Die drawing process: Fewer correction iterations and reduced manufacturing time

Schmidt created a project team with partners AutoForm Engineering Deutschland GmbH and Tebis Technische Informationssysteme AG. Both companies had previously supplied Allgaier with software products which up until now had been used separately. The objective was to optimize these two products as they worked together and enhance them with expanded software solutions from AutoForm and Tebis – while remaining focused on the entire process chain all the way to the finished draw die. A sheet-metal SUV part from a real project was used for testing. Allgaier’s customer expected an on-time delivery of the finished sheet-metal parts at the specified quality. Despite many unknowns, Allgaier did not want to perform a trial run separate from their day-to-day business, and the company had no intention of conducting a parallel development with a traditional CATIA V4/V5 process.

Allgaier received the CATIA data for the sheet-metal part from the customer. These data were imported into the AutoForm DieDesigner software, which generates a tool concept with the drawing, trimming, punching and restriking operations. Once the concept data are exported into Tebis, Tebis RSC (Rapid Surface Creation) created the surfaces for the draw die and restriking operations and forwards them to the die design department. This allowed the design department to begin work and order the cast parts. At the same time, method planning staff checked and optimized the draw die created in DieDesigner using AutoForm-Incremental until the simulation result predicted the specified part quality with optimal material use.

This draw process was then examined for its stability under real manufacturing conditions. At this point, an inevitable scatter of material properties and process parameters was expected. It was also obvious that a geometrical modification of the die surfaces for springback compensation would work as a long-term solution only for reproducible springback. Since stability was a given, the staff could begin working on adjusting the draw die and subsequent operations. The result: AutoForm mesh data with springback compensation were available.

The new draw die, compensated and optimized for stability, was re-exported to Tebis. The interface between AutoForm and Tebis also transfers any changes to the initial concept data. This allows the Tebis morphing software to update draw die surfaces at the touch of a button. This process creates high-quality die surfaces that incorporate springback compensation and stability calculation results. Tebis surface technology made it possible to create milling-quality die surfaces. This eliminated the need for the time-consuming route that entailed designing several new die surfaces in CATIA V5, and springback compensation was already incorporated into the design. For final verification, the Tebis surfaces were simulated again in the AutoForm software.

The result was satisfactory for all participants. Although CATIA V5 did not play a role in creating the milling data, it was still possible to provide the customer with all data in this format as requested. AutoForm and Tebis can both provide CATIA V5 data.