| Low
production volume. If your end product
requires only a small number of parts per year, hydroforming
is probably not the best choice, unless it’s the only
option for part formation or cost is not a critical factor.
The cost of hydroforming tools can be prohibitive for
some low-volume applications, even if it is an excellent
hydroforming candidate. Too
great expansion needed. Component designs
that would require a very high expansion rate in order
to properly form are not a good hydroforming choice.
Only so much expansion can be achieved before the part
is going to fail . HDT recommends an expansion rate
of 80 percent or less, unless special circumstances
in the design warrant more. More expansion can be achieved,
but it will require additional processes to complete
(i.e., annealing before final part formation).
Extensive
bend required. As with expansion rates,
material bending does have its limitations. If a component
design would require less than a 1D bend radios, chances are the material will crack
or break. Though you may be looking to eliminate a part
by bending a tube smaller than 1D, the required bend
would be too severe for proper material forming. |
