A new analytical method to determine the effective tool width in contact with the sheet workpiece in the plane strain compression test, which changes during the test if a tool with a radius is used, is proposed. A detailed description of this method and the corresponding procedure of the flow curve determination for high-strength sheet steels are presented. The underpinning assumptions of the method are validated with the help of the FEA and the validation results are presented. Furthermore, with the help of the FEA, the main disadvantages of the plane strain compression test – strain inhomogeneity and possible tool misalignment – are investigated. It is shown that these disadvantages become negligible if a tool with a sufficiently large radius is used. The experimental validation of the proposed method was performed with the help of the uniaxial tensile test, the plane strain compression test and hydraulic bulge test on ten common high-strength and advanced high-strength sheet steels in the ultimate tensile strength range between 460 and 1260 MPa and the thickness range between 0.8 and 3.1 mm. The paper demonstrates that with the proposed analytical method for determination of the effective tool width, the plane strain compression test equipped with a tool with a sufficiently large radius becomes more appealing as a cost-efficient alternative to the hydraulic bulge test for the flow curve determination of high-strength sheet steels than it has been considered until now.

提出了一种在平面应变压缩试验中确定与板材工件接触的有效刀具宽度的新分析方法，该方法在试验过程中如果使用具有半径的刀具会发生变化。给出了此方法的详细说明以及高强度钢板流动曲线确定的相应步骤。该方法的基础假设在有限元分析的帮助下得到了验证，并给出了验证结果。此外，借助有限元分析，研究了平面应变压缩测试的主要缺点-应变不均匀和可能的工具未对准-。结果表明，如果使用半径足够大的工具，这些缺点就可以忽略不计。在460至1260的极限抗拉强度范围内，对十种普通高强和先进高强钢板进行了单轴拉伸试验，平面应变压缩试验和水力膨胀试验，对该方法进行了实验验证。 MPa，厚度范围为0.8到3.1 mm。本文证明，通过所提出的用于确定有效工具宽度的分析方法，配备了具有足够大半径的工具的平面应变压缩测试作为用于确定流量曲线的液压凸起测试的一种经济高效的替代方案变得更具吸引力迄今为止尚未考虑使用的高强度钢板。对十种常见的高强度和高强度高强度薄钢板进行了平面应变压缩试验和水力膨胀试验，极限抗拉强度范围在460至1260 MPa之间，厚度范围在0.8至3.1 mm之间。本文证明，通过所提出的用于确定有效工具宽度的分析方法，配备了具有足够大半径的工具的平面应变压缩测试作为用于确定流量曲线的液压凸起测试的一种经济高效的替代方案变得更具吸引力迄今为止尚未考虑使用的高强度钢板。对十种常见的高强度和高强度高强度薄钢板进行了平面应变压缩试验和水力膨胀试验，极限抗拉强度范围在460至1260 MPa之间，厚度范围在0.8至3.1 mm之间。本文证明，通过所提出的用于确定有效工具宽度的分析方法，配备了具有足够大半径的工具的平面应变压缩测试作为用于确定流量曲线的液压凸起测试的一种经济高效的替代方案变得更具吸引力迄今为止尚未考虑使用的高强度钢板。