This study presents a comparison between the results of process parameter optimization for the deep drawing of an AA5754-O automotive fuel tank, which utilizes two different objective functions. The first objective function is the maximum thinning percentage (max. %Thinning) of the formed part, which is a conventional formability index. The second is Q-value, a metric derived from the Thinning Limit Diagram that accounts for both necking-prone (excessive thinning) and wrinkling-prone (thickening) regions. The experiments were conducted using finite element simulation to model the forming behavior under an inscribed central composite design within the response surface methodology. Three process parameters, which are well known to be important for controlling material flow and achieving a balance between wrinkling and excessive thinning in deep drawing, were varied: blank holder pressure, the height of the male drawbead, and the radius of the female drawbead. Refined second-order response surface models were developed for both objective functions. Optimization based on the response surface models showed that, for the max. %Thinning objective function, the final part exhibited 19.46% maximum thinning but suffered from substantially higher wrinkling, as indicated by a maximum thickening of 36.39%. In contrast, the Q-value-based optimization resulted in a more balanced formability condition, with maximum thinning of 21.74% and maximum thickening of 13.17%. Moreover, the normalized density of elements in the safe zone of the Thinning Limit Diagram was higher, indicating an improvement in formability robustness. Therefore, this study highlights the limitations of conventional thinning-based optimization and demonstrates the potential of the Q-value as an extended practical quantitative formability tool that can simultaneously address necking and wrinkling in sheet metal forming, as presented through the studied automotive fuel tank on behalf of complex components.
Leelaseat et al. (Sat,) studied this question.