comprehensive FE-study was carried out to analyze
the distribution of contact stress in forming tools. The two tool
sections drawing edge with blank holder area and draw bead were
simulated.
View publication stats
The distribution of the contact stress in these tool sections is
highly inhomogeneous. Distinct peaks occur at all bending points
in the area of drawing edge and draw bead. This is due to the fact
that the required bending moment has to be supported by the local
tool areas.
The FE-study identified sheet thickness, material strength and the
bending radius of the tool as the major influencing parameters.
The maximum contact stress at the certain bending points
increases significantly with rising sheet thickness and strength and
with decreasing bending radius. Those sheet metal induced
deviations have to be recognized when studying the tool wear
behavior of different sheet configurations.
In order to eliminate bending influences and to realize a flat
drawing direction similar to the friction test, an approach was
done representing the substantial load distribution at the drawing
edge using a simple line contact of a cylinder-plane tool.
Based on the results of the theoretical study a new laboratory test
stand was developed, allowing both individual friction tests and
intermitting duration wear tests.
References
1 Nakawaga, T.: Recent Development in Auto-Body Panel Forming
Technology. Annals of the CIRP, STC-F Keynote paper, 1994
2 Staeves, J.; Filzek, J.: Surface Qualification in the Sheet Metal
Domain. Proceedings She Met, 1998
3 Schuler - Metal Forming Handbook. Springer-Verlag Berlin
Heidelberg 1998
4 Filzek, J.; Schmoeckel, D.: Function-oriented Surface Parameters for
Sheet Metal Forming. Proceedings 6th ICTP, Volume 3, 1999, pp.
2169-2174
5 Wilson, W.R.D.: Tribology in Sheet Metal Forming. Proceedings 1st
ICTMP, 1997, pp. 1-8
6 Peterson, M. B., Winer, W. O.: Wear Control Handbook. United
Engineering Centre, New York, 1980
7 Eriksen, M.; Wanheim, T.: Wear Optimisation in Deep Drawing.
Proc. 1st ICTMP, 1997, pp. 128-133
8 Heiden van der, A., Burghardt, A.J.C., Koesveld van, W., Perstein
van: Galvannealed Microstructure and Anti-Powdering Process
Windows. The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society, 1993, pp. 251-
263
9 Mulki, H., Mizuno, T.: Tribo-Characteristics of Zinc Coated Steel
Sheets, Proc. 1st ICTMP, 1997, 140-145
10 Schey, J.A.: Metal Deformation Processes: Friction and Lubrication.
Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1970
11 Staeves, J.: Beurteilung der Topografie von Blechen in Hinblick auf
die Reibung beim Umformen. Ph.D. thesis, Darmstadt University of
Technology, Germany, Shaker-Verlag Aachen, Band 41, 1998
12 Netsch, Th.: Methode zur Ermittlung von Reibmodellen für die
Blechumformung. Ph.D. thesis, Darmstadt University of Technology,
Germany, Shaker-Verlag Aachen, Band 27, 1995
13 Hortig, D., Schmoeckel, D.: Analysis of Local Loads on the Draw Die
Profile with Regard to Wear Using the FEM and Experimental
Investigations. Proceedings She Met, 1999, pp. 193-202
14 Schulz, A., Stock, H.-R., Mayr, P., Staeves, J., Schmoeckel, D.:
Deposition and Investigation of TiN PVD Coatings on Cast Steel
Forming Tools. Surface and Coatings Technology, 1997, pp. 446-450
15 Damborg, F.F.; Jensen, M.R.; Nielsen, K.B.; Danckert, J.:
Optimization of the Draw Die Profile with Regard to Wear Using the
FEM; 19th IDDRG Biennial Congress; Eger 10-14. June 1996, pp.
277 f.
16 Filzek, J.: Ganzheitliche Prüfmethode für das Reib-, Verschleiß- und
Abriebverhalten bei der Blechumformung. Ph.D. thesis, Darmstadt
University of Technology, Germany, to be published at Shaker-Verlag
Aachen, 2003