2017-05-04 1 Innovative Lead Time and Cost Efficient Tools and Dies for Lightweight Autobody Components Professor Nader Asnafi, School of Science and Technology, and Ph D Student Tawfiq Shams, School of Business ÖREBRO UNIVERSITY SE-701 82 ÖREBRO, SWEDEN [email protected]
38
Embed
Innovative Lead Time and Cost Efficient Tools and Dies for ... · 2017-05-04 1 Innovative Lead Time and Cost Efficient Tools and Dies for Lightweight Autobody Components Professor
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
2017-05-04 1
Innovative Lead Time and Cost Efficient Tools and Diesfor Lightweight Autobody Components
Professor Nader Asnafi, School of Science and Technology, andPh D Student Tawfiq Shams, School of Business
IntroductionStamping tools & dies in the product development/creation process3D metal printing: current possibilities and limitationsBusiness cases: conventional process vs 3D printing of automotive stamping tools & diesConclusions
2
Contents
IntroductionStamping tools & dies in the product development/creation process3D metal printing: current possibilities and limitationsBusiness cases: conventional process vs 3D printing of automotive stamping tools & diesConclusions
4050 tons grey/nodular iron per model (5.4 tons grey/nodular iron per die)
450 tons tool/die steel per model (0.6 ton tool/die steel per die)
Investment in car body dies for each o completely new car model = m€ 100-140 o new die = 130 k€ - 187 k€
Current lead time for stamping tools & dies per car model = 10-12 months
Lead Time (or Time to Market) Reduction
Volvo Cars Target
Courtsey of Volvo Cars
7
Contents
IntroductionStamping tools & dies in the product development/creation process3D metal printing: current possibilities and limitationsBusiness cases: conventional process vs 3D printing of automotive stamping tools & diesConclusions
Source:Nader Asnafi: ”Tooling and Technologies for Processing of Ultra High Strength Sheet Steels”, Conf. Proc. of Tools and Technologies for Processing Ultra High Strength Materials, Sept 19-21, 2011, Graz, Austria, At Graz, Austria
Source:Nader Asnafi: ”Tooling and Technologies for Processing of Ultra High Strength Sheet Steels”, Conf. Proc. of Tools and Technologies for Processing Ultra High Strength Materials, Sept 19-21, 2011, Graz, Austria, At Graz, Austria
Is it possible to 3D print these die segments?
Concept/Styling
ProductDesign
ProductionPlanning
ProcessEngineering
Tool Design &Manufacturing Tryout Part
Production
Wear Abrasive, adhesive or mixed Sliding contact
Chipping Cracking at cutting edges and corners Fatigue
Galling Material pick-up (same mechanism Sliding contactas in adhesive wear)
Cold work tool/die failure mechanisms
13
Product Development
Source:Nader Asnafi: ”Tooling and Technologies for Processing of Ultra High Strength Sheet Steels”, Conf. Proc. of Tools and Technologies for Processing Ultra High Strength Materials, Sept 19-21, 2011, Graz, Austria, At Graz, Austria
Sheet materials X X XOperational severity X X XLubrication X X XProduction volume size X X XTool/die
Materials X X XStrength X X XMachinability X X XPolishability X X XSurface roughness X X XHardness (initial & after hardening) X X XWear X X XChipping X X XCracking X X XGalling X X XWeldability X X XHardenability X X XCoating X X X
Forming dies Trim dies Restrike/Flange dies
Concept/Styling
ProductDesign
ProductionPlanning
ProcessEngineering
Tool Design &Manufacturing Tryout Part
Production
14
Product Development
Contents
IntroductionStamping tools & dies in the product development/creation process3D metal printing: current possibilities and limitationsBusiness cases: conventional process vs 3D printing of automotive stamping tools & diesConclusions
15
3D metal printing: current possibilities & limitations
The current maximum size of the metal piece to 3Dprint?
The metallic materials that can be printed?
Tool/die weight/design: Solid structure vs hollow honeycomb structure?
The strength of the printed metallic material?
Surface roughness of the printed metal piece?
Hardness of the printed metal piece?
Can the printed metal piece be machined, polished, hardened and surface-coated?
16
The current maximum size of the metal piece to 3D-print?
17
500
500
500
100
10080
140
140100
250
250300
275
275
420
Current maximum build
volume
Source: 3D Systems, http://www.3dsystems.com/
18
500
500
500
100
10080
140
140100
250
250300
275
275
420
Current maximum build
volume
CoCrMo
1.2709
17-4PH
FullCoCrMo
1.2709
17-4PH
AlSi12
CoCrMo
1.2709
17-4PH
AlSi12 AlSi12
CoCrMo
1.2709
17-4PH
AISI 316
Inconel 718
Ti Gr. 1
Ti Gr. 23
Ti Gr. 5
PdAg
Ti6Al4V/Ti6Al4V ELI
Ti6Al4V/Ti6Al4V ELI Inconel 718 Hastelloy X AISI 316 CuSn6 AL2O3/AL2O3+Al
** Compressive yield strength.*** AISI D2/DIN 1.2379 can be hardened to 62 HRC but maraging steel’s maximum attainable hardness is 55 HRC.
Maraging Steel (1.2709)
22
Output quality
Feature resolution: ≈150 um
Surface roughness, Ra: Controlled.In many regions ≈10-25 µm. Smallest after printing, Ra = 5 µm.Can be polished as usual to lower Ra.
Tolerances: ≈ 50-100 µmRepeatability: ≈ 30 µm
Facade on hollow structures: 1.5-2 mmCan be machined/milled as usual.
23
How could 3D metal printing be included in the tool/die manufacturing process/production system?
Combine milling with 3D printing:
3D printed section:- Complex external shape- Difficult internal conformal
cooling channels
CNC machined section:- Massive and simple structure- Crossing channels straightness
24
Contents
IntroductionStamping tools & dies in the product development/creation process3D metal printing: current possibilities and limitationsBusiness cases: conventional process vs 3D printing of automotive stamping tools & diesConclusions
25
26
C-Bow Lower Progressive Die
Punch
Puller
58
140
240
27
Punch and Puller Made in a Metallic Material
Punch Puller
64
123
140
24058
64.3
28
Punch and Puller Made in Metallic MaterialsConventional Procedure Compared to 3D Printing
CONVENTIONAL PROCESS
PunchRequirements:
• Hardness (after hardening) = 60 HRC• Surface roughness in the working area = Ra = 0.8 µm
Material = SS2263 (tempered)Process:
1: Ordering and home-taking of the material2: Milling3: Hardening4: Wire EDM
Total lead time = 8 working daysTotal cost = 10500 SEK
PullerRequirements:
• Hardness (after hardening) = No requirement• Surface roughness in the working area = Ra = 2-3 µm
Material = SS2172Process:
1: Ordering and home-taking of the material2: Milling3: Wire EDM
Total lead time = 6 working daysTotal cost = 15500 SEK
3D PRINTING
PunchRequirements:
• Hardness (after hardening) = 60 HRC• Surface roughness in the working area = Ra = 0.8 µm
Material = Maraging steel (1.2709)Hardness after 3D Printing = 37 HRCHardness after hardening = 55-57 HRCSurface roughness in the working area after 3D Printing: Ra = 5 µmPolishing of the working area to Ra = 0.8 µm
PullerMaterial = Maraging steel (1.2709)Hardness after hardening = No requirement but equal to 37 HRCSurface roughness in the working area, Ra = 5 mm
Process:1: 3D printing of punch and puller2: Post-processing3: Hardening of the punch4: Polishing of the punch
Total lead time (both punch & puller) = 3.7 daysTotal cost (both punch & puller) = 31000 SEK (based on adepreciation period of 5 years)
29
Punch and Puller Made in a Metallic MaterialConventional Procedure Compared to 3D Printing
30
Punch and Puller Made in a Metallic MaterialConventional Procedure Compared to 3D Printing
31
Surface texture – radially generated
When there is no run-out in thecutter, the height of the cusp, h,will be equally high and can becalculated using the formula:
When there is a run-out in thecutter, the feed per tooth, fz, andconsequently the height of thecusp, h, will vary depending onthe TIR.
Prof
ilede
pth/
cusp
heig
htAs mentioned, surface texture and climbing tendencies may limit thefeed rate, especially when the radial depth of cut is small.
When using the side of an end mill to mill a profile, a series of ‘cusps’are generated. The height of the cusp, - h, is determined by:
• Cutter diameter, Dc• Feed per tooth, fz• Tool indicator reading of the run-out, TIR.
Source: Sandvik Coromant
32
Surface roughnessµm
-70-60-50-40-30-20-10010203040506070
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 mm
mm
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
Directly after 3D PrintingRa = 4.92 µm
µm
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 mm
mm
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
After 3D Printing and milling at Cusp height 6µmRa = 1.08 µm
µm
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 mm
mm
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
33
Surface roughness
After 3D Printing and milling at Cusp height 0.6µmRa = 0.71 µm
After 3D Printing & milling at Cusp height 3µmRa = 1.08 µm
µm
-20
-15
-10
-5
0
5
10
15
20
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 mm
mm
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
34
Punch and Puller Made in a Metallic MaterialConventional Procedure Compared to 3D Printing
1 € = 9.42 SEK
Lead Time (Working days)Conventional 3D Printed
Honeycomb structurePunch 8Puller 6
Total 8 3.7
Cost (SEK)Conventional 3D Printed
Honeycomb structurePunch 10 500Puller 15 500
Total 26 000 31 000
Based on a depreciation period(for the 3D-printing machine) of 5years (incl. a 5 years long warranty)
35
Punch and Puller Made in a Metallic MaterialConventional Procedure Compared to 3D Printing
1 € = 9.42 SEK
Lead Time (Working days)Conventional 3D Printed
Honeycomb structurePunch 8Puller 6
Total 8 3.7
Cost (SEK)Conventional 3D Printed
Honeycomb structurePunch 10 500Puller 15 500
Total 26 000 29 000
Based on a depreciation period (forthe 3D-printing machine) of 10 years(incl. a 10 years long warranty)
Contents
IntroductionStamping tools & dies in the product development/creation process3D metal printing: current possibilities and limitationsBusiness cases: conventional process vs 3D printing of automotive stamping tools & diesConclusions
36
37
Conclusions
o 3D printing enables a significant lead time reduction for stamping tools & dies.
o The 3D printing costs are somewhat higher but reasonable and are expected to be reduced during the coming years.
o So long there are only 1-2 relevant materials for 3D-printing of stamping tools & dies. These materials need to be tested from different perspectives.
o The possibilities provided by 3D printing need to be explored further.
o The current limitations (size, few relevant materials, quality assurance issues…) need to be addressed.