Solved By
XINJIAN DUAN
Bournemouth University
This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it
is understood to recognise that this copy right rests with its author and that no
from
the thesis and no information derived from it may be published
quotation
without the author's prior consent.
Abstract
This thesis is focused on employing the finite element method (FEM) to simulate
hot flat rolling process. The relevant work involves selecting a suitable constitutive
equation, predicting the rolling
lateral
deformation,
changes and
of substructure,
designing
the rolling pass schedule.
modelling static recrystallisation and
Critical reviews are presented for the previous work in the modelling of subgrain
size and static recrystallisation. Both empirical and physical models are applied to
investigate the evolution of subgrain size, dislocation density, misorientation and
the flow stress in the roll gap. The predicted subgrain size agreesvery well with the
difference
between
The
the use of two models are
experimental measurement.
Studies
illustrated and analysed.
on modelling of static recrystallisation are carried
by
out
incorporating the plastomechanical parameters, i. e. strain, strain rate and
temperature, into empirical model. Various approaches are proposed to reduce the
fraction
by
the
the
surface and are verified
recrystallised at
predicted volume
Simulation
results show that some of the previous
comparison with measurement.
literature
Further
in
the
erroneous.
work in the modelling of static
are
work reported
is
detailed.
The
Taguchi
texture
experimental
evolution
recrystallisation and
method is also applied to study the influence of the rolling parameters on the
fraction recrystallised (Xv ). The study shows that rolling temperature has the
Xv,
the
greatest influence on
Designing a rational rolling pass schedule is critical for the control of strip profile
designing
In
the
thesis,
the
a rolling pass
procedure of
present
and product quality.
in
listed
formulae
is
illustrated.
The
and explained.
scheduling are
used
schedule
The scheduling program is then performed to check with two existing industrial
load,
The
temperature and power
that
the
comparison shows
rolling
schedules.
by
high
is
A
the use of
accuracy.
multipass simulation
model
reliable and shows
finite element method is also carried out and the results are compared with various
model predictions. The problems in the simulation are illustrated and explained.
CONTENTS
Title
Abstract
Contents
List of figure
List of tables
14
List of publications
15
Acknowledgements
17
Nomenclature
18
Chapter I
Introduction
1.1
Aluminium alloys
23
1.2
24
1.3
25
1.4
Microstructure evolution
27
1.5
29
Chapter 2
Review of literature
2.1
2.1.1
Friction coefficient
33
2.1.2
Temperature evolution
34
32
35
36
37
2.1.3
Lateral deformation
38
2.2
41
2.2.1
41
2.2.2
44
2.2.3
47
2.2.4
52
2.2.5
Substructure strengthening
53
2.3
55
2.3.1
Empirical model
55
2.3.2
Physical models
57
2.4
60
2.4.1
60
2.4.2
Subgrain size
61
2.4.3
Static recrystallisation
62
2.5
Chapter 3
70
3.1
FEM program
73
3.2
Constitutive equation
73
3.3
Friction model
75
3.4
Thermal analysis
77
3.5
78
3.5.1
78
3.5.2
Increment approach
79
3.5.3
80
3.5.4
81
Chapter 4
Simulafion
3D
hot rolling
of
law and the hyperbolic sinh function
82
4.1
4.2
95
4.2.1
Rolling force
95
4.2.2
Roll torque
99
4.3
102
4.4
104
4.4.1
104
4.4.2
Stress state
106
4.5
107
4.5.1
107
4.5.2
III
4.5.3
116
4.5.4
121
4.5.5
123
4.6
Lateral deformation
128
128
131
137
4.6.4. Successivereduction
138
139
140
142
154
4.7
Chapter 5
Simulation of Microstructure
160
Evolution
5.1
163
5.1.1
163
5.1.2
171
5.2
180
5.3
Modelling of misorientation
183
5.4
185
5.5
191
5.5.1
191
5.5.2
193
5.5.3
194
5.5.4
206
5.5.5
211
Chapter 6
6.1
220
6.2
222
6.3
231
6.3.1
231
6.3.2
237
6.4
241
6.5
244
Chapter 7
7.1 Conclusions
246
250
253
254
256
257
258
259
261
262
References
263
270
List of Figures
Fig. I1.
25
Fig. 12.
28
Fig. 21.
42
Fig. 22.
2000)
(after
Sellars
Zhu
tests
and
compression
50
Fig. 23.
52
Fig. 24.
Fig. 25.
Fig. 26.
66
Fig. 29.
65
Fig. 28.
64
Fig. 27.
64
66
67
Fig. 2 10. Model predicted average grain size throughout the hot tandem mill
for AA5182 (after Wells et al 1999)
68
Fig. 21 1. Micrographs showing material half thickness in NDRD plane for (a)
20/40FF and (b) 30/40FR specimens annealed for 10s (after Black et
2001)
al
68
Fig. 31.
75
Fig. 32.
76
Fig. 33.
Fig. 41
81
Comparison of flow
85
for
binary
4%Cu
temperature
stress vs.
=45.86
Fig44
Fig. 45
15; (c)
=5 0
88
Fig. 46
87
89
Fig. 47
90
Fig. 48
94
Fig. 49
96
Fig. 41 0
98
Fig. 411
Fig. 412
Fig. 413
100
Fig. 414
torques by different
101
103
Fig.415
103
Fig. 416
105
Fig. 417
105
Fig. 41 8
Stress distribution in the roll gap during steady state for pass
106
Fig. 419
Arrangement of elements across the roll and slab (a) and the surface
(b)
region
108
Fig. 420
109
Fig. 421
Fig. 422
III
112
Fig. 423
113
Fig. 424
Fig. 425
Fig. 426
Distribution
Distribution
119
for
the
through
the
thickness
of equivalent strain
117
for
the
through
the
thickness
of equivalent strain
breakdown
industrial
pass
Fig. 428
116
Fig. 427
115
119
120
Fig. 430
122
Fig. 431
123
Fig. 432
126
Fig. 433
127
10
Fig. 434
Fig. 435
Fig. 436
129
(KG7A is the initial profile and KG7B is the measured profile after
deformation)
132
Fig. 437
133
Fig. 438
Fig. 439
133
convex edge
initial
the
shape(KG13A is
profile, KG13B and KG13C are the
first
deformation)
the
measuredprofiles after
and second
Fig. 440
Fig. 441
134
134
Fig. 442
136
Fig. 443
139
153
Fig. 444
IFR
Relationship between Swand W,
* dH
157
Fig. 445
Correlation
formula
by
the
new
predicted spread coefficient
158
Fig. 446
161
Fig. 51
164
Fig. 52
Fig. 53
165
166
Fig. 54
167
Fig. 55
168
Fig. 56
169
Fig. 57
Fig. 58
171
Fig. 59
173
Fig. 510
174
Fig. 511
174
Fig. 512
175
Fig. 513
175
Fig. 514
176
Fig. 515
177
Fig. 516
178
Fig. 517
178
Fig. 518
179
Fig. 519
181
Fig. 520
182
Fig. 521
183
Fig. 522
Distribution of misorientation
184
Fig. 523
184
Fig. 524
Z)
Fig. 525
185
186
Fig. 526
12
186
Fig. 527
188
189
Fig. 529
195
Fig. 530
195
Fig. 531
196
Fig. 532
Fig533
Fig534
(Zins
)t
197
and
(Ziav)c
200
)E
201
Fig. 535
)E
202
Fig. 536
)r
202
Fig. 537
Fig. 538
204
)C
205
13
Fig. 539
207
Fig. 540
207
208
208
Fig. 543
Fig. 544
209
211
Fig. 545 Plots of response of each parameter level on the predicted fraction
for
the centre point
recrystallised
218
Fig. 61
Fig. 62
Basic torque for both rolls equals 2Pa, work done for both rolls per
(After
1962)
Larke
47[Pa
revolution equals
Fig. 63
235
Fig. 65
228
Fig. 64
222
236
Fig. 66
Fi 67
tg).
Fig. 68
238
240
Fig. 69
Fig. 610
242
14
List of Tables
Table I
23
Table 2
84
Table 3
95
Table 4
96
Table 5
96
Table 6
101
Table 7
130
Table 8
140
Table 9
141
4)
Table 10
145
Table II
146
Table12
146
Table 13
149
Table 14
151
Table 15
152
Table 16
159
Table 17
Extrusion schedule
172
Table 18
172
Table 19
199
Table 20
212
Table 21
213
Table 22
centre point
Table 23
Table 24
233
239
241
15
List of Publications
Refereed
papers
Materials Science.(Submitted).
7. X. Duan and T. Sheppard. Factors involved in pass schedule design for hot flat
Simulation
Science
Modelling
Materials
and
rolling of aluminium alloys.
in
and
Engineering.
(Submitted).
Zn
8. X. Duan and T. Sheppard. Some problems in the modelling
of static
(Submitted).
Technology.
Material
science and
recrystallisation.
9. X. Duan and T. Sheppard. Influence of fomling parameters on static
during
hot
behaviour
Modelling
aluminiurn
rolling
alloys.
recrystallisation
and
Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering. (Submitted).
16
Simulation
Modelling
method.
and
in Materials Science and Engineering.
(Submitted).
Contributions to symposia
Second
Conference
The
International
empirical models.
on
Advanced Forming and Die Manufacturing Technology. Pusan, Korea, June 1719,2002. (Accepted).
2. X. Duan and T. Sheppard. The influence of process parameters on the evolution
flat
Second
during
hot
Al.
The
International
rolling
of
alloy.
of subgrain size
Conference on Advanced Forming and Die Manufacturing Technology. Pusan,
Korea, June 1719,2002. (Accepted).
3. X. Duan and T. Sheppard. Three dimensional simulation of subgrain size
during
hot
evolution
rolling of commercial purity aluminium. alloy. 9th ISPE
International
Conference
Applications. (Accepted).
on
Concurrent
Engineering:
Research
and
17
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The author would like to thank the many who have helped during the production of
this thesis, especially the following:
T. Sheppard
18
Nomenclature
IIR
b
b
1
lattice
in
Local
curvature equation (222), mmLevel arm, mm.
0
5/2
b,,,
Effusivity of the die, Kg.
001
Heat capacity,J.Kg'. Kl
C
S5/2
OK1
IC
Capacitymatrix in equation(326)
Roll diameter,nun
D,
D)
D.,
Selfdiffusion coefficient
dH
1
Thickness reduction dH = H, 
H2
,
r=
do
drex
Recrystallisedgrain size, ym
E(tj
Work function
Traction, N
G*
Shear modulus, Pa
HI
Entry thickness, mm
H,
Hc
19
HR
Heat transfer coefficient between the rolls and the stock, Wm 1.K
hcd
kh
Kbearing
Kfde
Klim
K total
Contact length, mm
L,
L2
Lc
Taylor factor
MGB
MSD
NTOT
Nv
OP
Roll force, MN
PD
QF
Qdf
for
Activation
J.
recrystallisation,
mol1
energy
Qrex
QS Sim'sfactor
R
Roll radius, mm
20
Deviatoric stresstensor
Surface
I H2
SW
S/N
Signaltonoise
SIN
Time, s
t'
tO.5
tb
Back tension, MN
tf
Forward tension, MN
tlead
ttall
ttotal
T
T
Ta
Tamb
OC
Ambient temperature,
Tmat
Material temperature, OC
To
OC
Outside temperature,
Tt,,
Tool temperature, oc
01
Velocity
/s
component, mm.
ui
V
VNie
Vm
W,
Entry width, mm
W
Exit width,, mm
21
xv
ZenerHollomon parameter
'8
0
Oc
Drag force, N
Misorientation across subgrain boundaries, degree
Critical misorientation for a high angle boundary, of the order of 150
Subgrain size, pm
Subgrainsize in steadystateregime, pm
distanceincrement,mm.
E
Strain
EM
Critical strain
17
Equivalent strain
E,
Emissivity parameter
E8
90
Oh
ff
.
IU
Friction coefficient
U,
Flow stress,MPa
67,
(Texp
an
as
Yield stress,,MPa
22
Ur
At
Time increment, s
TIad
AT,
al
OC
Temperature change at the slab tail,
Temperature change of the slab,
OC
OC
ATr,,,, Temperature change of the roll,
ATtail
OC
Temperature change at the slab tail,
AV
/T
Functional
Pb
Pg
2
2
2
P,
Ar
23
Chapter 1 Introduction
1.1
Aluminium alloys
According to the major principal alloy elements, wrought aluminium alloys are
by
four
digits.
In
divided
other way,
generally
into seven major classes, identified
into
heat
be
in
treatable
treatable,
categorised
nonheat
and
alloys
can
aluminium
terms of whether or not they can be strengthened by heat treatment. Table I briefly
designation.
the
illustrates
Designation
Major alloying
Properties
element
lXXX
99%
I>
Excellent corrosion
aluminium
Heat
Typical
treatable?
Alloys
No
AA1050
AA 1100
conductivity
2XXX
Cu, Si
Yes
AA2014
AA 2024
3XXX
Mn
Medium strength
No
AA3003
AA3104
4XXX
S1
Generally not
5XXX
Mg
No
high strength
6XXX
mo, Si
AA 5052
Yes
Mg, Zn
AA6061
AA 6063
weldability
7XXX
AA5083
Yes
AA7075
24
its
the
through
microstructure
influences
strong tendency to form
intermetallic compounds with Al, Fe, Mg and Mn. Manganese (Mn) is present in
the alloy both as precipitates and dissolved in the matrix. Zinc (Zn) improves
behaviour
between
and
compromises
good extrudability and
general corrosion
required strength.
Currently,
aluminium
alloys
are widely
used in
building,
construction,
1.2
Flat rolled products, i. e. sheet,plate and foil constitute almost 50% of all aluminium
foil
for
More
1/3
(Sanders
than
alloys used.
of sheet and
are consumed
making cans
2001). The raw material for most rolled products is the DC (Direct Chill semicontinuous cast) slab. Slabs up to over 20 tons in weight and 500600 mm thick,
2000 mm wide and 8000 mm long are produced. The slab is usually reduced in
thickness to about 25 mm in a single stand hot reversing mill (see Fig. 11). This
in
breakdown
the
to
process is always referred
as
rolling or roughing rolling
literature.
The breakdown rolling usually constitutes 925 passesdepending upon the capacity
Omm
2.35.
deformed
further
breakdown
to
After
in
of mill.
rolling, the strip is
25
The number of rolling passesand the allocation of the amount of reduction directly
determine the forining feasibility and the product quality. Deciding the number of
pass, allocating the amount of reduction, controlling the temperature variation are
the main tasks of designing an acceptable rolling pass schedule.
OC
480580
580 mm
280350 OC
2030 mm
I
Ingot
Coiler
Coller
Reversing breakdown
and
finishing mill
1.3
fornling
(FEM)
the
finite
to
Applying the
metal
aid predictions on
element method
decade.
This
last
during
focus
the
been
has
could
research
an
international
industry
"
be proved from the proceedings of any of the recent conferences on metal forming.
The reason can be attributed to the characteristics of the metal forming processes:
large defonnation, thermornechanical coupled, nonlinear boundary conditions and
behaviour.
is
Presently,
there
no method that could tackle all
nonlinear material
these problems satisfactorily except FEM. Applications of the plastic finite element
forming
1970's.
has
been
It
the
the
metal
started
at
end
of
method into
widely used
in both industry and academia since the beginning of the 1990's as computer
hardware and software make significant advance. The main advantages of FEM,
compared with other numerical methods and analytical techniques are:
"
"
"
"
Use very realistic models to represent real process behaviour, such as the
friction,
heat
transfer etc.
coefficient of
"
There are three main techniques dealing with the movement of the node in the FEM
fixed,
finite
Eulerian
In
the
technique,
the
element mesh is spatially
computation.
disadvantage
is
it
flow
The
that
to
through
can not
material is considered
it.
main
deformation
history
It
the
time.
predict
with
is only applicable to the steady state
deformation. The remeshing is avoided, thus computation time is greatly reduced.
In the Lagranglan technique, the finite element mesh is deformed incrementally
by
This
the
techniques
time
the
major
used
commonly
is
over
material.
with
frequently
is
disadvantage
One
FEM
that
remeshing is
conunercial
programs.
be
(ALE)
Euler
Lagrange
to
The
Aribitrary
efficient in metal
was shown
required.
forming to avoid remeshing. The basic idea is to define a mesh velocity, which is
different from the kinetics velocity, but preserves the free surface evolution. The
27
mesh velocity
include
EASYFORMO,
DEFORMO,
FORGE2&30,
The analysis accuracy is affected by three main elements: analyst, program and the
input data. Choosing an appropriate program is a choice, followed by preparing the
flow
heat
The
stress,
conductivity etc.
analyst's
various input parameters, such as
job involves: establishing the analysis model, running the program and analysing
the results. Although the present FEM programs are more user friendly and
10
than
those
years ago, the analyst still plays a very important role to
intelligent
is
for
Further
the capability of
the
analyst
requirement
ensure a good result.
language.
C
FORTRAN
or
programming user routine with
1.4
Microstructure
during
hot
working condition
changes
The microstructural changes during hot working conditions have been extensively
hot
than
The
greater
temperature
considered
is
conditions
working
in
studied.
0.6Tmqwhere Tn, is the melting temperature. The deformation of rolling is applied in
The
by
time.
of
periods
a series of passes, which are necessarily separated
28
during
deformation
changes
occurring
microstructural
are termed dynamic recovery
intervals
those
taking
deformation
is
the
time
place in
or recrystallisation, and
after
termed static recovery or recrystallisation.
The structural changes during deformation are the competing results of work
hardening and of softening by dynamic recovery and possibly by dynamic
dynamic
depends
Whether
recrystallisation occurs or not
primarily
recrystallisation.
Generally,
have
high
dynamic
the
aluminiurn
alloys
recovery.
stacking
rate of
on
fault energy. The movement of dislocation, such as climb and crossslip, takes place
have
dynamic
high
Previous
that
temperature.
researches
shown
recovery
easily at
is relatively rapid (Zaidi and Sheppard 1982). Dynamic recrystallisation does not
has
been
It
only
reported to occur in some
occur in most circumferences.
large
is
strains were applied, which
not
aluminiummagnesiurn alloys when
1981
Raghunathan
(Sheppard
Tutcher
in
industrial
and
a;
and
production
common
Sheppard 1986). Hence, dynamic recrystallisation can not be considered in the
present thesis.
Grains Elongate
Dislocotion Density
Increases
SuNroins Dtvt(oD
Distocation Densy
Constant
SubgEoins Remain
 Equiaxtd
 Const. Mean Size
Const.
MisorientnMean
Em
Lon
LA
Loi
LA
Const.
T Const.
(a)
STRAIN
29
After deformation,, further structural changes occur by the process of static recovery
during
They
to
the
that
take
processes
place
are equivalent
and recrystallisation.
driving
forces
lower.
These
the
although
are
annealing of cold worked metals,
by
because
the
substructures produced
processes occur
deformation
are
1.5
The present work has focused on employing the finite element method to simulate
The
from
breakdown
tandem
flat
to
hot
relevant
rolling.
the
rolling
rolling process,
aspects involve choosing an appropriate constitutive equation; predicting rolling
30
Basic concepts on aluminium alloy, hot flat rolling and microstructural changes are
briefly introduced in chapter 1. Detailed research history and critical reviews are
formulation
2.
Principal
FEM
techniques
the
and
analysis
given in chapter
of
3
FORGE2/30
programs
are recalled in chapter
In the early stages of the breakdown rolling, the lateral spread of a slab is
leading
deformation.
influence
The
to
threedimensional
a
significant,
of rolling
parameters, such as reduction, temperature and slab geometry on the roll load and
torque are first investigated. Attention is then paid to the heat transfer coefficient
friction
and
coefficient, which are very difficult
temperature and lateral profile under both laboratory and industrial rolling
design
4.
The
Taguchi
the
conditions are
major objectives in chapter
experimental
four
(the
to
the
ratio of
main parameters
method is applied
analyse
influence of
width to thickness, the ratio of roll radius to the slab thickness, reduction and
deforination temperature) on the spread, and to express the contribution of each
large
by
in
formula
A
then
analysing a
established
parameter
percentage. new
is
from
PhD
laboratory
data
FE
theses, which
the
external
amount of
analyses and
formula
for
laboratory
both
the
rolling and industrial practice.
makes
valid
In chapter 5, both empirical and physical based models are adopted to study how
flow
the
density,
dislocation
the
roll
vary
in
stress
misorientation and
subgTainsize,
31
Studies
on static recrystallisation are camied out by incorporating
gap.
the
I
plastomechanical parameters, i. e. strain, strain rate and temperature, Into the
Further
empirical model.
work is also detailed in this chapter.
The pass schedule optimisation is the most difficult but also the most valid method
to achieve good strip profile and high product qualities. In chapter 6, the procedure
is
designing
All
acceptable
schedule
an
rolling
pass
of
illustrated.
achievements on
temperature, lateral deformation, and the friction presented in Chapter 4 and
Chapter 5 are applied into the design of rolling pass schedules. The computed
load,
rolling
pass temperature, and power are then compared with industrial
by
FEM.
design
The
the
the
measurement and
predictions
package shows a very
high accuracy.
Chapter 7 concludes all the work carried out in the present thesis and suggests
further work in the modelling of hot rolling.
32
Rolling force, power, temperature and width are four basic rolling parameters
in
Accurate
is
for
the
these
mill setup.
prediction of
parameters crucial
required
breakdown
In
the
and
safely.
products
efficiently
rolling passes,
producing qualified
the slab thickness is of the same order as the rolls. The widthtoheight ratio is
deformation
be
less
4.
This
Lateral
therefore
than
cannot
ignored.
is a threeusually
dimensional deformation process and can only be described accurately by the use of
FD
FEM
analyses.
or
suitable
Nearly all theories concerning the calculation of the rolling force and torque in
based
on a plane strain assumption and assume that
current rolling publications are
the contact pressure distribution is distributed over a circular arc. Wright (1978)
compared various assumptions with
distributions.
measured pressure
The
distribution
in
breakdown
the
the
gap
conclusions on
pressure
in
roll
passes are
impossible
because
is
It
to
conceive a suitable mathematical algorithm
of
confusing.
the complexity of the deformation. Presently there is no method that could provide
last
decades,
detailed
local
deformation
FEM.
During
than
the
more
information
flat
3D
hot
have
been
FE
the
to
slab rolling
simulate
various
models
adopted
FEM
Betrand(1984)
3D
Li
their
analyses.
rigidplastic
in
processes. et al
used
Corini et al (1988) applied 3D viscoplastic model. Liu et al (1987) employed
elasticplastic analyses.
The calculation of rolling force is the most important task for the mill setup.
Accurate prediction of rolling force can greatly reduce the pressure over the
has
Although
invested
each rolling plant
controlling system to adjust the mill setup.
to establish their own empirical rolling
by
various methods such as
model
these
FEM
models are
approaches,
analytical
and
regression, neural networks,
33
usually not useful when rolling a new product. The reasons are due to the dearth of
deep study on the influence of some factors, i. e. friction coefficient, temperature
lateral
deformation. Hence, hot rolling model development has
evolution and
following
In
focus
the
proceeded slowly.
sections, reviews will
on these factors.
Friction coefficient
Friction in the roll gap possibly affects the mode of deformation more than any of
the geometrical features of the rolling slab or strip since its coefficient is affected by
including
lubricant
factors,
temperature,
and emulsion, reduction,
a multitude of
hot
interface
The
the
the
nature of
velocity etc.
rolling process makes it
and
difficulty
Lenard,
Pletrzyk
Cser
the
to
contact
condition.
verify
and
extremely
(1999) have reviewed the techniques for the evaluation of friction coefficient in flat
direct
(1)
These
techniques
measurement methods, measuring the
rolling.
include:
frictional
average
shear stresses or the average coefficient of friction at the
interface; (2) deriving a constant friction factor or coefficient of friction from the
load;
(3)
determining
friction
factor
deformation
the
constant
measured
shear
or
friction
by
deformation
indirect
indices,
coefficient of
measurementsof
or other
and
(4) calculating the coefficient of friction from measured values of the forward slip.
The most commonly adopted methods are (1) and (2). When using FEA, the inverse
be
best
(trial
to
the
analysis
and error) appears
choice. By using an inverse analysis
friction
found
is
iteratively
FEA
to
the
coefficient is
method,
run until
appropriate
Clearly,
force
the
the
satisfactorily.
measurement
match
computed rolling
with
industrial or experimental data is required for this method.
However, none of the above methods appear to be capable of dealing with the
Moreover,
the
throughout
of
most
schedule.
pass
a
complete
variations experienced
be
to
has
been
under
concerned with cold rolling and considered
published work
hot
friction
during
Specific
the
measurement of
results on
plane strain conditions.
General
the
that
coefficient of
are
conclusions
rolling of aluminium alloys is scarce.
34
friction falls as the rolling speed is increased and it increases when the reduction is
increased. Atack and Abbott (1986) concluded that sticking friction does not exist
hot
rolling aluminium alloys. This conclusion contradicts many authors'
when
it
does
But
is
that
observation.
indicate
more research work necessaryin this area.
There are three friction laws, which have been widely used in the current
friction
law,
friction
law,
They
Tresca
the
are
coulomb
simulations.
and viscoplastic
friction law. The form of various laws will be detailed in chapter 3.
2.1.2
Temperature evolution
by
formation
the
influenced
and
Three different approaches, the analytical approach, the finite difference (FD) and
the finite element method (FEM) are currently in use to calculate the temperature
There
the
through
thickness
the
are quite significant
gap.
roll
in
variation
slab
differences between these approaches in their consideration of heat generation and
heat loss. The analytical approach usually only takes into account heat transfer
between the slab and roll by conduction. The calculated temperature is only
better
FD
than
the
prediction
true
a
gives
under certain conditions.
rigorously
thickness
heat
the
by
through
and
slab
generation
assuming
analytical approach
35
friction
applying
work to the surface elements, in addition to the conduction
between roll and slab. Due to the convergence problem and the difficulty of dealing
distorted
during
deformation,
the
mesh
with
currently all researchers have only
FD
FEM
is
twodimensional
theoretically the best method because
adopted
models.
it considers all factors, such as changing thermal properties or differing rates of
heat
The
time.
generation
with
position
and
problem when employing FEM
internal
is that the analysis takes a good deal of computer time, especially for threedimensional deformation. For this reason analytical methods and FD are usually
for
the design of rolling pass schedules.
adopted
Equations adopted to calculate the temperature distribution in slab and roll are
expressedas (Carslaw and Jaeger 1959):
k2
T, =A 1+
kIF2
a]

erf
x
2, t
vFal
1XI
A e7fc
(22)
2a2t
defined
A
is
is
T)
T,
temperature,
temperature,
the
the roll
as
is
slab
where
36
Tinitial
k2
(23)
Fla21
al
1+
k,
L
These relationships are limited by the lack of any terms for either internal heat
friction
generation or
at the interface. Their validity is only rigorously true so long
as the slab appears infinite, e.g. whenever x< l 2oct Assuming a quadratic
.
temperature profile with the integral profile approach derives this latter limit.
Wilmotte
et al (1972)
temperature distribution
difference
approach to calculate
temperature in the roll gap was assumed and Carslaw and Jaeger's (1959) equation
during
to
was employed
calculate cooling
contact with the work rolls. Bryant and
Heselton (1982) carried out similar calculations, neglecting the effect of friction and
distribution
assuming uniform
heat
of
caused by plastic deformation and uniform
Sheppard
the
of
strip.
and Wright
distribution
temperature
the
calculated
(1978,1980)
deformation
friction.
heat
Sellars
the
the
effect of
uniform
generation in
zone and
and Kawai (1993) determined the temperature changes in the stock without
leading
in
"the
to
termed
the
a method
phantom roll".
rolls,
computing conduction
Critically we should note that this method requires the input of considerable
limited
Recently,
Hand
is
data
to
twodimensional
geometry.
et
and
experimental
during
for
(2000)
temperature
multideformation schedules
changes
al.
calculated
hot plane strain compression. The temperature rise due to plastic deformation and
friction is obtained by considering the area under the equivalent pressurestrain
data.
This
test
requires actual
curve over the appropriate strain interval.
37
In recent years, the application of FEM into the rolling process has made the FD
techniques redundant. Compared with many available FEM codes, there are few
commercial FD packages, and there exists inherent theoretical disadvantage, such
as mesh generation and remeshing, and convergence. All these factors help to
explain why the development of FD proceeds so slowly in the simulation of metal
forming. In the current study, the method adopted by Sheppard and Wright (1980)
is chosen as a representative for the FD. It should be stated that this method is not
the best among various FD methods. The reason of selecting this method is
is
FD
to
that
attributed
not the major research interest in the current thesis. It is only
adopted to give a general comparison of the predicted temperature evolution
between FD and FEM.
Rebelo and Kobayashi (1980) first simulated the combined effects of viscoplastic
deformation and heat transfer for cylinder compression and ring compression
by
functions
for
for
the
the energy
processes introducing separate
equilibrium and
balance equations in FEM. The first application of the finite element method to
hot
distribution
during
by
Zienkiewicz et
the
temperature
analyse
rolling was
heat
(1981).
(1992)
Lenard
Pletrzyk
the
the
al.
reviewed
research work on
and
transfer coefficient and described the effect of variation in the heat transfer
for
load
the
coefficient on
warm and cold rolling of alurninium.
calculation of
In addition to the experimental method (Atack, Round and Wright 1988), the
heat
by
FEM
to
the
(trial
ascertain
is another way
inverse analysis
and error)
transfer coefficient. When using this method, FEA is run iteratively until the
The
histories
temperature
the
satisfactorily.
recorded
match
computed temperature
from
10,000
differences
to
heat
transfer
great
show
coefficient
reported values of
80,000 WM2K1 by this method (Chen et al 1992, Wells et al 1998, and Mirza et al
2001). These differences may be attributed to the thickness reduction (which
38
influences the pressure and hence the true contact area), and finally the thickness of
the lubricant layer, this last factor alters the heat transfer characteristics across the
interface.
2.1.3
Lateral deformation
In the hot flat rolling of slabs, plane strain condition prevails in the middle portion
lateral
flow
the
of
product width, and
occurs at the edges. The consequencesof this
spread are many:
"
"
There is a propensity for the fibers near the edge to be short, resulting in a
flatness
tensile
thus
stress state,
making shape and
control more
residual
difficult.
It may cause edge cracking, depending on the initial geometry and the process
parameters.
All these considerations emphasize the necessity for a deep understanding of lateral
flow during slab rolling. Earlier work has predicted the spread by empirical
formulae constructed from regression of laboratory experimental data (Hill 1950,
Wusatowski 1958, Sparling 1961, Helmi & Alexander 1967, Sheppard & Wright
1981 Raghunathan & Sheppard 1989, Silk & Winden 1999). The relaevant
,
formulae are given below.
Hill' equation
D
* dH)]
Sit = 0.5 expl 0.525(W, /
(24)
39
Wusatowski's equation
]*
[HI
1.9872[WI
/
H,
/ R]
exp
0.556
(25)
Sparling's equation
[W,0.9 I(RO.
55
Hlo*'dHO.25
(26)
Sw = 0.95
W'
0.971
exp  0.707
H,
H,
W,
(R * dH)
(27)
1/2
W2
In
WI
W,
W,
(R * dH)
_3.5
1/2
4.1
1.375TH+0.233(R/H,
(28)
H,
Raghunathan
& Sheppard's equation
t: )
In
ff
W,
2.45
=
w,
0.71
In
H,
exp 
zR
0.002
0.04
H,
2.72  0.125 In
zRW,
A
H,
0,55
1
(29)
W,
1/2
H,
_(R*dH)
Winden's equation
W2
H2
+
= _Cspread
W,
(I
H,
+ Cspread
(210)
40
Notes:
Su, = Ln(W2 / W, )l Ln(HI / H2)
The conclusions drawn on the spread for hot flat rolling are that the spread
increaseswith
*
initial
the
thickness ratio
increase of
roll radius/
increase
e
of the reduction
"
"
Other factors such as the interface friction, roll speed, and the material flow
stress exert minor influence on the spread.
41
At the present time, there would appear to be no published papers dealing with
width variation predicted by FEA for industrial rollingtDwhich must also include
multipass rolling.
2.2
2.2.1
1998) (Nieth
1996) (Baxter
density
dislocation
be
described
by
three
substructure can
internal state variables:
(p), subgrain size (6) and misorientation across subgrain boundaries (0). Prior to
discussing the modelling of the substructure changes, it would be useful to review
the previous investigations on substructure evolution.
42
L.
/*"
K
L
JL
JL
jL
I
I
I
I.
1
tLLL
Li
Li
j_
L
j_
Fig. 21 A schematic representation of the microstructure; cell diameter, (5, cell
b,
dislocation
density,
thickness
p, and dislocation density with the
wall
cell wall
(after
Nes
1998)
pi
cells,
During the early stages of deformation, dislocation multiplication
total dislocation density (p), p=p,
12
10
flow.
Dislocations
move, and
interact with each other to fonn tangles. This terminates in a cellular structure with
the dislocations
clustering tightly
free
increasing,
deforination
As
p
regions.
and attains at a constant
continues
proceeds,
value of approximately
14
10
The
the
M2 when
steady state regime is reached.
due
formation
by
to the
the
of subgrains
cellular structures are replaced completely
additional dislocation
be
Subgrains
can
regarded as an extension of a
reactions.
43
cellular structurein that the dislocationsare arrangedin the form of planar networks
in subgrain boundaries,while the cellular boundariesconsist of threedimensional
dislocation.
The ability to form a cellular or subgrain
tangles
of
network and
factors:
depends
the stacking fault energy, the applied stress,
on several
structure
the strain,,the temperature,and the presenceor absenceof obstacles.
An interesting feature of subgrains is that they are equiaxed and maintain their
large
the
steady state regime even at very
strains,
equilibrium size and shape in
in
direction
There
the
the
the
are
always
elongated
of
extension.
are
grains
whereas
first
date
The
to
two
considers that subboundaries are constantly
up
interpretations.
keep
The
to
the
substructure
equiaxed.
second possible
migrating in such a way as
is
by
the repeated unravelling of the subboundaries and the
interpretation
locations
keep
their
which
subsequent reformation of new subboundaries at
(Jonas
density
"repolygonisation"
dislocation
termed
constant,
average spacing and
1969).
et al
The critical strain required for subgrain formation varies with the deformation mode
increases
Z,
the temperature compensated strain rate,
with
and materials, and
defined as
Qdef
Z
*exp
GT
(211)
At strain rates of 0.05 I s1, the critical value of strain for general hot working
0.01for
but
0.20.3;
is
the
critical strains are only
creep,
conditions usually within
0.1 (Jonas et al 1969). According to Zaidi et al's (1982) observation on the subgrain
the
for
throughout
size
is
subgrain
gap,
roll
aluminium
pure
evolution
commercial
is
35
length
the
(the
bite
from
slab
10mm
total
mm)
in
contact
entry
stabilised at
this
The
be
further
at
strain
equivalent
observed.
change in size could
centre, and no
44
cm = 0.002
* ZO. 2
(212)
The calculated value of em for commercial purity aluminiurn is 0.314 when the
is
is
500OC;
40%
temperature
there
reduction; and 2 s1 is the strain rate.
rolling
Obviously, the calculated value of e,, is too large. The reason may be attributed to
the plane strain compression test where c,, is regressed from experimental data.
Raghunathan and Sheppard's (1989) observation for AA5056 showed that a
for
0.19
to
that alloy.
minimum strain of
is required attain stabilised subgrains
After the critical strain, the flow stress is independent of strain. The hyperbolic sine
function is usually applied to describe the relationship between the rolling
flow
function
flow
Before
the
the
stress is a
of
stress.
reaching e,,,,
parameters and
described
by
is
The
the power
terin
often
strain.
relative
in constitutive equation
law. The determination of eM is hence important for the selection of constitutive
equation.
2.2.2
For steady state deforination, a generally recognised equation relating subgrain size
density
dislocation
the
is written as
with
internal
112g
SA
(213)
C usually varies from 5 to 30 (Sellars 1997, Zhu 1998). Compared with the steady
during
density
for
dislocation
transient
data
little
deformation,
there
reported
is
state
45
p = Ap
1.5
(b'sk
07
Q/R
T)
exp(sinh
I(A*T))
(214)
was
by
given
(2M1b)il(cDo')
(215)
It is clear that p' depends on the strain rate E and the dislocation density p.
immobile dislocations density pi inside the cell and the density of immobile
dislocations
is
dislocations,
in
For
the
the
p,,,
evolution
cell walls.
each class of
forn1.
term
also made up of a production
and a reduction
Sellars and Zhu's work (1997,2000) is highlighted because it will be adopted and
in
5.
modified
chapter
The internal dislocation density p, is made up of two parts, i. e. the socalled
"random" dislocation density (p, ) and the "geometrically necessary" dislocation
density (pl., ),
46
Pr + Pg
(216)
dp+ =m
dc
r
bAr
A
Ar
(217)
distance
the
that a dislocation travels before being stopped.
average
is
r
CPI/2
=
(Nes
1998, Sellars et al 1997), where p is the
is conunonly postulated
dPr
dt
_2LCvmPr
w
(218)
Lc
length
between
is
the
the
the
is
events,
slip
or
climb
cross
sites
of
where w
length of dislocations annihilated, V.. is the mean velocity of viscous glide, defined
as
PM
Dsbaf
=
47
is
D
the selfdiffusion coefficient, P is the drag force and af is the friction
where
The
stress.
evolution equation for the random dislocation density is then derived as
+
dPr +dPr
dPr =
jf
= ClPr _C2
Pr de
z
1/2
(220)
C2
(Z
":
/ OrfDI/2
) C,

(221)
pg is derived using
I=
(222)
pgb +0
8
Rp
The local lattice curvature, IIRP within a grain during deformation is assumedto
,
be constant at a given strain in transient deformation. This assumption is not totally
true. Further work has been initiated.
2.2.3
It is generally accepted that the following equation can satisfactorily relate subgrain
size with temperature T, and strain rate
deformation:
during
Z
rate
steady state
n7
BLnZ
=A+
(223)
48
According to the conclusions given by Zaidi and Sheppard (1982), a good fit could
be obtained for m values in equation (223) varying from 0.35 to 1.25. This is
becausethe range of subgrain sizes generally obtainable in the hot working range is
very small when compared with the range of LnZ values. Constants in equation (223) for various alloys are listed in Appendix 1. It can be seen from the appendix 1
that rn equals 1 is widely used. It should be noted that equation (223) is not the
formula
form
for
that
subgrain
of
relates
size
with
process
parameters
steady
only
deformation. Other formulae modified from equation (223) are given as (Jonas
1969, Raghunathan 1986, Nes et al 1994):
(224)
bLn(ZIA)
=a+
Sm
b
m=a+
+
E
cLn(ZIA)I.
05SS
GT
L
AB
(225)
Zi5.
%,,
v'
I=U
(226)
2C
cU
LnZi5s.,
kTZC.,
cl
when
(227)
1/3
Pv"
when
'
k
is
',
V1,
for
the
driving
volume,
P
activation
the
growth,
subgrain
pressure
where is
C=0.0004M
V1,2
2rsB
C=
is geometric constant,, I
VD
1994).
(Nes
frequency
Debye
et al
is the
1(vD b
2C
B)ICB
is a constant,
49
It must be emphasisedhere that the equations (223 to 227) are just statistical
from
experimental data, strictly they have no physical interpretation, and
expression
are not valid to predict subgrains size in transient deformation.
Compared with the work on subgrain size during steady state deformation, there is
lack
of quantitative relationships to relate the subgrain size with the
still a
deformation parameters in transient deformation. During the last few years, Furu et
Sellars
(2000)
have
(1999),
and
et al
al
carried out some exploration work in this
field. They have performed transient deformation by altering the strain rate in plane
(PSC)
The
PSC
tests.
strain compression
specimens of 60.0x5O. OxIO. Omm'were
from
homogenised
fully
rolled
and
annealed
machined
material
with
recrystallised
,
(117
length
lubricant
intercept
for
5),
um
graphite
grains of major
was
used
all
.A
tests. The specimens were quenched within 1.5s of the end of deformation. Their
for
dislocation
density,
internal
subgrain size and misorientation are
conclusions
shown in Fig. 22.
For deformation at constant strain rate, the subgrain size decreases.For deformation
decreases
the
with strain until a steady
subgrain size also
at increasing strain rate,
1.0.
Under
transient conditions of reducing
state size is achieved at a strain of about
1.0.
the
than
the
to
steady state size.
smaller
size
is
subgrain
strain rate
a strain of
After a strain of 1.0, the subgrain size increases suddenly, interpreted as the
dissociation of subgrain boundaries. The steady state value is eventually achieved at
1.6.
a strain of about
50
10
(a)
104
25/s
. 25/s012.5/s
2.5/s
"No
00w
/s
im2.5
Increasing
Constant
Decreasing F
0.25/s
61
eoo,
ftft
2
All%Mg
385'C
Decreasing
Constant
Increasing
D
0
0.5
1.5
CIO
IL
1.5
F
7.
00
. 00
:Broo
00
0
0,00
00
.00110,3
eim
1
0.5
1.5
E
Figure 22 Experimental results of evolution of (a) strainrate, t, (b) flow
J,
(e)
(d)
density,
dislocation
(c)
and
pl,
subgrain size
internal
stress, a,
in
385'C
defonned
0,
AII%Mg
between
at
of
subgrains,
misorientation
2000).
Zhu
Sellars
(After
tests
and
plane strain compression
It is clear from the above analysis that the subgrain size shows a very complex
behaviour with strain during transient deformation, especially in the case of
decreasing strain rate. Fortunately, for most metal forming processes, subgrain
bite
from
the
entry
forms and stabilises in the stage of increasing strain rate, such as
in
hot
die
to
the
mouth
to the exit in hot flat rolling and from the rear of container
two
are
very
decreasing
these
processes
The
in
rate
strain
periods of
rod extrusion.
51
It
be
short. should also noted that measurementsof subgrainsize before the steady
have
stateregime
not been presentedin the caseof constantstrain rate (seeFig.22
(d)). It is also clear that the prediction of initial subgrainsize has not been logically
studied.
Comparing (b) with (c), (d) and (e) in Fig. 22, it can be seenthat the flow stress can
be
function
not
uniquely expressed as a
of dislocation density, subgrain size and
deformation
the
transient
misorientation when
condition of decreasing strain rate is
applied. This indicates that a simple work hardening and recovery approach is not
different
A
The
increase
dislocation
sufficient.
mechanism occurs.
sudden
in
density was attributed to the subgrain boundaries dissolving (Zhu et al 1997).
The following equation has been applied successfully to model the behaviour of AlI %Mg alloy:
45
(15,,
d45=
 i5)de
06gss
(228)
Where "ss" stands for steady state, 8 is the instantaneous subgrain size, de is the
increment of strain, d6 is the increment of subgrain size, E8 is characteristic
is
defined
the
determine
the
as
size,
of
subgrain
of
evolution
rates
(5,,
strains, which
Z.
(223).
to
F8is assumedproportion
same as equation
Sellars (1997,2000) assigned different values (0.5 and 1/4)to the exponent n in two
indicates
However,
that
for
it
the
conditions.
same material and experimental
papers
ZenerHollomon
form
the
The
function
Z.
F5
with
relating
specific
F8 is a
of
deformation
the
depend
the
material.
and
conditions
upon
parameter may
52
For obvious experimental reasons, the variation of misorientation 0 has not been
investigated.
Some
extensively
work concerned with high purity aluminium is
(Nes
Fig.
23
1998).
figure
The
shown in
clearly shows that the average boundary
increases
rapidly with strain, reaching about 2030at a strain of about
misorientation
I. after that it remains constant up to strains as high as 4. According to Fig. 23, a
be
derived
simple relationship can
1%]
ROLLINGREDUCTION
uj
1=1
rftn
10
90
9s
EDO
198
c3". 98 At
0 99.5 At
a ". 5 At
a 99S At
:z
C)
(391
(40)
(2 )
142)
00
13
X:
C3
C)
130
STRAIN.
1998)
(after
Nes
Subboundary
23
Fig.
misorientation vs strain
3. xc
if g<1.
I>if F
(229)
for
All%Mg
Sellars and Zhu (2000) have recently proposed another relationship
deformation
during
transient
conditions:
alloy
53
d0 =1 (Oss 0)de
Co
(230)
1/4
is assumed in their study. Fig. 22 (e)
Z
where E is a characteristic strain. F CC
between
the
the predicted and the measured misorientation. For
shows
comparison
for
constant t, the calculated curves show similar shape as the curve
increasing and
in
Fig.
23.
The
presented
variation of misorientation under decreasing '& is more
But
does
happen
in rolling. Therefore, equation (229)
this
complex.
condition
not
has adequatecapacity to predict the misorientation.
+ ki5'
Where a
(231)
.f
introduction of new techniques into experimental measurement, models based on
dislocation, subgrain size, misorientation and grain size have been reported. The
include
formulae
most recent
+aMG*bVp,,,
(232)
54
(T=uf
(233)
a2 G*b[118+11D]
*
MG
bVp,
af + cyp+ a,
+
a=
(X
are constants,
p,
O,
(234)
lco
Ptot
(235)
=pi+
bi5
where v=3
(Marthinsen
and
Nes
200 1),
b=2.86 x 1010m. For high purity Al I %Mg (Zhu et al 1997), af =25, a, 0.26
for
(X2=0.83;
commercial Al I %Mg (Zhu et al 1998), af 25, ot, =0.18, a ,0.83.
Based on a considerable amount of investigation on various aluminium alloys,
NordVarhaug et al (2000) have found that
better prediction
af
=O'laexp9
oc,0.3,
(X2=2.0
give a
Nes
(2001)
Marthinsen
(1998)
Nes
and
and
compression) and uniaxial compression.
have concluded that equation (233) and equation (234) give a much better
does
(232).
than
equation
prediction
There is another model (Roters et al 2000) which considers the dislocation density
by
flow
The
stressis calculated
as the characteristicstatevariable.
55
M(fi
fn,
reff,
+
i
'reff
(236)
w)
is
M
the average Taylor factor, f
where
1eff
,i
and 'reff are the effective stressinside the cell or cell wall. Theoretically, equation
'w
(236) is the sameas equation (233) since the strengtheningby dislocation density
inside cell walls equalsthe strengtheningeffect by subgrainsize. However, there is
difference
in
between
(233)
the
obvious
an
application
equation
and equation(236) becausethe mode of calculationsfor p,,, and 15are quite different.
2.3
There are two types of models: empirical and physical, which deal with the kinetics
of static recrystallisation (SRX). Each model has its advantages. In general,
empirical models are easy to use and could be accepted by industry for offline
is
in
The
theory and is only
microstructure control.
physical model
advanced
in
However,
the
time.
the model reveals the physics
studied
academia at
present
behind the transformation and if the problem of evaluating the constants can be
overcome, it would clearly very useful.
2.3.1
Empirical model
The relationship between the fraction of recrystallised (Xv ) and the holding time
by
Avrami
the
equation:
is generally represented
(237)
xi, =Iexp
.
56
(238)
The usual convention is to fix f at 50% and this leads to the characteristic time for
50% recrystallisation
( tO. ).
5
rewritten
2
t
Xv =1exp
In2
tO.
(239)
5
tO.
hZ' exp
AdOE
=
Qrex
R T,
(240)
drex
Z9
Bdo
ef
=
B, e, f, g are constants. The constants in equation (240) and (241) are listed in the
for
2
appendix
various aluminium alloys.
57
It should be noted that equation (237) is not the only form possible. In
extrusion,
the fraction recrystallised Xv is usually less than 50%. Hence the term t can not
0.5
be used. A replacement is using to the time to just give zero recrystallisation. The
.
for
XV is given by the form of equation (Sheppard 1993b)
modified expression
In In
2.3.2
I
Ixv
Ko + K, In do +
K2
InZK3T,
K4
IntK5
Ine
(242)
Physical models
There are two main research groups (Nes et al at the Norwegian University of
Science and Technology, Norway; Sellars et al at the University of Sheffield, UK)
who have carried out similar researches on the modelling of SRX behaviour for
aluminium. alloys. All models are built on the calculation of the number of
nucleation sites and the total stored energy, which are two key parameters for the
SRX.
Since two groups have different research objectives, and use
occurrence of
different materials in their work, the consideration of the number of nuclei is
therefore different, resulting in different models.
Nes et al. have mainly concentrated on the cube texture evolution in multipass
(Vatne
AA3004
during
deformation.
The
rolling
major alloy studied is
steady state
1995,1998, Nes 1998), which is regarded as containing large undeformable
t:)
particles. These particles are considered as an important and often governing
deformation
Three
types
of nucleation sites are involved:
nucleation mechanism.
58
zones around particles, cube sites and grain boundary regions. The total stored
energy (or driving force) PD is expressed as:
2+0.05M
bC.
b
5
PD= 0.5M
8J
(243)
is
Cr
where ,, a constantof typical value of the order 5. The f action recrystallisation
X(t) after time t is written:
(t)
(X,.,,
(t))
x
=1 exp
Xext
(244)
Xext
)3
t
irNToT(G10.
(245)
GI is the growth rate of recrystallised grains. NTOTis the sum of above three types
of nuclei. The recrystallised grin size d,,,, is given by:
x
drex
1/3
=
NTOT
(246)
Sellars et al. (2000) and Zhu et al (2001) have built their models on the basis of
three internal state variables, J, pi and 0. AlMg alloys are defonned by plane
strain compression (PSC). Their work has focused on the influence of transient
deformation on the substructure evolution and static recrystallisation behaviour.
Since deformation is performed by plane strain compression and the material is
high purity AlMg alloy, there is no cube band before or after deformation; grain
boundaries are therefore the dominant nucleation sites. Hence only the nuclei at
grain boundaries have been considered in their models. Adopting such a strategy is
helpful for understanding one nucleation mechanism thoroughly.
59
PD
Mb
=
10
pi
(I
/2
(I
In
Obp'
1
20
bg
1+ In
C
(247)
1/3
c1
tO.
=5
PD
(248)
Nv
Where C is a constant. The fraction recrystallisation X(t) after time t is the same as
(239).
The recrystallised grin size d rex is written as:
equation
1/3
drex
=A
(249)
Nv
Since physical modelling model is still at the exploration stage, there are several
in
(245),
G'
A
the
equation
and
uncertain parameters in
above equations, such as
fitting
by
All
(249)
the calculated
these
etc.
in equation
parameters are obtained
for
data.
The
such an analysis are attributed to:
reasons
results with experimental
(1) these parameters are too difficult
data
few
just
kind
(2)
the
this
experimental
starting stage,
at
equipment;
research is
for
(3)
there are still some mechanisms which are not very clear,
are available;
example
how
the microband
forms.
Previous
nucleation
initial
the
of
works
have shown
that the
Jonas
1982,
Sheppard
(Zaidi
and
site
internal dislocation
density (po)
of
8
The
1010
be
10
to
to
Most
M2.
workers consider this value
annealed materials.
60
limit
is
100
times the lower limit. This is a significant difference. In Sellars
upper
11.
Zhu's
(2000),
10
All theseuncertainfactorsrestrict
work
p0 is even taken as
and
the application of physically based models because they can not be directly applied
to other materials. The ambition of obtaining a model, which has the capability of
for
prediction power
cases outside the alloy test conditions, is however one should
be pursued.
2.4.1
Prediction of microstructure
evolution by FEM
Modelling the evolution of dislocation density by FEM started during the 1980's
and was concerned mainly with steels. Lenard et al (1999) has given an excellent
review in this aspect in their book. In the present thesis, attention will only be paid
on the application of the models introduced in the section 2.2.2, because they are
the latest work and must be advanced in theory. They are also the basis for the
hardening,
behaviour
the
modelling of other metallurgical phenomena, i. e.
work
static recrystallisation and texture evolution.
In recent years, only the model proposed by Roters et al (2000) has been
for
FE
the
an
rolling process
program to simulate
incorporated into a commercial
Alalloy (Luce et al 2000, Aretz et al 2000). Integrating Sellars and Zhu's model
been
has
FE
reported.
into
not
programs
61
None of the past work has dealt with the simulation of misorientation. From the
introduction in section 2.2.4, it can be seen that the modelling of misorientation is
easy compared with the simulation of subgrain size and dislocation density.
Equation (247) indicates that the calculation of misorientation is inevitable if we
want to compute the value ofPD') which is the basis of all physical models for the
modelling of static recrystallisation.
2.4.2
Subgrain size
There are two ways to predict the subgrain size. The first is using equation (223). It
be
distribution,
just
to
trivial
task
to
the
a
predict
subgrain size and
would appear
directly
(2temperature
strain
rate
and
nodal
simply substituting nodal
into equation
23). However, the work in chapter 5 will show that the computed distribution of
based
incorrect.
Hence,
on such a computation is
some modifications
subgrain size
for
be
(223)
FEM.
equation
when using
must
made
At the present time, the present author is aware of only two attempts to predict the
during
AA7075
(1996)
by
FEM:
Dashwood
rod
study on
et al's
subgrain size
The
for
hot
Chen
(1992)
rolling of pure aluminium.
et al's
prediction
extrusion and
fit
by
Dashwood
the
experimental
with
reasonably
well
et
al.
result
predicted
distribution
die
The
the
of subgrain
mouth.
measurement in a small region around
is
However,
there
their
one
study,
in
size within the container was not given.
dubious assumption. The value of activation energy, which is used to calculate Z by
did
the
(211),
authors
equation
is twice the normal value of activation energy, and
The
data
this
to
activation
modification.
support
not present relevant experimental
for
KJ/mol
156
is
thermal
It
activation
approximately
energy is a process parameter.
be
Of
there
during deformation for nearly all aluminium alloys.
will
course,
fraction
the
from
to
of
crossslip,
these
according
values
somewhat variations
is
It
dislocation
the
a
parameter,
not
alloy.
the
in
movements
of
etc.
climb, glide
62
be
tuned in order to match the predicted result with experimental
which can
measurement.
Chen et al. averaged the ZenerHollomon parameter over each element in the whole
deformation zone and then integrated with time during simulation. This model gave
The
between
the measured and predicted results
result.
relative error
an acceptable
is about 20%. There is also a problem with the method presented. That is how to
ZenerHollomon
the
average
parameter over the whole deformation zone and what
interpretation
justify
this action? The authors' interpretation cannot
physical
would
be accepted.
The second way to predict the subgrain evolution is in using physical model. Only
Vatne et al (Vatne et al 2000) have applied Nes's subgrain model (Nes 1998) to
deformation
driving
the
to
the
the
predict
subgrain size after
pass in order calculate
for
pressure
subsequent recrystallisation. The predicted subgrain size was reported
to be good (no computed distribution of subgrain size was given). However, the
for
in
their
calculation
static
predicted subgrain size was not actually adopted
recrystallisation.
2.4.3
Static recrystallisation
(SRX)
There are three ways to predict SRX: empirical model, physical model and cellular
automaton.
When using the empirical model, the FEA results are postprocessed to produce a
differing
for
throughthickness
final
the
Z
strain
equivalent
mean value of
and
derive
(240)
the
to
locations. These two values are then substituted into equation
by
is
X,
the
fraction
finally
of
use
the
calculated
tO.
recrystallised
value of 5, and
(
by
have
been
this
Several
approach
(239).
using
out
carried
attempts
equation
McLaren
1993,
Sellars
1992,
McLaren
Chen
1999,
Dauda& McLaren
and
et al
63
from
fall
to
fraction
the
the
surface
that
should
recrystallised
quantitative evidence
is
25,
Fig.
Compared
1990).
(Yiu
there
26
Fig.
significant
the centre see
with
et al.
difference on the fraction recrystallised between the surface recrystallised and the
is
fraction
the
in a
surface
recrystallised at
centre in Fig. 26a. The value of the
reasonablerange.
64
1.2
STRAIN 1
 0STRAIN 2
STRAIN 3
....0. ..
STRAIN 4
Ui
0.8
'''U
MEASURED
C/3
cc
()
uj
cc:
z
0
2'
0.6
0.4
'1/1E1
LL
0.2
L0
0.2
0.4
0.6
POSITION
CENTRE
0.8
SURFACE
100
it 0 1
a. in m4
L%
b4
IL
80
k
A
lb
II
LI
I
:i
IL
60
IL
measured
4 final stTain
strain
ccum.
4p timeave.
#'.,
i
ir,
1
if
%d
ir
40
20
'It.
oll
1.0
.
0.8
SUIRFACE
0.6
4r
At
h.
0.4
.
i
0.
0.2
0.0
CENTRE
0.4
0.6
1.0
0.8
SURFACE
65
40
0
35
30
25
20
3
15
10
5
m
LU
C.)
Surface
Centre
Surface
Centre
(a)
(b)
Fig. 26 Comparison of fraction recrystallised (a) 4.45% Mcr alloy (b)
I% Mg alloy (After Ylu et al 1990)
When modelling multipass hot flat rolling, Brand et al predicted the grain size
for
during
AA2024
a 6pass rolling schedule (Brand et al 1996). Their
evolution
deal
between
FEM
to
the
method
with
combination
and empirical models seems
distribution
fraction
did
But
the
they
the
of
regretfully,
give
efficient.
predicted
not
fraction
data
Their
the
recrystallised.
recrystallised or any measured
on grain size or
results show a small gradient region near the surface where the grain is coarser than
for
kinetics
"
Their
that
the
the
static recrystallisation is
at
centre.
conclusions were
SRX
the
onset
of
is calculated to occur too early in the
not evaluated exactly,
Mirza
Most
et al reported a very small
recently,
multistage rolling process".
high
fraction
the
the
prediction at
surface and relative
prediction of
recrystallised at
different
for
AA3104
for
two
17pass
the centre
using
a
industrial schedule
No
'1001).
(Mirza
comparison with the measurementwas presented
approaches
et al
The
The
present
above two modelling results are unacceptable.
in their work.
large
have
discussed
this problem with several researchersconnected with a
authors
have
to
of
amount
considerable
a
access
who
international aluminium company
the
None
their
above modelling results.
support
micrographs
of
micrographs.
Z:
)
66
1
0,9
0,8
0,7
0.6
0,5
.2
0A
LZ 0.3
0,2
4
0"1
JL
0,2
0.4
0,6
0.8
1
0,9
0,8
0.7
0
CD
0,6
0.4
L
0,3
0,2
[).I
C
0
0.2
0,4
016
0,8
67
followed by a further 40% pass in the same direction. The second micrograph was
followed
by
by
forward
40%
30%
rolling
reverse rolling.
obtained
50
Predicted Measured
40
=
%o
It'.
20
()
center
0.5
Distance froly..Center] ine(nim)
1.5
surface
68
80
f
Afl
4U r
,%"0,1
20 I
PasSI
T), Ioc I
colier
Fig. 21 I Micrographs showing material half thickness in NDRD plane for (a)
20/40FF and (b) 30/40FR specimens annealed for I Os(after Black et al 200 1)
69
From Fig. 24 to Fig. 26, one conclusion can certainly be drawn: the fraction
deformation
recrystallised is overpredicted at the surface region after a single pass
to
In
correct
FEM
proposed
the
are
methods
new
work,
present
when
applied.
is
four
from
the
The
calculation of
aspects:
this anomaly.
study is carried out
70
Combining the physical model described in section 2.3.3 with FEM to predict SRX
has not been reported. These approaches are not so complicated as cellular
from
better
in
the
than
terms
empirical model
automaton
using
of programming and
the point of view of metallurgy. However, this approach requires the predictions of
for
have
been
8
before,
0.
discussed
As
the
given
pi,
no successful examples
and
After
solving these two problems, it
simulation of subgrain size and misorientation.
would be possible to employ the physical model.
2.5
Designing a rational pass schedule is the most effective way to control the final
the
difficult
is
However,
to
about
information
any
obtain
very
it
product qualities.
71
from
the aluminium industry because of commercial
rolling pass schedule
it
is
But,
find
to
the publishedpassschedulesfor steelsin
sensitivity.
relatively easy
the literature (Wehage et al 1998b, Mdntyld et al 1992, Svietlichnyj and Pietrzyk
1999).
There are two modes of designing pass schedule: a forward strategy and a reverse
initial
thickness,
depends
the
The
of
values
required
on whether
strategy.
selection
be
has
to
directly
them
temperature and width are given
or whether one of
determined iteratively (Czlapinski et al 1989). For the design of an initial pass
is
forward
scheduling strategy usually adopted.
schedule, the
72
Models in the pass scheduledesign involve: thermal model, rolling force and roll
torque model, profile model, and microstructure model. It is of special importance
to calculate the exact temperaturechangesbecauseit has the major impact on the
force
the
roll
and power and considerablyinfluencesthe structureof
calculation of
finished product. The adoptedtemperaturemodel varies with designerand always
industrial
data.
be
the
tuned
to
with
measured
need
Accurate prediction of the rolling force is of paramount importance in the rolling
industry. The most commonly adopted rolling force models are those due to Sim's,
Orowan and Pascoe's and Ekelund's equation. Their comparisons have also been
Generally,
literature
(Larke
1957).
the
the
the
of
predicted
more
accurate
given in
less
dependence
less
load,
the
the
the
investment is
on
control system,
rolling
is
for
hot
force
The
rolling
usually written:
model
rolling
required.
F=
(250)
U*lW2QF
length,
is
1
the
is
contact
rollstrip
the
stress,
strain
yield
plane
a*
modified
where
W2 is the strip width
for
factor
QF
to
the
pass
account
is
after the roll gap,
frictional
conditions.
geometry and
be
flattened
by
roll, which can
the profile of the
The product profile is determined
1996)
thermal
roll
(Atack
and
camber
by
camber,
roll
et al
spray cooling
controlled
bending. To cope with the problem of strain accumulation and to control the
be
considered.
microstructure evolution, static recrystallisatIon must
73
All simulations in the present thesis are conducted by FORGE2 '8and FORGE3R0
which are two software packages developed by TRANSVALOR,
French
a
company.
Only those theories and analysis techniques, which are adopted by FORGE30' and
in
following
to
the
the
related
work
1996
1999,
TRANSVALOR
al
and
FORGE2R is dedicated to simulate the hot, warm and cold axisymmetric and plane
deformation
bulk
forging,
strain
processes,such as
rolling and extrusion. It has three
databases:material database,process condition databaseand press database.Several
have
been
alloys
added to the material database. It can analyse the process with
deformable
latest
dies.
The
multiple
version is v2.9.4.
3.2
Constitutive equation
For hot rolling, the elastic effect can be neglected, the most economical laws are
law
NortonHoff
3D
The
isotropic viscoplastic
purely viscoplastic approximations.
is written:
niI
2K(Vk)
74
1/2
t2
2/31
ij
(32)
K=K
E)n
B'/
T)
exp(,
(33)
8'
where n and
are constants, and m in equation (31) is the strain rate sensitivity
between
0.1 and 0.2 for ordinary metals, and between 0.5 and
index,, which ranges
0.7 for superplastic metals. Dense materials show a negligible volume change,
incompressibility
the
which results in
constraint:
div(V) =0
(34)
describe
flow
behaviour
to
the
usually used
stress
at elevated temperatures,
Iln
Ln
a
4
JATZ
2/n
(35)
75
Three kinds of friction law are available in the FORGE2/3''codes; Tresca friction,
Viscoplastic friction and Coulomb friction. The Tresca friction law is written in the
following fonn:
67 AV
T=M T3
AV
(36)
V3
/
ff
ff
the
yield stress,
is usually temied the shear strength, m
represents
where
friction
to
as a
is commonly referred
friction
law
The
Tresca
treats
the
as pressure independent and
interface
interface.
friction
the
relates
deformed
directly
to
the
the
material.
stress
yield strength of
Viscoplastic friction law arises from the consideration of a thin interface layer of a
31.
Fig.
lubricant
between
tool,
the
as shown in
workpiece and
viscoplastic
Workpiece
Viscop lastic
nt
I
Lubrica,
Tool
oV
v
Workpiece
Lunricant
v Tool
r=a*K*AV"'*AV
(37)
76
friction
Viscoplastic
0:!
function
1,
a
coefficient
a
and
a!
is
which is a
where
of
the normal stress. That means a could vary with thickness reduction in rolling. K
is the consistency of the material, which is defined in equation (33). P is the
is
P
to
the
sliding velocity.
usually chosen as the same value as
sensitivity parameter
the strain rate sensitivity index in equation (31). When p=O, equation (37) turns
into equation (36). Therefore, for the same simulation model, the value of a must
be lower than the value of m in equation (36).
AV
/Iu, AV
,
ifjia
and:
(38)
57 AV
inV3
AV
if
V3
is
the
a,,
to
friction
stress
normal
the
equal
shear stress
with this relationship,
fraction
the
stress
shear
to
friction
by
maximum
of
a
the
y
or
coefficient
multiplied
following
by
the
be
(38)
Equation
by
well illustrated
can
the
material.
sustainable
figure.
Coulomb
)il
T

Sticking
Transition
rrax 

law
friction
Coulomb
Fig. 32 Conceptual view of the modified
1997)
Chenot
Wagoner
(after
and
77
For convenient, a,, u and m are all called as friction coefficient throughout the
present thesis.
From the above equations, it is clear that each equation includes a term AV the
,
difference
between
When
tool
AV approacheszero, certain
and
velocity
workpiece.
To
occur.
solve these convergenceproblems in such cases,these friction
problems
laws areregularised,i. e. written as follows:
AV
0,
T3 VA+
(39)
Vol
dT
div(kgrad(T))
+
PC
=
dt
(310)
fK(jel) M+l
The f factor takes into account the fraction of energy which is converted Into heat, it
thesis.
f=0.95
1.0.
the
0.9
between
throughout
present
is used
and
ranges generally
78
aT
k an =E rrU
(T 4
4)
T
(312)
On the surface of contact with the tools, conduction with the tool and surface
dissipation due to friction must be taken into account:
aT
hcd(T
Ttool
K
AVIP+l
+b**
af
=
k an
b* + b,,,
tool
(313)
3.5.1
Using isotropic elements, the velocity field is discretised with the help of the nodal
functions
local
N,,
V,
and
coordinate vector as:
shape
velocity vectors
V,,N,,
(314)
by:
defined
The mapping
the
4:) with
physical space is
inn
x=N
XN
(315)
linear
B
help
the
the
operator:
of
and the strain rate tensor is computed with
I:
V17Bn
(316)
The pressure field is discretised in terrn of nodal pressure P, with compatible shape
ftinctionsMni:
79
P, M,
nonlinear equations:
R"nfnff= 2K(Vk)
B dV +a
M,
fM,,, div(v)dV
=0
fptr(Bn)dV
lp'v,
Kjv,
N,,dS 
=0
(318)
(319)
fonn
the
takes
symbolic
:
which
(320)
The time evolution of coordinate vectors and equivalent strain is governed by:
dX
=v
dt
dJff
dt
3.5.2
=F*
(321)
(322)
Increment approach
The nodal update can be perfonned with the Euler explicit scheme. If X'n is the coAt
Vnt
t+
time
t,
time
; at
with velocity vector
ordinate vector of node number n at
AtVt
Xt
Xt+At
+
nnn =
(323)
80
A second order scheme was shown to improve the accuracy, especially regarding the
volume conservation of the part, with a RungeKutta method or the semiimplicit
scheme:
xt+At
nn2
3.5.3
xt
=
(Vn
+I At
t+v
t+At
n
(324)
The temperature field is discretised with the same elements as for the velocity field
according to:
N. () =TN
T =IT,,
(325)
C.
dT
(326)
+H. T+F=O
dt
fpcNlNjdV
Cij =
(327)
and
Hij =
fkgrad(Ni)
)dV
 grad(N,
(328)
Q
boundary
dissipation
heat
and
F
the
the
viscoplastic
while
vector contains
integrated
be
field
scheme
order
second
a
The
with
temperature
can
conditions.
where:
81
'tAt
T= aT
dT
=0dt
t+At
t+
(1.5
2a
(a
0.5
g)T
+ g)T

T'  T''"
T "'"  T'
+9g)
At
At
(329)
(330)
(331)
During the simulation of the forging and rolling process, which involve large or very
large deformation, some elements soon become very distorted and are not
for
further
appropriate
computation. It is very often necessaryto regeneratethe mesh
several times in order to complete the simulation. For very complicated industrial
for
tetrahedral
parts,
elements seem more convenient
automatic meshing and
for
linear
The
5
the
tetrahedral
element
velocity, with
remeshing.
node
mini
in
is
continuous pressure shown Fig. 33.
0
Velocity v
82
Flow stress functions may be divided into a number of groups differing type and
taking into account the parameters describing initial conditions and the
development of the material from the initial state (Grosman 1997). As described in
Chapter 3, two flow stress functions: the NortonHoff law and the hyperbolic sine
function, are adopted to relate the viscoplastic material behaviour for aluminium
hot
alloys under
work conditions in the present thesis. Although several workers
have proposed some more complex and advanced constitutive equations in recent
Shi
(Gelin
1993,
1997,
Puchi
1998),
the major aluminium
et
al
et
al
et
al
years
in
the present work: AA3003 and AAllOO have not been
that
are studied
alloys
hyperbolic
function
been
by
has
In
the
these
contrast,
sine
represented
models.
(Sheppard
describe
behaviour
the
to
a
great
number
of
aluminium
alloys
of
applied
1997).
et al
Dashwood et al.(1996) have simply referred to the difference between these two
flow stress ftinctions for AA7075. However, their comparison was not thorough.
Therefore, it is still necessary to give more details about their difference under
different temperature and strain rate conditions, especially their influence on the
data
to
the
Since
FEA
the
available
only available experimental
computed
results.
is
4),
(see
2014
the
binary
4%Cu
comparison made
appendix
alloy
present author is
for this alloy first. The comparison for AA3003 is followed.
law,
NortonHoff
the
Fig41 indicates the correlationship among the regressed
from
the
flow
function,
stress obtained
and the measured
regressedhyperbolic sine
2014
binary
for
4%Cu
Is
alloy
NortonHoff
literature. The regressed
equation
written
83
1772
3 1*
(41)
It is clear from Fig. 41 that the hyperbolic sine function gives a better description
for actual stress than the NortonHoff law does. The correlation coefficient
of the
hyperbolic sine function is nearly 1.0. Therefore, we have sufficient confidence to
assume that, the hyper sine function can truly relate the flow stress with strain rate
and temperature during steady state deformation under high working conditions.
Becausethe flow stress behaviour for most aluminium alloys were expressedby the
hyperbolic sine function in the past, in order to use the NortonHoff law in
FORGE2/30, conversion from the hyperbolic sine function to the NortonHoff law
How
lost
is
during this conversion is a common
is inevitable.
much accuracy
concern for each analyst. In the past the necessity for such a transformation was not
occurred. Fig. 41 (c) compares the correlationship between the hyperbolic sine
function and the NortonHoff
function. The correlation coefficient in Fig. 41 (c) equals the correlation coefficient
in Fig. 41 (a). That means the NortonHoff
hyperbolic sine function has the same accuracy as the NortonHoff law regressed
from experimental data. This discovery is of importance for the conversion between
these two flow stress functions.
Curves of the flow stress with temperature under different equivalent strain rates for
these two flow stress functions are shown in Fig. 42. We can see that, there are
(lower
than
low
in
between
temperature
differences
the
two
range
curves
significant
law
NortonHoff
The
increase
573K). The difference decreaseswith
of temperature.
low
flow
temperatures,
underslightly
and
the
at
stress
significantly overpredicts
84
flow
the
predicts
stress at high temperature. As the equivalent strain rate increases,
the difference expands. It is noteworthy that, no measurement was
carried out for
temperatures lower than 573K (see appendix 4). The correlationship coefficient0.985 between the NortonHoff law and the actual flow stress, shown in Fig.41 (a),
is only valid when conditions fall within the measurement range. When predicting
the flow stress for a condition outside the valid range, the deviation from the true
be
large,
very
situation could
as shown in Fig. 42.
The same comparison is conducted for AA3003, and shown in Fig. 44 and Fig. 45.
The regressedNortonHoff equation for this alloy is written
CY
31.1262
* 777.67 *
(F
+ c,
)0
exp(2194.284/T)
0.0.1262
F
(KPa)
(42)
From Fig. 44 (a), it is apparent that, these two equations correspond very well in
t:)
Fig. 44 shows similar feature as in Fig. 42.
Z:)
whole temperature range.
Fig.46 shows the application of two flow stress functions into FEM for the plane
strain rolling of AA3003. The rolling parameters, shown in Table 2, were provided
by an aluminium company in Italy.
Exit
RoIIin,
thickness
thickness
c:,,
temperature
30mm
l5mm
4500C
Roll speed
Roll radius
Measured
pressure
80 rpm
495mm
0.755 ton/mm
CD
LO
Tl
(0
Co
COD)
U)
65
C) 0
CDM.
C000000
C%j
co
(D
U)
bj)
(L'dW)SsBJISmOl:J uollenb3
cz
C)
LO
m
0
cz
C0
C:) 0
L)
Er
Q
C:)
u)
CD
N
CD
CD
C:)
C)
LO
U')
Co
m
C)
CN
co
CL
E' IC.,
C) U)
U)
CD
0
(c)LL
0
0
c)
CY)
C)
CD
C)
CD
m
CD
(D
C)
co
(BdUOSSOJISN01=1
uollenb3
CD
(D
CD
Co
CD
C:
.
C/)
0
C2
C)
"a
C.)
C)
CD
co
CD
LO
C%4
0
00
04
CD
0
LO
C)
C)
T
T
(L'dW)SSOIIS M01: 1
0
)
)
D
De
03
I
a)
0.
a)
)1
CIO,
C)
L
ct
C)
C)
LO
04
(L'dW)SsaJISN01: 1
CA
cn
CD
CD
CD
C
C)
C)
C)
03
0
C: )
W
CL
Cl E
flo fCD
ct
C:)
co
C:)
r0
C:)
Itil
C)
No
C:)
co
C)
0
C.
(L'dW)SSOIIS*01=1
CD
q:r
C)
C14
C)
c)
0
LO
0
0
00
V)
C)
C.)
0.
(D
C
CN
co
6666
co
It
C)
C)
LO
C)
C)
OD
M: F
CD
0 c:
0
ZN
C)
CD
CD
91
CD
(C)
CA
co
Lf)
cl
LO
6
Ln
SSOJIS
C)
C)
LO
MOJJ 10 8AjjeAIJ8(3
CD
CD
CD
CD
C:
.U)
2Q
0
CD
cn
CL
0
Qc)
C

LO
co
E
(1)
ct
u
rn
'IT
0
C
CC)
2
Z
c2
21
CD
C)
CD
C)
C
(D
c)
C)
N
C)
C)
C)
CC)
C)
(D
C)
lql
C)
N
C)
C)
LO
0
a3
0
C)
CY)
M
(D
c
U)
CD
C)
OD
2
T
CD
CD m
r1CL
E
0
CD
CD
(0
o
0
CD
le
C:)
C,4
CD
Co
CD
CD
CD
(0
CD
C)
N
LO
(L'dW) SSOJISMOI:1
C)
0
E
0
0
CC)
IL
cl)
0"
tb
0
Cm
E
4)
CD
le
C:)
C,4
C:)
CD
C:)
Co
CD
(0
CD
0
0
LO
03
8
CC)
121
C)
tr)
cc
LO
Cl?
ci
U)
co
C14
db
LO
c)
LO
0
C)
Q7jel
ks
J1160IJ
jo
; ae&IJN]
03
C)
0
0
C)
C)
CD
C/)
.2
C)
110.
0
0
OD
2 J
2
CD
Er
CD
CD 2
m
cu
FCD
CD
(D
o
C)
CP
C)
CP
000
clq
11:
LO
alltal"(3
C)
C)
CY)
C
U
0
.0
a)
CD
CD
OD
C
0
0.
E
0
u
tf)
4
a
CD
C)
CL
U')
or)
C
ajej
CNJ
LO
Lr)
J0
0
0
LO
90
0.8
0.7
,E
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0 02
NortcaFbif
Ficgne
0.1
0
0.02
0.04
TIMB(s)
0.06
0.08
It is clear from Fig. 46 (a) that, the two functions give identical curve shape. They
leave
The
the
the
the
time.
steady state regime and
same
reach
measured
roll gap at
0.755ton/mm.
The
the
computed pressure
rolling pressure in
steady state regime is
by the hyperbolic sine function is 0.718 ton/mm. The relative error between the
NortonFor
4.91%.
the
the
model with
measuredpressure and
computed pressure is
Hoff law, the computed pressure is 0.663 ton/mm; the relative error is 12.2%. It is
Nortonbetter
function
the
hyper
than
that
the
prediction
gives a
sine
not surprising
Hoff does. The problem is that, the difference between two equations seemsa little
large. Since at the nominal rolling temperature 4250C (698K), two functions
large.
The
be
difference
42),
(see
Fig.
the
so
should not
correspond very well
flow
derivative
be
the
to
the
stressvs. strain rate.
of
attributed
reason could
91
(43)
&=
Fi &i dS =0
(44)
(5ir=
f, d:'&:dV
+Kf
tj, ikv dV I
T&jdS =0
(45)
obtainedas
a)T
aui
I(
i
)
a)T
J(j)
aul
(46)
lau,
az
a, z
V=ro
auiau
"
Au. =0
U=U()
(47)
92
P V. dV +j
Li
aul
1, FNjj
dS

KCj V. C, dV
(48)
a,ir
auiaui
dV
+2)
P
EE Ij
IPIK
aE
VKVmPmdV+IKCJCIdV
EE
(49)
a
The term ff and Cyare involved in equation (49). The influence
different
flow
of
aE.
functions
stress
on the computed results is thus introduced into FEM.
For the hyperbolic sine function, the derivative
of the flow stress with the
equivalent strain rate is obtained as
dZY
AH ).
= exp
dE
RT (x
nAtanh(ad)
1
[SinhXd)]n1
 cosh(aU)
(410)
a. n. E
for
the NortonHoff law exists
and
d
dE
(411).
Fig. 43 compares the difference between equation (410) and equation (411) under
different temperature and strain rate conditions. There is considerable difference
when the temperature is lower than 3000C (573K). As the equivalent strain rate
increases, the difference rises from 200% to approximately 400%. When
experimental data is correlated by either the Norton Hoff law or the hyperbolic sine
function, the confidence level is usually higher than 95%. That means a very good
93
for
regression the flow stress,but not for the derivative of the flow stress
with the
equivalent strain rate. Even if two flow stress functions have the same
regression
for
the actual flow stress, it can not be assured that the
accuracy
same value of the
derivative of flow stress with equivalent strain rate,
which definitely contributes
somewhat extent to the finite element analysis results. A quantitative description of
this contribution could be very difficult due to the complex formulae in FEM.
One interesting feature in Fig. 43 is that, the curve given by the hyperbolic
sine
function varies little with change of temperature, especially when
strain rate is at a
high value. Temperature affects the derivative of the flow stresswith strain
in
rate a
very complicated way, since both the numerator and the denominator in equation
(410) involve the temperature T. If we take a look at Fig. 45, the curve given by
the hyperbolic sine function varies considerably with temperature change, but still
less
than the variation of the curve given by the NortonHoff law. That means
much
the derivative of the flow stress with strain rate is sensitive to materials.
The temperature distributions in the roll gap obtained by using these two
laws
constitutive
are shown in Fig. 47 and Fig. 48. The temperature rise obtained
by the hyperbolic sine function is little larger than the model given by the NortonHoff law. This is a reasonable result, because the load computed by the hyperbolic
sine function is higher than the load obtained by using the NortonHoff law. Hence,
more heat is expected to be generated.
It is strongly advised that the reader should read appendix 9 before going through
the following sections. In appendix 9, some important aspects related with the
This
thesis
the
the
explained.
are
present
selection of
constitutive equation in
following
for
the
helpful
be
the
the reader to understand
work in
explaination would
chapters.
94
by
hyperbolic
functi
the
computed
sine
ion
ion
II
tiorton.don
T=2,4880e02
H=1,7488e+Ol
Hodal
Iso:
Temperature
(Celsius)
ll ie+02
4.66s1@+02
4.6045e+02
4.5409@+02
4.41, le+O.,
,Max4.92
Ml=4.150ge+02
law
NortonHoff
by
the
Fig. 48 Temperature distribution computed
95
Pass
Width
Entry
Exit
Thickness
Average
Roll speed
No.
(mm)
thickness
thickness
reduction(%)
temperature
(rpm)
(mm)
(mm)
1800
580
540
6.897
560
40
1814
540
500
7.407
555
40
1832
500
460
550
40
10
1860
220
180
18.1
5150C
55
(1c)
96
Ak
I
Fig. 49 The FEA model
Table 4. Physical properties of slabs used in the finite element model
Heat capacity
Conductivity
Heat transfer
Possion
Density
(J.Kgl K)
Ratio
(Kg. M3)
960
198
30000
0.33
2730
Measured Force(MN)
Measured Torque(MNm. )
8.11
1.46
8.36
1.49
8.61
1.52
10
9.12
1.35
97
The rolling force is directly affected by the contact length, the friction coefficient,
the material properties, and the temperature. The roll radius and reduction affect the
force
indirectly through changing the contact length. Among these factors,
rolling
the friction coefficient probably has the greatest influence. For passes I to 3, the
friction coefficients are derived by trial and error by FEA. With the exception of the
friction law, each computational parameter, including the mesh, material properties
held
derived
friction
The
etc., are
constant.
coefficients are 0.7,0.6 and 0.35 for
Coulomb friction
law,
Tresca friction
law
and Viscoplastic
friction
law
respectively.
It is clear that the friction coefficient is not the same for the same rolling condition
for different friction laws in FORGE3. A lower value of friction coefficient is
for
law
friction
laws.
is
inevitable
Viscoplastic
This
the
than
the
two
obtained
other
since the definition assumesthat there is a continuous lubricant film within the roll
Since
is
directly
to
the
the
material properties.
gap, which is viscoplastic and
related
difference of thickness reduction for passes I to 3 is small, identical friction
friction.
derived
for
Tresca
have
been
coefficients
coulomb and
The computed rolling load for pass I as the material traverses the roll gap is shown
in Fig. 410. As expected the rolling force increases gradually when the slab feeds
defonnation
the
is in
into the mill gap and reaches a relatively steady value when
the steady state regime. Since only a quarter slab is modelled, the actual rolling
force equals twice the average value in the steady state deformation shown in Fig.
410.
98
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
z
2.5
Viscoplastic
Tresca
Coulomb
'0 2.0
m
0
1.5
J
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (s)
Fig. 41 0 Comparison of the rolling load between the computed and
the measured for pass 1
For the viscoplastic friction law, the calculated rolling force is 4.12*28.24 MN.
The relative error compared with the measured rolling force 8.11 MN is 1.6%. The
for
the Tresca friction law and the Coulomb friction law are 1.1% and 3.3%
error
Coulomb
identical
The
Viscoplastic
respectively.
curves of
and
show nearly
shapes,
the same time to reach the steady state and same time to leave the roll gap. The
for
before
friction
differs
in
Tresca
It
time
curve
reaching the
shape. needs greater
steady state, and therefore the time leaving the roll gap is greater than other two
friction laws. This phenomenon is of course due to the varying slip predicted by
friction
each
friction
factor
is
The
that
all
common
mode.
modes give
Generally
load
the
the
consideration
steady state.
approximately
in
same averaged
Viscoplastic
the
load
that
the
curve shape suggest
of predicted rolling
value and
friction law gives a slightly better prediction than the other two friction laws. We
10.
law
friction
Viscoplastic
and investigate pass
may therefore adopt the
For pass 10, the analysis shows that when the friction coefficient is chosen as 0.35,
The
load.
load
computed
the computed rolling
agrees well with the measured
99
load
is 4.54*2=9.08 MN. The relative error compared with the measured
rolling
load is 4.4%. One point, which should be noted,, is that this
is a larger reduction
than for pass 1, but nevertheless the friction coefficient is same. This phenomenon
be
higher
to
the
may
attributed
we
rolling speed and lower temperature compared
first
the
three passes. According to Lenard's study on hot rolling of
with
commercially pure aluminium, the friction coefficient falls as the rolling speed
increasesand increases when the reduction is increased (Lenard et al 1999). In pass
10, the effect of low temperature and high rolling speed balance the effect of high
zn
reduction, which may explain the calculation of the same friction coefficient. The
comparison of the measured and computed rolling load is illustrated in Fig. 41 1. It
FEA
that
gives excellent prediction.
is obvious
9.2
[:i Viscoplastique
0 Coulomb
r1Tresca
8.8
Measured
. ft
8.6
'o 8.4
m
8.2
8
7.8
7.6
passl
pass2
pass3
passlO
loads
between
the
Fig.41 I Comparison
the predicted and
measuredrolling
4.2.2 Torque
the
designing
the
feature
is
schedule
Perhaps the most important
pass
when
the
risk
An
obvious
most
Is
unit
underpowered
calculation of energy requirement.
100
lead
this
to a reduction in productivity due to stalling. Thus
will
since
we must
is
that
the
motor more than adequatefor any immediateor future workloads.
ensure
In the present work, the calculated torque for various friction laws for
pass I are
in
Fig.
412.
shown
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
Viscoplastic
cr
I0
0.6
. *Tresca
Coulomb
A
0.4
0.2
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Time (s)
Fig. 412 Comparison between the predicted rolling torques
bv different friction laws for i)ass 1.
The torque is obtained by post processing the output results from FORGE3. It
bearing
be
here
torque.
torques
the
that
the
include
should
measured
emphasised
The bearing torque is not easy to measure. The values of the bearing torque
in
discussed
be
from
chapter
calculated
rolling pass schedule program, which will
6, are 0.084MNm, 0.083MNm, 0.082MNm and 0.06MNm for pass 1,2,3 and 10
1.44MNm
1.41MNm,,
1.38MNm,
Therefore,
torques
the rolling
are
respectively.
The
the
Fig.
413).
(shown
1.29MNm
rolling
of
error
computed
in
and
respectively
torque for the pass 1,2,3 and 10 are 9.4%, 7.8%9 6.9% and 14% respectively when
Viscoplastic friction is employed. The computed rolling torque is under all
designing
So
there
is no risk of
conditions,, slightly greater than the measured value.
10
for
the
The
passes
initial
torques
and
pass
calculated
an underpowered unit.
101
[3Viscoplastique
E]Tresca
1.55
1.5
1.45
1.4
1.35
1.3
1.25
passl
pass2
pass3
passlO
Fie, 413 Comparl son between the predicted torques and the
g.
for
different
passes
measured values
Table 6 The influence of element size on the computed results
H/a
Computed load(MN)
Computed torque(MNm)
3349
4.25
15.6
7661
4.15
15.2
13905
4.13
15.2
44998
4.13
15.1
law
fraction
by
a
with
the
In table 6,, all analyses are carried out
v1scoplastIc
using
friction coefficient of 0.335for pass 1. The ratio of H/a is the value of slab thickness
102
of the simulation model over the characteristic element size. The increaseof the
H/a
meansthat the element size decreasesand more elementsare used.As we
ratio
can see,,when H/a is greater than 4, there is almost no difference among the
loads
computed
and torques. The computing precision improvesno more. That also
means that the searchedfriction coefficient is independentof the mesh density
when H/a is over 4. When H/a doubles, for examplechangingfrom 3 to 6, the total
increase
13 times. Due to the complexity of threedimensional
element number
simulation,,13 times increasein element number leads to at least 30 times increase
in computing time. Therefore, the search of the critical H/a value is crucial for
saving the analysis time. It should be emphasised here that the optimal value of H/a
could increase if the research object is pressure distribution along the contact since
it needsmore nodes to display the local deformation information.
At the present time, few analytical studies have been presented on the distribution
of pressure in the breakdown pass in hot rolling using numerical methods. The
curves of pressure distribution in the roll gap for pass I and the pass 10 are shown
in Fig414. The maximum pressure occurs close to the point of entry; after which
the pressure drops gradually. This is in contrast to the pressure peak near the centre
line for strip rolling. This conclusion coincides with Macgregor and Palme's (195 1)
by
(1992)
Chen
the
using
et al.
observation and
computed normal pressure curve of
explicit dynamic relaxation model.
Although the reduction of the pass 10 is about twice that of pass 1, the peak
Fig.
4I
(see
is
lower
10
the
than
peak pressure value of pass
pressurevalue of pass
14). This phenomenon was also observed in Macgregor and Palme' (195 1)
The
45
MPa.
I
The
yield strength
experiment.
maximum pressure in pass is about
t:)
Peak
MPa.
thus
19
deformation
is
pressure
condition is about
under the current
"peening
Orowan
the
That
effect".
higher
called
than yield strength.
is what
much
103
50
45
Pass 1
40
m Pass 10
35
30
25
(1)
20
15
10
5
0
05
10
15
20
0.5
O4
0.3
1
ol
0.05
104
of equivalent strain
The deformation mainly concentrates within the region of half thickness below the
interface
is
(<10%)
when a small reduction
roll/slab
applied (see Fig. 416). The
is
0.08
the
magnitude of equivalent strain in
slab centre
about
indicating that the
steady state deformation
in
3
The
the
not
achieved
is
slab centre.
curve of pass
in
industrial
This
the
shows
same shape.
roughing rolling
is a common phenomenon
(passIO)
into
18%
deformation
When
the
the
can not penetrate
slab centre.
where
highest
The
is
the
the
slab centre increases.
equivalent strain at
reduction
applied,
deformation region is still concentrated near the interface of roll and slab but a large
deforination zone gradually expands into the slab centre. For pass 1, the equivalent
deformation
for
the
strain
whole
10,
For
less
0.25.
the whole
than
pass
zone is
deformation zone has an equivalent strain value over 0.25. There are two factors,
large
the
One
in
10.
defonnation
large
is
another
and
reduction
is
pass
which cause
Z:
)
1:)
Ithe
thickness
thinner thickness compared with
in pass
The curves in Fig. 417 show the variation of equivalent strain with time at three
The
leaving
the
positions
different positions from entering the roll gap to
roll gap.
30mm
below
30mm
the
a
plane
130mm
at
270mm,
surface
three
and
of
points are
further
the
conclusion.
The
above
three
verify
curves
away the width centre.
105
0.4
0.35
o.3
'M
&
0.25
0.2
0.15
LLJ
Pass 1
Pass 3
0.1
Pass 10
0.05
0
50
150
100
200
Thickness (mm)
Ce ntre
250
300
Surface
0.30
0.25
0.20
U)
Centre
Middle
Surface
0.15
=s
cr
0.10
LLJ
0.05
n nn
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Time (S)
I
different
for
pass
of
points
Equivalent
417
Fig.
strain/time curves
106
There are twodimensional tensile stresses,along the rolling direction and along the
in
for
(see
I
Fig. 418). Twodimensional
the
the
slab
centre
in
roll gap
width,
pass
tensile stresses are undesirable because they tend to cause microcracks if the slab
is
The
is
through
the
thickness
excellent.
stress
not
quality
compressive stress.This
is
feature
The
t:
a
all
of
rolling
)
operations.
combined effect of three
phenomenon
Fig.
418.
The pressure is
the
shown
as
curve
components
is
of
pressure
stress
in
defined as (ax + a,, + a) /3 the hydrostatic stress. In many fracture criteria, this
,
hydrostatic stress is regarded as having a direct link with crack generation and plays
(Kim
1995).
The
hydrostatic
cracks
et
al
causing
compressive
an important role in
hence
improves
the
reduces the possibility of crack, and the
plasticity and
stress
tensile hydrostatic stress increasesthe possibility of crack
20
10
Thickness(mm)
Surface
0
50
150
200
250
10
20
30
o Sigma x
E3 Sigma y
SigmaZ
Pressure
40
I
for
the
pass
Fig. 418 Stress distribution in the roll gap during the steady state
107
All these aspects will be discussed in this section. The role of FEM is highlighted.
The research works on the heat transfer coefficient in the rolling of aluminium
factor
it
is
FEA
the
the
major
affecting
accuracy of
alloys are reviewed since
temperature. Knowledge of temperature changes in different slab positions after
designer
by
be
helpful
the
of rolling pass schedule a
offering
several passes will
therefore
to
the
to
control
rolling
and
processes,
rolling
chance
understand
unique
laboratory
following
twoIn
threepass
the
and
a
rolling
schedule
a
parts,
process.
FEM
gives an excellent agreement
pass commercial rolling schedule are simulated.
with the recorded temperature changes.
before.
discussed
been
have
FEM
the
The theories of the analytical approach and
(1980)
Wright
Sheppard
by
Z:
is chosen as a
Here, only the method adopted
)
and
briefly
The
for
FD.
this
revisited.
theory of
the
method is
representative
heat
transfer
equation
difference
the
to
Applying the explicit finite
general
equation
(z),
direction
lateral
flow
obtain:
we
the
the
in
material
and ignoringt:
108
a2Ta2T
ax
+K
aT
ay
pC
at
+q=O
(a)
216x
',
I
k
TIi
(b)
Sl ab
Rol I
heat flow
109
revs/sec
MhH2
2
ct
2a
2V=f
v2h=
__v
__v
x0x
tot
e
Im)0
Cos
H2
cc
+2R
(1
cos
(y
till
Fig.
419
420,
of
and
we obtain:
nomenclature
(t
T, + At)
(6X)2
2ocAt
(6X)2
(413)
balance
heat
for
increment
At
the
the
time
slab and roll,
using the same calculation
in
T,
the
temperature
the
equation:
an
interface
gives
at
interface 4D
(I
2M*
+
7)
(t)]l
(t)
(t)
Tll
(t)
(t)+
(t
T,
T,
+
T, + At) = T,
i[Tj+l 11
(414)
where:
(5X)roll
slab
(6X)slab
Kroll
2(At)
2
(&)
(415)
110
Friction at the rollslab interface will cause a temperature rise locally near the
Assuming
that the heat is generated only at the interface, and that sticking
interface.
friction prevails, the temperature rise is given as:
2T(AV)(At)
AT =
(PC8X)roll + (PC8X)slab
(417)
The tangential relative velocity between the slab and the roll is given by:
AV =fI
h. cosa
h. cos 0
The time of contact between any element in the slab and the roll is calculated by:
RR [(h,
Vccha
+2R)sinO.
RO.
21
20,
sin
(419)
0
defined
as:
where m is
VR8
R
Om=sin
52
/4
(420)
known
from
determined
the
stressstrain
The heat generation per unit volume, q, is
behaviour of the alloys:
77c' In[
]
hl
h,
heat.
turned
fraction
into
work
the
of
q
where is
(421)
Fig.421 to Fig. 425 show the calculated results for laboratory hot
a
rolling pass.
The material rolled is cornmercial purity aluminium. Details
of the experimental
program were given in Wright's thesis (1978). Briefly, the slab size is 30mm in
length (rolling direction), 25mm in width and 25mm in thickness. The
exit
thickness is 17.5mrn, resulting in a 30% thickness reduction. The nominal rolling
temperature is 5000C, and the roll diameter is 25Omm.The average characteristic
element size is 1.2mm, for the laboratory simulation. The comparison between the
measuredtemperature data and the calculated curves is shown in Fig. 42 1.
600
500
400
300
200
FD
Analytical
CL
FEM
Nbasured
100
0
02468
10
Surface
Thickness
(mm)
Ce ntre
112
is
the
to
the
slab
centre,
surface
and
curve much smoother than FD and FEM. This
is not surprising since this method does not consider the heat generation caused by
deformation
friction
and
plastic
work, and heat loss by radiation and convection.
The thickness reduction in the current slab rolling pass is up to 30%. The effect of
heat generation by plastic deformation at such a large deformation is expected to be
large
distribution
the
temperature
and
will
change
very
gTeatly. When this effect is
taken into account in the FD, the calculated accuracy improves greatly, especially in
the centre region, where more heat is generated by plastic deformation. But the
distribution
is
by
temperature
than
that
the analytical
even worse
predicted
provided
approach near the surface region.
510
500
FD
490
FEM
480
470
460
450
0.440
430
420
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
113
9
8
7
I.
2
1
0
10
Width
15
(mm)
114
Previous work has shown that the heat transfer coefficient plays
an important role
determination
the
on
of the computed temperature by FEM. Very few experiments
have been carried out to determine the heat transfer coefficient across the
roll gap in
the hot rolling of aluminium alloys, whereas the heat transfer coefficient in the hot
by
rolling of steels reported
several workers (Semiatin et al. 1987, Smelser et al.
1987) has shown large differences.
In addition to the experimental method (Attack, Round, and Wright 1988), inverse
by
FEM
analysis
is another way to ascertain the heat transfer coefficient. When
FEA
this
method,
is run iteratively until the computed temperature histories
using
The
the
measured
satisfactorily.
match
values
reported values of heat transfer
2
from
differences
10,000
400,000
Win K1 by this method
to
coefficient show great
(Chen et al. 1992, Lenard and Pietrzyk 1992, Well et al 1998, Mirza et al 2001).
These differences may be attributed to the varying thickness of surface roughness of
the roll and strip, the thickness reduction (which influences the pressure and hence
the true contact area), and finally the thickness of the lubricant layer, this last factor
heat
the
transfer characteristics across the interface.
alters
115
0
5
10
15
0.
measured
htc= 14000
htc= 15000
htc=13000
20
25
30
C.
35
40
45
50
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Time (s)
Fig. 424 Comparison of computed and measured temperature
history for a point at slab centre
116
0
10
L)
CL
0
I
t3
20
htc= 15000
htc=14000
htc= 13000
measurement
30
40
50
0)
F
60
70
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
Time (s)
In industrial rolling, especially in the early passes, the thermal mass of the slab is
usually of the same order as the roll, and the thickness reduction is often less than
10%. These conditions will essentially cause a different temperature distribution in
the slab to that encountered in the laboratory. The temperature distribution is
calculated here for an actual pass schedule. Larninazione Sottile SA, Caserta, Italy,
supplied the experimental results. Rolling was conducted in a single stand hot
is
580
is
The
AA3003.
The
thickness
mm
slab
inlet
reversing mill.
material rolled
The
5600C.
The
540
the
thickness
roll
and
mm.
rolling was carried out at
exit
is
diameter is 990mm and surface speed is 2.073 m/s. Two remeshing boxes were
first
box.
The
in
located
box
the
characteristic element
adopted and the second
is
box
first
the
is
30mm,
box
ide
the element size in
remeshing)
sIze outsi the remeshing
I14:
117
15mm.,
the element size in the second remeshing box is 8mm. Computed
is
results
from
Fig.
426
to Fig. 429.
are shown
580
:w
530
do
480
*0
do
.. 0
t4p
e
430
FD
An? lytical
FEM

(D
r.L
E
380
0
i330
280
05
10
15
20
Thickness (mm)
Fig. 426 Comparison of temperature distribution along thickness of slab
for a industrial rolling pass
Fig.426 shows the temperature variation in the region 20mm below the slab/roll
The
for
is
three
20mm,
After
temperature
there
approaches.
all
change
no
interface.
differences among the three different methods appear within the first IOMM. FD
FEM
by
followed
the
lowest
analytical approach, and
gives the
surface temperature,
from
the
to
distribution
slab
surface
temperature
slab
predicts nearly constant
trend
The
20C.
the
drop
same
the
show
The
curves
temperature
surface is
at
centre.
10
does
FEM
mm
at
FD
1.
42
do
Fig.
as
prediction
they
provides identical
as
in
below the surface. The temperature difference between the FEM and the analytical
for
0C
the
The
small
below
20mrn
the
depth
reason
20
surface.
of
after a
approach is
distribution
the
be
to
attributed
temperature variation alongZ:) the slab thickness may
of equivalent strain.
118
There could be some errors of the computed temperature distribution for the first
8mm below the surface. This is because the slab is so large it is very difficult to use
an element with a characteristic size less than 10mm. In the present simulation, the
8mm.
in
the roll gap and 30mm. outside the roll gap.
minimum element size is
Another possible reason, which can cause computation error,, is the heat transfer
coefficient. In this case, the heat transfer coefficient is 30000 WM2K1. Becauseno
distribution
temperature
measurement of
along the thickness was performed, it is
heat
difficult
However,
the
transfer coefficient
to
very
give an accurate value.
larger
by
(1998)
Wells
than the above value.
adopted
et al
is an order of magnitude
When a heat transfer coefficient of 300,000 WM2K1 was applied into the same FE
drop,
2.40C,
found
described
temperature
the
that
same
nearly
model
above, it was
Hence,
third
That
the
the
a
error.
source
major
mesh size is
is observed.
means
4mm
the
to
box
elements
refine
added
was
of
size
remeshing
with an element
below the surface. For the heat transfer coefficient of 30,000 WM2K1, the predicted
This
leaves
just
the
the
drop
4.80C
roll gap.
temperature
slab
after
on the surface
is
(50C)
drop
temperature
a
using
the
surface
measured
value agrees very well with
drawn
be
the
that
element
Therefore,
can
conclusion
one
noncontact pyrometer.
the
temperature
in
determining
factor
the
dominant
predicted surface
size is the
finite element computation.
119
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
cr
ui
0.05
0
0
50
Centre
100
150
Thickness
200
250
(mm)
300
Surface
0.44
0.42
0.4
0.38
cr
LLI
0.36
0.34
0.32
0.3
8
0246
Centre
Thickness
(mm)
10
Su rface
for
thickness
Fig. 428 The distribution of equivalent strain through the
the laboratory breakdown pass
120
561.0
560.9
560.8
560.7
FD
560.6
FEM
560.5
560.4
560.3
CL
E
0
560.2
560.1
560.0
559.9
0
0.05
0.1
Time (s)
0.15
0.2
121
For most alurninium alloys, static recrystallisation may intervene during the
interpass time if sufficient deformation at specific temperatures has been applied in
deformations.
Temperature has the most important influence on the
previous
behaviour.
Temperature change in the slab during the interpass
recrystallisation
time is caused by the radiation and convection with surrounding air, and conduction
The
tables.
runout
conduction with runout tables will cause nonsymmetric
with
temperature distribution between slab surface and slab bottom. This effect is
ignored in order to shorten analysis time by using only a quarter of a complete slab.
To study the temperature difference between the slab head and slab rear during
during
dwell
between
time
rolling and
passes, the temperature changes of some
points are traced. Their positions within slab are shown in Fig. 430, in which X
represents the rolling
long.
is
Other rolling parameters
direction.
The
5
the
represents
slab
meters
width
described
in
3.
Table
the
are
same as
Curves of temperature vs. time for these points are given in Fig. 43 1. The interpass
4,
For
20
the
to
time
expectations,
contrary
point
air cooling
seconds.
is of
temperature rises slightly, even after about 46 seconds. Temperature drops for point
39 89 9 and 10 are 3,4,5,5
degrees
the
10
6,7,9
the
second air cooling
of
end
at
respectively
phase, and
and
10
9
experience
At
the end of the second air cooling phase, point and point
phase.
The
difference
the
small.
therefore
is very
nearly the same time exposure in air,
122
It should be noted that since pass I and pass 2 were performed on the
samemill and
have similar reductions, the heat transfer coefficient is chosen the same as
in section
21
Plane 1
Middle Plane
Plane 2
0z
123
562.0
560.0
Point 5
Point 7
558.0
Point I
oint 6
556.0
Pass I
to
Point 3
CL
E
0
i
554.0
t8
Pass2
552.0
Point 9
Po'
550.0
10
20
30
40
10
50
Time (s)
Fig 431 Temperature history for different points of the industrial rolling
124
Fig.432 and Fig. 433 indicate that the slab temperature drops continuously and the
drop
is
higher
first
temperature
the
rate of
in
air cooling phase than in the latter
cooling phases. In each pass, the slab surface loses more temperature (380C) than
the slab centre (150C). These temperature drops remain almost constant in all the
because
This
the rolls are at the room temperature all the time and the
passes.
is
heating effect of the slab on the rolls does not change the roll temperature
apparently. The trace of each point contains three spikes. The rise in the
temperature corresponding to these spikes increases with a decrease in the entry
temperature (fig. 432). With a decreaseof entry temperature for the same thickness
It
input
deformation
the
temperature
thus
the
rises.
and
reduction,
energy
increases
has also been observed that this temperature rise decreasesnear the slab surface.
Near the surface, the roll quenching effect more than compensates for the heat
for
friction.
Thus,
the
deformation
due
the
surface,
near
to
material
and
generation
loss
due
heat
to
47
history
two
quenching
the thermal
roll
:
an
initial
=1
stages,
consists of
followed by a quick rise in the temperature to an equilibrium value by the heat gain
from the hot interior. Outside the roll gap during the interpass period, there is not
high
because
the
from
to
the
of
the
surface
temperature
the
centre
much variation in
conductivity of aluminium alloys.
1)
I
When comparing the measured curves with the computed curves (see Fig. 432 and
Fig.433), the first impression is that FEM gives a better prediction of temperature
for
for
the
than
the surface point in terms of the time that
centre point
variation
Both
the
and
occur
value
of
spikes.
spikes
predictions agree well with the recorded
The
predicted times at which the spikes of surface point occur are all about
profiles.
23 seconds in delay after the measured time, while the predicted times of spike for
the centre point match very well with the measured values. The reason is that the
is
from
The
taken
the
time
the
comparison
used
in
centre
curve
of
point.
interpass
for
drop
both
is
temperature
points at each pass accurately predicted.
magnitude of
The computed rate of temperature drop during interpass cooling is nearly identical
to the measured rate. Only the effect of radiation and convection with the
during
in
is
FEA
the
the
cooling
simulation
air
included
ambient
surrounding
computation.
IC
C)
I
CN
lqr
0
_0
Q
0
C/)
cot)
CD
c
CD
CD
Z;
%..,
0
co
ct
ci4
0
0
LO
CY)
T
"t
NI"
a)
co
rco
C)
LO
co
E
0
u
r
(\J
(D
44
0L
E
0
0
Q
0
CD
CD
OD
cn
001*1.
cn
co
CD
0
,'I
0
00
It
C)
C)
(snl3lao)
C)
CD
"Zi
C)
00
(Y)
ainjejedwE)jL
C0
(.0
co
C
:1co
128
of
experimental
various
existing
and industrial
formulae
on the prediction
of
1978). The
spread under
129
To describe the simulation results clearly, some geometrical terms are defined
Fig.
Only
434.
to
a quarter of the real slab is simulated. The plane EFGH
according
X
FDCG
direction,
Y
the
symmetry
are
planes.
represents
rolling
represents
and
thickness, and Z represents the width direction. The variation of edge AD is the
be
Ideally,
the
the
studied
present
in
paper.
edge should
straight,
principal objective
but usually a convex or concave shape is observed. Throughout this section, only
this curve is used to represent the edge profile. Point A is defined as the surface
leading
is
AE
is
The
D
the
the
edge.
curve
center point.
point, point
HB
for
FEM
Schematic
Fig 434
slab geometry
rn
rn
00
':t
C, 00
,1 ,o
;
=3
C1
ct
00
)
(::
r
14
C)
.!
C)
DO
00
D "I
"o
C:
\,D
tn
C:)
cn
cn
>
00
u
;>
rn
U)
 cz
X:
cu
r
7.
OC)
kn
I'D
00
en
"
C.
Cl
Tt
Z.,
kf)
rn
00
.0
00
11.0
25
C4 CIA
00
kf)
=3
OC)
ct
C)
Z
4
kr
00
4
c)
tr)
bl)
C4
kf)
03
*C:
r )
Cl
(:: )
;4
>,
0
0
ct
C
cn
Z:
C)
Ln
kr)
ct
CD
0
kr)
OC)
kf)
1111
cl
Ln
cn
4
a:
*Z.,
1 ,
c
C)
2
i
CD
r1)
E
00
131
The predicted edge profile for AA3003 is shown in Fig. 435. This pass is the first
19Pass
friction
The
0.6
schedule.
a
of
coefficient
pass
was obtained by the method
has
been
discussed
of inverse analysis, which
in section 4.2. A sticking friction
friction
factor
0.95
illustrates
friction
the
with
of
effect of
condition
coefficient on
the spread. The edge profile is assumed straight before entering the breakdown
be
It
that
the
noted
starting point of measurement along the thickness is
should
pass.
in
A
Fig.
434.
It
to
the
corresponding
point
surface,
is obvious that after the
on
breakdown pass, the straight edge line turns into a concave profile. The reason will
be explained in the next section.
914
912
Friction coefficient=0.95
Friction coefficient=0.6
910
908
906
904
902
900
898
0
50
Surface
100
150
Thickness(mm)
200
250
300
Centre
132
KG7A
KG7B
KG7BPredicted
662
660
658
0
50
Surface
Thickness (mrro
100
150
Centre
Fig. 436 Changes of lateral profile of a slab with initially concave edge shape
(KG7A is the initial profile and KG7B is the measured profile after deformation)
Fig.
436
initially
before
the
shows
of
an
edge
profile
and after a
change
convex
Cr
I11
breakdown pass. The initially
from
is
the preceding
convex profile
inherited
"broadside" rolling. The width differences between the surface point and the center
7.5mm,
5mm
for
KG7B
KG7BPredicted
KG7A,
the
and
point of
are
and
curves
2.5mm respectively. This indicates that the width difference between the surface
deformation
The
decreases.
the
to
tends
the
extent of convex
reduce
and
center
be
deformation
If
produced.
the
profile.
continues, a concave profile will inevitably
Fig.437 shows an actual profile when rolling an AA5051 plate of 35mm final
thickness. There is an obvious concaN,,,
ity.
133
600
595 I
KG3A
KG3B
KG3BPredicted
590
585
1%0575
0
20
Surface
40
60
80
Thickness (nTl
100
120
Centre
by
Fig,.438 Lateral profile of a slab with initially curved edge shape obtained
broadside rolling (KG3A is the initial profile, KG3B is the measured profile
deformation)
after
134
610
605
600
595
590
585
KG13A
KG13B
KG13C
KG13BPredicted
A KG13CPredicted
5W
"D
575
570
565
560
0
25
Surface
50
75
100
Thickness (mm)
125
150
Centre
60f
600
595
590
585
KG13C
KG13CPredicted
580
575
570
50
Surface
Thickness
100
(mm)
150
Centre
Fig. 440 Comparison of the predicted and the measured profile for
KG13C (KG13C is the measured profile after two pass deformation)
135
1978). The
be
discussed
factors,
the
be
in
to
will
and
several
interpretation can
attributed
following section.
136
15
14.5
14
E3
m
A
A
3.5
D8A1
D8A2
D8A
MEASURED
m
13
12.5
12
10
Su rface
Thickness
(mm)
12
Centre
Fig. 441 Comparison of lateral profile between one single pass and two
from
initial
10%
(D8AI
an
relative reduction
successivepasses
is predicted after
from
D8A1,
22.2%
D8A2
relative reduction
straight profile,
is predicted after
from
by
30%
D8A
an initial straight profile)
relative reduction
and
is obtained
Prior to discussing the computed results, it would be useful to revisit the existing
lateral
flat
The
hot
during
drawn
spread increases
rolling.
conclusions
on spread
with
*A
137
exerts a minor
In
industrial
effect on spread.
because
is
flow
the
thickness
small
stress along
circumstances, the gradient of the
less
is
than
thickness
the
normally
reduction
of the small temperature gradient, and
10% in those passes which are clearly three dimensional, resulting in a deformation
factors
two
these
The
combined effects of
concentration near the slab surface.
flow
the
that
the
surface is encouraged.
at
ensure
material
138
factor
The
8.66
the
5,7.45
is
second
respectively.
and
are
deformation concentration near the surface region due to the small reductions,
leading to large spread in the surface. The third factor is the variation of the
width/thickness ratio.
VRJ
HI
<C0.06
(422)
for
C=0.8
industrial
and
laboratory
For
experiments
the lateral shape is concave.
The
of
C=0.30.6.
values
A(51H,
computed
rolling
139
than 0.4, and all show a tendency of concave profile. In all laboratory cases,except
the D8A I, equation (422) also gives an accurate prediction of shapechanges.
Fig.442 shows the predicted shapes of the leading edge, which is obtained by two
KG13A.
It
reductions
of
successive
is clear that the material at the slab centre
elongates more than the material at the slab edge region, and the length difference
between the centre and the edge increases with pass number. This kind of shape is
industrial
in
roughing passes and perhaps illustrates that spread
always observed
does indeed induce residual stresses since when insufficient material is in the roll
freely.
fibre
is
to
allowed
elongate
gap each
16
14
12
10
:.o
KG13B
KG13C
4
2
0
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
Midth (nzn)
5%
(KG13B
leading
after
predicted
is
Fig. 442 The shape of
edge
Z:)
8.3%
further
3C
I
KG
3A
I
from
KG
after
obtained
is
and
reduction
I
3B)
from
KG
reduction
140
The comparison of the predicted and the measured spreadsfor the casesof D8A
and
AA3003 are listed in Table 8.
Formula
D8A
AA3003
Hill
0.37
0.00433
0.53
0.0135
Wusatowski
0.44
0.0012
Sparling
0.39
0.00007
Wright*
0.48
0.001
Raghunathan*
0.02
0.00014
Computed
0.478
0.17
Measured
0.487
Sw =Ln(W2
/Wl)/Ln(HI
/H,, )
The six formulae to be examined here are due to Hill, Wusatowski, Sparling, Hehni
& Alexander, Sheppard and Wright, and Raghunathan & Sheppard. Each formula,
laboratory
for
Sheppard's,
&
gives an acceptable prediction
except Raghunathan
for
best
this
formula
the
&
Wright's
case.
Sheppard
(MA).
prediction
gives
rolling
However, none of the existing fonnulae agrees with the predicted spread obtained
4:
during
the
the
spread
by the FEM. They all significantly underestimate
maximum
fail
formulae
to
data.
The
predict
that
breakdown passes in the industrial
all
reasons
from:
for
the spread
industrial practice may arise
141
of
AA3003,
the ration
WIH, =3.1,
RIHI=0.853.
The
/
W,
H,
ranges
of
corresponding
and R/H, for various formulae are shown in Table
9. The R/H, automatically included in the FEA is excluded in all formulae. The
for
laboratory
data is presumably that rolling the thick, wide
this
omission in
reason
specimenswould overload an experimental mill. This exclusion might be the cause
difference
in
the two calculations.
the
considerable
of
R/H
W/H
3.7510
113
Wusatowski
35
0.530
Wright*
2.548.5
14
Raghunathan*
512.5
13
All the above formulae are constructed from data collected in single pass rolling of
flat slabs in the laboratory. There is usually no rolling emulsion applied, which
from
The
thus
friction
lead
restrained
to sticking
surface is
at the roll surface.
could
degree
In
direction.
there
of
some
is
industrial rolling,
expanding in the width
ID
lubrication. The surface can expand along the width direction. When the reduction
large
deformation
the
roll/slab interface, causing
near
concentrates
is small, all
spreadon the top surface of slab.
by
derived
in
analytical
Hill's fonnula was the only work
which the spread was
In
the
but
addition
spread.
It
underestimates
grossly
analysis. is analytically correct
friction
condition Is
to the geometrical factors, the influence of temperature and
As
the
for
formula
in
Wright's
reported
&
alloys.
in
Sheppard
aluminium
included
142
z
A
is adopted to
consider the combined effect of roll speed, temperature and differing material
behaviour. Although we would expect this to improve the prediction accuracy, the
term greatly reduces the predicting capacity when the formula is applied to other
It
indicates
the
that more research is
are
not
experiments.
involved in
alloys, which
necessaryin this area.
Most recently, Winden (1999) proposed a formula for industrial break down rolling
laboratory
The
the
predicted spreads
mill.
where
experiments were carried out on a
Ln(W2
sm.=
Ln(HI
A
IH2
by equation (210) for the D8A and the AA3003 are 0.16 and
0.19 respectively. It is clear that equation (210) fits very well with the AA3 003, but
(210)
for
D8A.
That
bad
the
is not surprising since equation
provides a
prediction
but
factor,
the
influence
the
neglects
reduction,
the
second important
only considers
Hence
thickness.
the
factor,
to
the ration of initial width
entry slab
most important
W/H
R/H
The
where equation was
and
the valid range is greatly reduced.
ranges of
0.930
0.617
respectively.
and
regressedare
4.6.7
find
each
the
of
to
Influence
Taguchi
out
In this part, the
method is employed
the
contribution
relative
to
estimate
the
quantitatively
spread,
rolling parameter on
143
The Taguchi method was conceived and developed by Dr. Genichi Taguchi in
Japan after World War II. It is considered as a highly effective method for the
determination of optimal values for the various parameters involved in a given
has
been
in
The
successfully used
many industries.
manufacturing system and
few
is
(Tseng
1996,
this
the
rolling
et
al
method in
industry
application of
Yoshimura et al 1995). The Taguchi method emphasises returning to the design
for
bad
fully
compensate
stage after inspection since statistical quality can never
design. It seeks to design a process that is insensitive or robust to causesof quality
problems.
The Taguchi method adopts a set of standard orthogonal arrays (OA) to determine
kinds
These
of arrays use a small
parameters configuration and analyse results.
high
have
information
but
and
obtains maximum
number of experimental runs
t:)
Taguchi
The
the
include:
method
applying
in
steps
reliability.
reproducibility and
Detennine the quality characteristics to be optimised
Select control factors(parameters)
Design the orthogonal array
Conduct experiments according to the array
o
the
optimum
parameter combination
and quantify
the
factor
percentage.
in
the
characteristics
quality
on
contribution of each
devised
been
to
experimental
have
specific
study
four
that
There are
approaches
factorial
ftill
design space: Buildtestfix, onefactoratatime experiments,
144
The full factorial approach investigates all possible combination of all factor levels.
The biggest weakness of this approach is that it requires too many experiments. For
factors
levels,
(6561).
8
38
The
three
time
at
all possible combinations are
example,
is
to
conduct
such
a
study
prohibitive.
and cost
factor variables.
Taguchi's OA experiments, on a product design yield similar and consistent
different
by
be
carried out
results, even though the experiment can
experimenters.
9
large
number of
OA allows easy interpretation of experiments with a
factors.
A,
four
In
10.
there
parameters
the array,
are
A typical tabulation is shown in Table
trial
9
a
There
levels.
represents
B, C and D, each at three
are rows and each row
The
by
the
vertical
the
row.
levels
in
factor
numbers
indicated
condition with
145
columns correspond to the factors specified in the study and each column contains
three level 1, three level 2 and three level 3 conditions for the factor
assigned to the
is
This
column.
called an L 9(34). Usually, the orthogonal array is written as LA(Bc).
A stands for the number of experimental runs. B stands for the
number of levels for
factor.
is
C
the number of factors. The total degree of freedom (DOF) equals
each
A1. In this array, the columns are mutually orthogonal. That is, for
any pair of
factor
levels occur; and they occur an equal number
all
combinations
columns,
of
of
times. This characteristic is terined orthogonal.
As a result, the
Test number
Parameter A
Parameter B
Parameter C
Parameter D
As discussed before,, there are several kinds of parameters that have influence on
the
spread.
They
are
initial
geometry
parameters
(width/thickness,
146
(temperature,
parameters
roll speed) and material parameters (component). Four
init'al
the
ratio of
variables,
width to the entry thickness ( W,IHI ), the ratio of roll
(RIH,
),
to
the
thickness
the slab temperature (T), and the amount of
entry
radius
(AH%
)
that are easily controlled, are selected for the study. Each
reduction
has
levels.
three
These values are shown in table
three
values,
parameter
also called
11. For the ratio W,IHI
the values are 3,6 and 10. For the ratio of RIH, the values
,
,
For
8.
1,5
the slab temperature, the values are 4000C, 4700C and 5400C.
and
are
For the reduction AH%, the values are 10%, 20% and 30%.
AH%
T( uC)
10
400
20
470
10
30
540
Level
W,1H,
2
3
RIHI
T( OC)
Spread
10
400
0.124313
20
470
0.14199
30
540
0.2186
20
540
0.03117
30
400
0.055387
10
470
0.047248
30
470
0.02
10
10
540
0.016147
10
20
400
Run No.
W,IHI
RIHI
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
6
10
147
With regard to the spread, there are two types definition. One
defined
of
is
as
Ln(W2
WI)
Ln(H,
H2)
(423)
Ln(W2
/ WI)
(424)
To predict the response of the product design parameters under the optimum
conditions.
The first objective is obtained through the analysis of variance (ANOVA). ANOVA
usesthe sum of squares to quantitatively examine the deviation of the control factor
effect responses from the over all experimental mean response.
148
n is the number of experiments that include the level. For example, The first level
of
the WIIHI is included in the experimental run number 1,2 and 3. The first level
of
the RIHI is included in the experimental run number 1,4 and 7. In the
array
Lq(3')
by:
calculated
10.1243
+ 0.141994 + 0.2186)
3
0.16163
6
=
(426)
The mean values at other levels of other factors for the spread can be calculated in
the same way, and calculated results are shown in the Table 13 under the column
y.
In order to detennine the optimal parameter design, the signaltonoise (S/N) ratio is
S/N
both
The
the average (mean) and the variation(scatter)
adopted.
ratio can reflect
function
is
defined
by
S/N
The
trial
of quality characterics under one
condition.
SIN=
10*Log(MSD)
(427)
deviation.
The
for
the
MSD
the
the
of
using
purpose
square
mean
where
stands
In
investigation,
In
for
the
S/N
this
10
the
to
easier
analysis.
value
constant
is magnify
MSD is expressed as:
MSD =2
yi
(428)
SIN=Y(SIN)i
9
= 24.39119
(429)
149
W,IHI
RIHI
AH%
T.
Level
Runs
1
2
0.124313
0.141994
0.218601
4
5
6
0.03117
0.055387
0.047248
10
7
8
9
0.02
0.016147
0.103962
1
4
0.124313
0.03117
0.02
2
5
8
0.141994
0.055387
0.016147
3
6
9
0.218601
0.047248
0.103962
10
1
6
8
0.124313
0.047248
0.016147
20
2
4
9
0.141994
0.03117
0.103962
30
3
5
7
0.218601
0.055387
0.02
1
5
9
0.124313
0.055387
0.103962
400
S/N
0.161636
18.1097
16.9546
0.044602
540
30.1253
25.1318
26.5124
27.2565
907.5346
631.6076
702.908
29.8266
1154.6
1284.365
386.6134
0.058494
1097
18 .
30.1253
0.062569
0.092375
0.097996
27.4048
33.9794
16.9546
25.1318
35.838
25.9748
287.4584
631.6076
1284.365
19.7939
174.4234
702.908
386.6134
26.8201
327.9612
702.908
1284.365
22.2475
287.4584
907.5346
386.6134
24.106
174.4234
631.6076
1154.6
13.2069
26.5124
19.6625
18.1097
26.5124
35.838
16.9546
30.1253
19.6625
13.2069
25.1318
33.9794
0.094554
20.968
0.069747
16.9546
26.5124
33.9794
25.8155
2
6
7
0.141994
0.047248
0.02
3
4
8
0.218601
0.088639
0.03117
1
0.016147
327.9612
907.5346
1154.6
18.1097
25.1318
19.6625
1
470
174.4234
0.046703
0.12327
160904
327.9612
287.4584
13.2069
33.9794
35.838
19.6625
0.071176
SIN
(S/N)"
327.9612
631.6076
386.6134
0
287.4584
702.908
1154.6
174.4234
13.206
907.5346
26.3901
30.1253
1 1284.365
1
35.838
150
SS =
(S
/ N, 
3INY
(430)
503.1005
=
For the factor expressing the ratio of width to thickness, the sum of the squaresdue
to variation about the mean is
3
SSW,
/ H,
LM*
(431)
j=l
=3*(S1Nwi
S1N)'+3*(S1NfV2S1N)2
+3*(SINH3
SIN)2
319.9713
=
(432)
98.173
=
SSAH'1o
SST
31.729
=
53.227
=
factor
These values represent a measure of the relative importance of each control
the
The
effect
each
relative
of
contribution
the
percentage
spread.
in controlling
Z:
)
factors has on the spread is shown in the following:
151
(53.227/503.1)xIOO=10.57987/`
From table 14, it is clear that the factor W,IHI has an overwhelming influence on
the spread, the factor AH% has the minimum effect. Table 14 also implies that the
factor of temperature should be included in spread fonnulae.
DOF
ss
SS%
W,IH,
319.9713
63.59988
RIH,
98.173119
19.51362
AH%
31.728658
6.30662
53.227398
10.57987
Total
503.1005
100
does
having
the
the minimum effect on
not seems a reasonable
AH%
spread
from
does
it.
But
scientific
come
it
conclusion. Most researchers could not accept
All
the
definition
is
due
the
are
analyses
This
above
the
to
spread.
of
analysis.
Ln(W2
I W, )
S,,,
(423),
based
the
equation
=
on
perfomied
H2)
Ln(HI /
on the spread is involved implicitly
Ln(H,
temi
the
introduction of
IH2
the
definition
through
the
spread
of
in
4:)
)"
The
of
analysis
differing
obtained
If equation (424) is adopted, a
emerges.
analysis
15.
table
(424)
by
defined
in
shown
for
is
equation
the
spread
variance
152
DOF
ss
SS%
W,IH,
321.04148
41.05
RIH,
97.559536
12.474
AH%
309.42486
39.564
54.06191
6.912
Total
782.08778
100
Surprisingly, a totally different order is given except for the ratio of W,IHI W,IHI
.
has nearly the same effect as AH% on the spread, followed
by RIH,
T.
and
Considering this point, Winden's formula, which just considers the effect of
be
T
It
to
the
is
the
simplify
neglected
can
clear
effect
of
is
incorrect.
reduction,
formula.
processof establishing a new
From the aforementioned discussion, we can see that the Taguchi method is indeed
helpful for gaining insight into the spread behaviour, and does provide useful guides
:n
for controlling the spread behaviour.
have
on
Taguchi
two
influence
When applying the
significantly
elements
method,
level.
For
the
the
each
at
They
value
the results.
are the choice of parameters and
friction
temperature,
roll
speed,
roll
include:
the
parameters
spread,
influencing
the
four
above
in
studied
the
parameters
coefficient, material resistance and
have
they
that
four
first
either
for
are
the
parameters
The
excludingtD
reason
sections.
If
these
difficult
to
parameters
all
they
control.
influence
the
are
spread, or
on
minor
(3')
task.
this
L,,
suit
will
array
orthogonal
an
are chosen as parameters,
153
0.045
0.04
0.04
0.035
0.035
0.03
0.03
0.025
.00.025
0.02
CL
0.015
cn
0.02
0.
U.01 5
0.01
0.01
(a)
0.005
0
(b)
0.005
0
10
15
5
R/Hl
Wl/Hl
0.04
10
0.03
0.035
0.025
0.03
0.02
0.025
'0
0.02
,o0.015
0.0.015
0.01
0.
ch
U. U I
0.005
0.005
0
0
10
20
Reduction
30
40
(d)
L350
400
(1/6)
450
500
550
Temperature
The average effect of each parameter level on the spread is shown in Fig. 443.
4:
154
From Table 14 and Table 15 it can be seen that the definition of the spread
,
factor
included
directly
determines
be
in
coefficient
which
should
any spread
formula. With the consideration of reducing any possible measurement error, it was
decided that equation (423) would be abandonedbecauseit involves both a change
(4A
to
thickness.
use equation
more satisfactory way is
in width and a change in
24), where W) is the maximum width after deformation. The advantage of using
function
If
is
(424)
we
the
of
reduction.
that
spread coefficient is a simple
equation
W1
W'
(28),
(24)
that
three
to
parameters:
can
see
we
revisit equations
R
9
Hj
* dH
R
S
This
that
(where dH = H,  H,) and
suggests
are adopted.
H,
H'
factors.
In
three
recent years, a parameter, L
above
function
of
is a
distinguish
to
various rolling
thickness to the projected arc of contact, is adopted
conditions
(Biinten
and
Karhausen
1999).
The
value
of
where
155
VR
*dH
L=
formula.
the
new
in
A total of 434 sets of spread data are employed to deduce the
formula.
The data
new
from
taken
two sources: one is from the FE analyses for various industrial
are
rolling conditions (50 data sets), another part is taken from Wright's laboratory
(384
data sets) (Wright 1978). It is expected that the
experiments
formula
new
zn
in
this way will be able to deal with both laboratory rolling and
constructed
w
W,
RH
industrial rolling. The ranges of
'
and
are:
,,
H, , VR *dH ' H,
L
1:! W, /Hl
/J*dH
0.54:! W,
28.6
:!
1:5 R/Hl :59.48
(433)
0.42:! H. /L <4
The software used to obtain the new spread formula is Microsoft Excel 97. The
linear regression function "LINEST"
for
is
linear
97
Excel
applied
multiple
in
line
for
by
"least
function
This
the
the
regression.
a
using
statistics
calculates
data.
fits
The
line
best
the
that
to
squares" method
provided
calculate a straight
equation for the line is:
M1 Xi + 1112
X2++b
(434)
The
function
is
the
dependent
mindependent xvalues.
of
where the
a
yvalue
b
to
each xvalue, and Is a constant value.
values are coefficients corresponding
156
returns is
Im. mn,
bl
Imn, mn 1,...,m I, b 1.
m,
9
.., .
When applying the function "LINEST", one necessary condition is the knowledge
form
formula.
Although four factors are ascertained above,,
the
the
possible
of
of
there are countless functional combinations for these four factors. The most
function
due
linear,
to
are
power and exponential relationship. From
common
(24)
(28),
to
we can see that there possibly exists an exponential
equations
IVR
*
dH
between
Sw
W,
and
and
possibly
power
relationship
relationship
,
between S,, and W,IHI After many trial regression analyses, it was found that the
.
following formula gives the best fit with the raw spread data:
0.1071*
Ln
W,
0.2187 *e
wl
JR*dHi
848
*
0
R
H,
wl
1.481
H,
2.6978
(435)
IL
H.
the
(435)
to
from
be
that
It can
spread
more
contributes
equation
seen
IL
IHI
is
H,,,
The
does
W,
as a parameter
studied
than
not
why
reason
coefficient
.
difficulty
the
is
the
of
Taguchi
to
variation
controlling
of
the
attributed
method
in
H,,,IL. The value of H IL is usually calculated by
..
Hm
L
(436)
From
before
the
equation
gap.
roll
H,
after
thickness
H,
and
the
are
where
and
(or
H,
H,,
by
IL
three parameters:
is influenced
H..
36) it can be seen that the
,
12,
the
design,
of
table
value
see
Taguchi
dH) and R. In the above
experimental
1H,
W,
levels
the
to
of
determined
H
according
H is fixed. W,, R and
2 were
IL
H,,,
the
)/
is
(H,
Hence,
100.
H,
analysis,
H2
each
in
x
RIH, and AH% =

157
W11H,
together to design an orthogonal array. In order to compare with the reported work,
IL
decided
H,,
be
ignored
that
the
was
should
it
in the orthogonal table. But this
does not mean that the H IL is not important. On the contrary, it could be the
..
most influencing variable.
IR
* dH is shown in Fig. 444. It is obvious that
The relation between Sw and W,
IVR
function
does
between
S,
* dH We can also
exist
and W,
an exponential
.
from
data,,
Wright's
that
taken
thesis, are situated within the
most
which are
observe
IVR
*
dH
due
load
10.
The
limit
laboratory
W,
to
the
the
roll
!
reason is
of
range of
fit
larger
because
limitation.
between
be
The
The
torque
of
slab width can not
mill.
the prediction and the measurement is illustrated in Fig. 445. The correlation
is
0.97.
coefficient
0.5
0.45
.
0.4
0.35
.
.
0.3
0.25
cn
0.2
i.
0.15
0.1
0.05
""
0
0
10
20
30
*dh
1RW,
TV,
S,,.
between
Relation
and
Fig. 444
dH
40
158
0.5
m
75
0.45
0.4
0.35
0.3
0.25
.0
r_
0
0.2
0.15
6*
*0.
be 0
0.1
CL
0.05
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Measurement
Fig. 445 Correlation between the measured/computedspreadand the
predicted spread coefficient by the new formula
To check the validity of the new formula, the variation of spread coefficient of a 14pass schedule was calculated and compared with the laboratory measurement by
Winden (Winden 2000). The experiments were carried out in a laboratory mill in
the University of Sheffield, but the industrial rolling conditions were reproduced
through the introduction of a series of new techniques. The calculated spread
coefficients are shown in Table 16. The values in the column 4 to column 7 in Table
16 are calculated by using the expression WiIWO where W, is the width of ith pass,
,
WOis the initial width which is 55 mm in this particular rolling pass schedule. It is
be
by
Winden's
here
the
the
that
as
regarded
can
equation
assumed
given
values
from
his
because
the measurement.
actual measurement
equation is regressed
From Table 16, we can see that the present work shows a better prediction than
Sheppard & Wright's equation and Helmi & Alexander's equation. Sheppard's
believed
It
that
twelfth
the
is
pass.
work gives the greatest unrealistic values after
159
this result is caused by the first term in equation (28) (Winden 2000). Although the
formula
from
is regressed
present
nearly the same data sets as Sheppard & Wright's
formula
the
adopted,
equation
new
show more flexibility and accuracy due to two
main reasons:
(a) The introduction of the terin of
Hm
L
in equation (435)
(b) The introduction of industrial data into the regression data set
H,
H2
(Winden)
Sheppard
Helmi
Winden
Present
Eq. (28)
Eq. (27)
Eq. (210)
work
58.6
50.1
1.006
1.032
1.028
1.030451
50.1
48.2
1.007
1.033
1.035
1.035224
48.2
43.4
1.009
1.047
1.051
1.050404
43.4
38.7
1.013
1.063
1.066
1.065958
38.7
34
1.016
1.083
1.082
1.082465
34
29.3
1.02
1.106
1.097
1.100177
29.3
24.6
1.026
1.133
1.113
1.119475
24.6
19.8
1.034
1.168
1.129
1.141663
19.8
15.1
1.045
1.208
1.145
1.166637
10
15.1
11.3
1.062
1.244
1.157
1.188666
7.6
1.104
1.286
1.17
1.215497
4.7
1.298
1.323
1.179
1.241364
3.2
0.311
1.341
1.184
1.255344
2.2
1.353
1.188
1.266232
11
12
13
14
11.3
7.6
4.7
3.2
Em
The present author believes that the introduction of
previous
all
In
temi
this
Unfortunately,
ignored
was
is vital for the success.
for
derived
(435)
a
is
though
that
equation
fonnulae. It is worth emphasising
even
160
series of single pass deformation, it still performs quite well for multipass rolling
process.
fdE
=C
(437)
0&
In Fig. 446, the maximum damage value is 0.21, which occurs at the ed9e and the
Z:)
dangerous
If
That
the
the
the
slab centre.
most
places.
means
edge and
centre are
the damage value reaches a critical value, either edge cracking or alligatoring may
occur. Because there is no practical data nor experimental evidence to connect edge
it
is not possible to predict the
cracking or alligatoring in any aluminium alloys
fracture limit or to assess whether the maximum value of C=0.21 will produce
those
however
We
that
the
at
occur
values
greatest
observe
unsound products.
can
locations most susceptible to cracking.
The rolling process is made up of a series of single passes.Similar to the strain, the
from
damage
damage value is inherited from pass to pass. If the
value is computed
becomes
the
manifest,
the
the first pass to the pass in which
edge cracking
is
It
damage
suggested
be
the
value.
damage
critical
as
regarded
can
accumulated
161
that the critical damage value C could be obtained, by conducting hot compression
tests.
PAGE
MISSING
IN
ORIGINAL
163
i
(a)
Figure
52
Fig.
52.
The measured microstructure in the roll gap is shown in
z:
:,
I
I
is
by
bite,
8
from
from
foil
the
taken
indicated
roll
a position mm ahead of
a
extracted
A in Fig. 51. There is no evidence of subgrains, the only substructural feature being
dislocation lines which terminate either at particles or grain boundaries. This is
typical of a cast and homogenised structure. At a position closer to the roll gap
(location B in Fig. 51) but still generally considered to be outside the quasi static
deformation zone,, an imperfect
cellular
structure with
It
that
(b)).
Fig.
52
(see
be
indicates
dislocation
observed
may
activity
considerable
164
low
strains are required to produce sufficient activity to initiate the formation
very
of subgrains.
Figure 52 (c) shows that many dislocation tangles have formed in the grain interior
but that well defined subboundaries form only at the grain boundaries and at those
larger
located.
This is becausethe grain boundaries are
where
particles are
positions
likely to be locations of the greatest stress in lightly deformed material.
of
4microcells' within each subgrain. Subgrain size in Fig. 522(e) is stabilised and no
further change is observed after the position E in Fig. 51.
Generally, in a billet rolled at 5000C with 40% reduction, the average subgrain
diameter decreased from 9 to 6.4,wn within the first 10 mm of the projected
length of contact. The total length of contact for such a reduction is 35 mm.
1982)
Sheppard
Zaidi.
(after
and
measurement
subgrain size
165
(a)
(b)
(d)
(e)
Fig. 52 The development of a subgrain structure as material passes
through the roll gap (after Zaidi and Sheppard 1982)
The relationship between the subgrain size and the deformation parameters in the
by:
steady state regime
given
was
=1
*
LnZ
0.0153
+
=
(5.
0.196
%.
%]
(51)
In the following prediction of the subgrain size evolution, Sellars and Zhu's model
formation,
for
the
is assumed
subgrain
is applied. The F6, the characteristic strain
(2000).
's
from
Sellars
differs
Z1,
et al. assumption
proportional to
which
166
1
E5 =
(52)
(53)
A
where is a constant. The initial subgrain size is taken as 9 tm which is indicated
,
by the experimental observations. In many circumstances, the initial subgrain
is
size
unknown, replacing the initial subgrain size by the initial grain size seemsthe most
logical way to apply the equation (53). The variation of subgrain size with constant
increasing
and
strain rate calculated by equation (53) is shown in Fig. 53.
9.5
9
8.5
(D
8
.ii
7.5
strain rate
7
6.5
60
0.6
0.4
0.8
Strain
Fig. 53 The variation of subgrain size under different strain rate
(53)
by
equation
conditions calculated
It is apparent that the curves presented In Flg. 53 show similar trends to those in
Fig.22 (e). The subgrain size decreases with increasing strain, and attains a
167
6.4
The
to attain such a steady subgTainsize is
trn
value
of
strain
needed
stabilised
.
for
for
0.8
0.2
constant strain rate and
increasing strain rate.
about
The computed distribution of subgrain size using equation (53) by FEM is given in
Fig. 54. Obviously, Fig. 54 shows a reasonable prediction for subgraln size:
is
from
decreases
than
that
the
the
the
at
centre and
surface smaller
subgrain size at
leaving
is
it
Clearly
the roll gap.
to
the
the entry
constant after
exit.
Line
Subgrain
si
8=8.711
7=8.422
6=8.133
5=7.844
4=7.555
3=7.266
2=6.977
1=6.689
X=l I
X20
X=32
in
(228),
by
um
equation
Fig. 54 Distribution of subgrain size computed
histories
the
of
size,
the
subgrain
of
better
To give a
variation
of
understanding
47)
in
Fig54.
locations
beginning
the
to
shown
from
the
B
traced
A
III
ZD
point and point are
55.
Fig.
for
in
two
shown
are
these
time
points
The variations of subgrain size with
time
first
6.4
a
at
attained
Lm is
For the surface point, the stabilised subgrain size of
6.75
time
of
a
tin
at
of
value
state
steady
its
0.2s,
obtains
the
centre point
of
while
the
is
centre
at
size
before,
the
subgrain
discussed
As
stabilised
0.4s.
approximately
5.5%.
the
is
prediction
and
between
the measurement
6.4pi, the relative error
by
the
empirical
using
Chen et al (1990) also simulated the same rolling process
168
(223),
in the state steady reg ime is5.2 Lm the
the predicted subgraln size
equation
1111
,
20%.
It
error
approximately
is
relative
is clear that the present prediction is much
9.5
9.0
8.5
wo
8.0
Point A
7.5
Point B
7.0
6.5
6.0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Time(s)
time
Subgrain
with
Variation
size
Fig. 55
of
1.0
169
8.5
8.0
4)
N
=1 Imm
7.5
X=20mm
M 7.0
:3
Cl)
X=32mm
6.5
6.0
10
Centre
Thickness
(mm)
Surface
170
19
Line
8
7
6
5=
4=
3=
2
1
Smbgraimsize
720.1
436.5
152.9
130.7
414.3
697.9
901.5
1265.
& Max i= 1004.
o Mini = 1549.
Fig.58 shows the computed subgrain size using the same ideas that Chen et al
(1990) adopted: strain rate is averaged over the whole deformation region at each
deformation
during
but
it
FE
increment
also varies as
progresses.
computation,
Comparing Fig. 58 with Fig. 54, it can be seen that using the physical model gives
The
better
the
than
predicted subgrain
empirical model.
a much
using
prediction
Chen
is
in
5.15,
Fig.
58
the
et al's
um,
which approaches
size at
at exit
centre
prediction, 5.2,um .
Finite element analyses show that distribution of strain rate is erratic and irregular
f
bias
to
There
too
exit
entry
rom
much
are
entry
point.
with greatest contribution at
in the roll gap. The subgrain size at exit Is most important. However, the strain rate
the
to
Hence
over
rate
strain
it is necessary average
at this position approaches zero.
whole deformation zone.
171
Line
Subgrain
Size
5.142
5.033
5 = 4315
= 4.706
597
.
=
1%
1
1=4.379
172
Extrusion ratio
40: 1
Ram velocity
6.7mm/s
Extrusion temperature
3250C
0 73.5* 95
075
Container temperature
275"C
Ram temperature
225"C
Die temperature
2250C
Relative Error
Location
Measurement (gm)
1.27
0.19
1.29
1.57
1.38
0.11
1.4
1.45
1.36
0.21
1.44
5.88
1.88
0.12
1.82
3.19
1.49
0.25
1.57
5.37
D
E
Error
173
(54)
The computed history of the subgrain size for point F is shown in Fig. 510 It is
die
before
the
iI
mouth.
reaching
increases steadily
I
obvious that the subgrain size
When point F enters the high deformation region, the subgrain size gTows rapidly.
After leaving the die mouth, the subgrain size maintains an equilibrium size; any
The
by
applied.
being
usually
the
is
which
quench
water
prevented
possible growth
174
substructure observed at point D and E are shown in Fig. 511 and Fig. 512
respectively.
1.60
1.55
1.50
1.45
1.40
1.35
1.30
1.25
1.20 "
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
Time (s)
iI
w
"
1983)
Vierod
(After
D
Fig. 51 I Substructure observed at point
175
35
30
25
20
ffl
15
10
0
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
Time(s)
F
for
time
Variation
Fig. 513
point
of strain rate with
1.6
176
400
380
360
340
m
320
300
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
Time (s)
Fig. 514 Variation of temperature with time for point F
The variations of strain rate and temperature for point F are shown in Fig. 513 and
Fig.514 respectively. Temperature and strain rate also increase with time before
leaving the die mouth. It is obvious by inspecting all the formulae that the higher
the temperature, the larger the subgrain size; the higher the strain rate, the smaller
the subgrain size. The effect of increasing temperature complements the effect of
die
At
the
the
mouth, the strain rate,
increasing strain rate on
subgrain size.
temperature and subgrain size all reach their peaks. Also, the curve presented in
Fig. 510 exhibits almost the identical shape to the curve presented in Fig. 514. This
determination
dominant
the
of subgrain
that
temperature
role on
implies
must play a
be
the
than
Certainly,
to
precipitates and
greater
appear
size.
it's influence would
dispersoids readily identified in Fig. 51 I and Fig. 512The profiles of subgrain size, strain rate, equivalent rate and temperature from point
n
The
518.
Fig.
from
Fig.
515
to
die
predicted
E to point D at the
mouth are shown
177
E
size
at
subgrains
point
and D are 1.57tm and 1.82 gm respectively. The relative
errors compared with experimental measurement are 5.4% and 3.2% respectively.
The predicted subgrains size for other points are listed in Table 18. It is clear that the
predicted subgrain size agree well with the measured data.
The strain rate, equivalent strain and temperature at point D are all larger than those
leading
larger
E,
to
a
at point
subgrain size at point D. It is interesting to find that
there is a sharp growth in the equivalent strain near the die surface due to the strong
friction effect (sticking friction condition is assumed in the present simulation).
Since the die temperature is 1000C below the initial billet temperature, there is a
heat
between
billet
die.
The combined
transfer
the
the
phenomenon
strong
and
OC
friction
heat
5
transfer
temperature rise
of
and
cause
effects
approxim ately
between points D and E.
1.90
1.85
1.80
1.75
N
LW
u
72 1.65
CA
1.60
1.55
1.50
0123456
X coordinate (mm)
ED
line
Variation
Fig. 515
of subgrain size along
178
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
cn
3.5
3.0 
0
234
X coordinate (mm)
Fig. 516 Variation of strain rate along line ED
8
7
r_
.ii
to
Cr
w
1
o
0
23
X coordinate (mm)
Fig. 517 Variation of equivalent strain along line ED
179
408
407
9
406
CL
404
403
402
01234567
X coordinate (mm)
Fig. 518 Variation of temperature along line ED
Although equation (228) gives a good result in the present research, it still is a
halfphysical model, depending upon strain, strain rate, temperature and previous
state of subgrain size. As discussed earlier, the initial subgrain size is the
consequence of dislocation movement and interaction. From the point of view of
be
dislocation
density
included or should precede
the
metallurgy,
should
internal
(228)
Nes
(Nes
1998,
Marthinsen
Most
the
equation
recently,
et al
calculation.
in
dislocation
Nes
2001)
have
and
proposed a model relating subgrain evolution with
density and other metallurgical variables.
When using equation (228), there is a parameter which has not been clarified in
Furu et al's work (see Fig. 22). This is the determination of the initial subgrain size.
In the present paper, the Initial subgrains size, 9lm is extracted from the
Regretfully,
in
this
Therefore,
study.
it is not a problem
experimental measurement.
beginning
from
to
the
the
the
size
measurement of subgrain
experimental work on
steady state regime is scarce.
180
108 to 10 11
2
According
Holt's
(1970),
to
the relationship betweeninternal dislocation
M.
work
densityand subgrain size is given as
JVp =K
(55)
For the same K, if p varies from 108 to loll M2, the corresponding maximum value
31.6
6ma,
is
times the minimum
about
of
6min.
In the current stage of
value of
few
data
The
the
subgrain
size,
evolution
of
experimental
available.
are
modelling
determination
of
some parameters,
i. e.
E,,, is obtained
by tuning
to one
data
Therefore,
the
set.
choice of initial subgrain size will significantly
experimental
hence
determination
the predicted results of subgrain size.
the
of e,, , and
affect
pg
density
dislocation
Hence,
the
flow
is
random
the
to
only
stress.
contribution
FE
The
density.
dislocation
internal
analysis
the
to
considered and assumed replace
5.1.
described
in section
model is the same as that
181
Dislocation
Line
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
= 1.1 692E+l 4
= 1.0232E+l 4
8.7714E+l
3
=
7.3111
E+l
3
=
= 5.8508E+l 3
= 4.3906E+l 3
= 2.9303E,.I 3
1.4700E+l
3
=
\\
\2
\\\\
Fig.519 shows the distribution of the computed internal dislocation density pi. The
dislocation
density
maximum
occurs near the exit in the surface due to the effect of
strong shearing since sticking friction is applied in the simulation. To understand
the evolution of internal dislocation density, point A (see Fig. 54) is traced from the
beginning of the rolling to the position illustrated in Fig54. The variation of pi of
initial
in
Fig.
The
520.
A
the
the
point
roll gap is shown
position in
with
pi is
from
from
Fig.
520
be
It
1011M2.
there
that
to
is a sharp rise
assumed
is clear
approximately
IM2
101
to the peak value of 4x 1013M2within a very short period,
is
followed
and
by a slightly
recovery
during
deformation in the roll gap and static recovery after leaving the roll gap. Unlike
subgrain size which
leaving
the
roll
after
remains constant
due
density
dislocation
to
dislocation density decreasessince the generation of
stops
the cessation of further plastic deformation, while static recovery or static
interpass
during
time.
the
recrystallisation occurs
182
4.5E+ 13
4. OE+13
0k
cv
3.5E+ 13
3. OE+13
2.5E+ 13
2. OE+13
1.5E+ 13
1.OE+13
5. lE+12
1.OE+l 1
20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Position (mm)
Fig. 520 Variation of internal dislocation density for point A
The predicted profiles of pi along the thickness at different location (see Fig. 54) in
the roll gap are given in Fig. 521. We can see that as the workpiece passesthrough
the roll gap, the values of pi rise and the gradients increase due to increasing shear
strain. The curves present in Fig. 521 shows a completely reverse shapeto the curve
Fig.
56. From Fig. 519 to Fig. 521, it can be seen that the predictions seem
in
reasonable with common metallurgical observation. Due to the dearth of the
measureddata in dislocation density, comparison between the measurementand the
prediction can not be performed. Once the measured data is obtained, the constants
in equation (220) need to be tuned to the experimental data set. The tuned model is
then applied to predict the dislocation evolution.
183
1.2E+14
c4
X=11
X=20
X=32
1.OE+14
8.OE+13
6.OE+13
C
4.OE+13
2.OE+13
1.OE+ll
02468
Centre
10
Thickness (mm)
12
Surface
first
also
remains
finally
to
the
then
reaches
peak within a short period and
almost constant,
increases
0
The
1.90.
situated at the surface is attributed to
a steady value of about
maximum
the strong effect of shear strains, which contributes more to the equivalent strain
than the other strain components, while at the slab centre, little shear strains exist.
The relationship between shear strain and the equivalent strain will be detailed in
section 5.5.
184
Line
Misorienta
= 2.667
2.333
=
2.000
=
= 1.667
= 1.333
= 1.000
= 0.6667
= 0.3333
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
2.0
1.8
1.6
C,
1.4
1.2
1.0
0.8
C,
I
0
U)
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Time (s)
A
for
time
Variation
point
Fig. 523
of misorientation with
185
The predicted distributions of the flow stressby equation (232) and equation (233)
Fig.
524
Fig.
525
shown
in
are
and
respectively. Two figures show similar
distribution except the magnitudes. Fig. 524 indicates that the now stress at the
is
higher
flow
4
times
than
the
stress at the centre. This is causedby
surface about
two effects: lower temperature at the surface (about 700C temperature drop from the
Fig.
425)
the
to
see
producing a small subgrain size; strong shear
centre,
surface
high
dislocation
density
high
As
discussed
in
generating
and
misorientation.
strain
in
flow
between
4.6,
the
this
the surface and the
considerable gradient
stress
section
difference,
i.
lateral
deformation,
e., microstructure,
centre will produce a serious
between laboratory and industrial rolling. Fig. 524 further confirms the explanation
laboratory
lateral
deformation
between
difference
the
the
rolling and
on
of
industrial rolling.
Line
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
Flow
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
str
57.97
51.43
44.89
38.35
31.81
25.27
18.73
12.19
MPa
(232)
by
flow
in
equation
the
Distribution
stress
Fig. 524
of
186
Flow
Line
stress
63.29
56.58
49.86
43.14
36.42
29.71
22.99
16.27
8=
7=
6=
5=
4=
3=
2=
1=
\\I
\\\3\
\i \\
\\
\\
\\5
\\
45
40
35
CL
!5
30
Eq. (232)
25
Eq. (233)
20
cn
15
LL
10
5
0
20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Position (mm)
different
by
A
for
models
computed
Fig. 526 Variation of flow stress
point
187
The curves present in Fig. 526 exhibit almost identical shapeto the curve present in
Fig. 514. This implies that dislocation density must contribute more to the
determination of the flow stress than subgrain size does. Urcola and Sellars (1987)
for
have
AlMg
However,
(1997)
Zhu
the
alloys.
same
conclusion
and
et al
reached
from hnmarigeon and McQueen (1969) et al's observation on substructure for
(see
Fig.
527
90%
and
a
single
in
pass
reduction
superpurity aluminiurn rolled after
Fig. 528), there is little
dislocation within
be
by
the
The
major source.
temperature.
should
size
subgrain
effect
strengthening
The modified HallPetch relationship, equation (231), should be used for the
is
density
dislocation
that
Therefore,
flow
the
conclusion
the
stress.
prediction of
the major strengthening source should be applied with extreme caution.
(233)
(232)
by
in
or equation
When the flow stress is calculated
either equation
the
as
same
as
chosen
are
the
a,
anda2
the
the present study,
constants
values of
for
Experiment
various
(2001)
evidences
adopted.
the NordVarhaug et al
these
parameters.
have
the
of
validities
confinned
aluminiurn alloys
188
Immarigeon
(After
T,,
0.55
Fig. 527 Micrograph of superpurity aluminium rolled at
1969)
McQueen
and
189
74
711,
tg
II
Immarigeon
(After
T..
0.65
and
at
Fig. 528 Micrograph of superpurity aluminium rolled
McQueen 1969)
190
Controlling the distribution of texture is one of the major objectives in the strip
Frequent
(SRX)
alurninium
alloys.
of
occurrence
of
static recrystallisation
rolling
intensity
final
intermediate
SRX
the
the
texture
stages reduce
of
rolling
and
after
texture (McQueen and Blum 1998). Due to the complexity, modelling of texture
itself
for
lend
is
to
numerical modelling even though some
not ready
evolution
future,
SRX
by
In
FEM.
have
the
the
texture
the
modelling
near
predicted
workers
basedon physical model is practical and will be helpful for a deeper understanding
influence
its
behaviour
SRX
on the texture.
and
of
The rate of recrystallisation is dominated by the total stored energy and its
distribution, the availability of nucleation and the holding temperature. The
for
is
PD,
every
crucial
total
volume,
the
unit
per
energy
stored
calculation of
be
to
PD,
added
the
p,
need
To
of
the
calculation
of
value
obtain
physical model.
in addition to the calculation
of
p,.
After
PD is calculated, subsequent
texture
cube
and
size
kinetics
grain
as
such
reactions
related
and
recrystallisation
Sellars's
(1994)
model
Nes
by
or
be
model
et al's
can possibly
predicted, either
(2000).
191
From equation (240), it is clear that the mean values of strain and ZenerHollomon
for
different
the prediction of
thickness
through
parameter at
positions are required
the local kinetics of static recrystallisation.
different methods have been proposed by McLaren and Sellars (1993) in summing
the strain components. The details of the summation methods are given in the
in
the
definitions
8.
Two
present study:
are
used
strain
equivalent
appendix
of
Strain I
f J,
+i
2, +2
2!t
dt
(56)
192
Strain2
F13Ft
1
2+
x7,
' dt
(57)
In equation (57), the contribution of the shear strain to the total accumulated
ignored.
There are two reasons. Firstly, McLaren and Sellars's
equivalent strain is
have
(1993)
demonstrated
work
clearly that "accumulated equivalent strains by
during
deformation
squares
of components
summing
may give grossly erroneous
if
in
for
(240)
kinetics.
these
strains
are applied
results
equations
recrystallisation
The accumulation of shear strains irrespective of sign appears to be incorrect in
direction
during
the
significant
where
reversals
regions
in
of shear occur
rolling".
Secondly, when equation (240) is regressed from the experimental data, the strain
is usually calculated by (Sheppard et al 1986)
Hf
E=Ln
(58)
Ho
The
final
H.
thickness
HO
effect of
the
respectively.
and
initial
are
and
where
f
(58).
shearstrain is not included in equation
Dauda and McLaren (1999) adopted another definition of equivalent strain in their
study
F3EC
'c
"'
(59)
is
it
(59)
since
However, extra caution must be taken when using equation
deformation
large
typically
Hot
a
deformations.
is
for
rolling
proposed
small
To
the
breakdown
hot
in
reduce
few
rolling.
the
first
for
the
passes
process, except
FEM,
the
(59)
of
increments
by
in
introduced
the
use of equation
possible error
193
time must be set at very small values to ensure a small deformation during
each
increment.
Presently, there are two ways to calculate the value of Z for each
node in FEM
first
The
computation.
method is simply substituting the nodal strain rate and nodal
temperature into equation (211) to calculate the history of Z. The ZenerHollomon
parameter calculated by this way is termed "instantaneous ZenerHollomon
by
Zj,
parameter", represented
averaged strain rate and nodal temperature to derive the value of Z. The Z
by
this way is termed " averaged ZenerHollomon parameter",
calculated
by
Zave The averaged strain rate is obtained by averaging strain rate
represented
*
over the whole deformation zone in each increment durino, the finite element
computation (Chen et al 1992). Adopting such an average strategy is logical since
the strain rate in equation (211), which is regressedfrom experimental data, is also
deformation
during
Thus
the
the
a mean value over
zone.
each
whole
in
increment
,
finite element computation, all nodes have the same strain rate. The gradient of Z
dependsupon the gradient of temperature. According to Wells et al's study (Wells
determining
1998),
the
temperature
et al
plays an overwhelming effect on
(strain
rate), work roll temperature,
microstructure when compared with roll speed
deformation
Hence,
the
friction
whole
averaging strain rate over
and the
coefficient.
is acceptable.
by
be
Z
(1993),
Sellars
&
the
As reported by McLaren
obtained
mean value of can
Z
For
the
the
basis
averaged
Z
time
history
the
strain.
or
of
the
on
averaging
of
insI
(510)
and
equation
time
in
basis
given
are
strain
and
the
value on
of increments of
(511) respectively:
194
Zin,
Vin,
At
(510)
(Zins)e
Zins
AE
=
(511)
where At and AE are time and strain increments respectively, t is the deformation
time, Zis the final equivalent strain. For the Z ave) similar definitions are givenby:
I
(Zavc)t =
(Z
ave), 
=,
Zave
At
(512)
2:ZaveAE
(513)
recrystallised
for
commercial
purity
aluminium
The predicted through thickness variation of the accumulated strains defined in
final
in
Fig.
These
(56)
(57)
529.
nodal strains are taken
equations
are shown
and
from the FEM output. The lines marked "strain I" and "strain 2" give the same
is
From
the
the
the
negligible.
shear
strain
effect of
value at
slab centre, where
due
between
to
difference
two
these
curves expands
centre to the surface, the
from
I"
to
the
"Strain
the
surface.
centre
gradually
rises
increase of shear strain.
However, for the line marked "strain 2", there is a steep rise near the surface.
"Strain I" is much greater than "strain 2" at the surface. This implies that there is a
large shear strain generated by the contacting friction force.
The computed profiles of (Zi,, ), and (Z,,,, ), are shown in Fig. 530. There also
The
lines
the
between
region.
two
difference
these
surface
in
exists a significant
195
maximum value appearsat the surface,and the value of (Z,,, ), is much greaterthan
the value of
(Zave
Aft
)i*
0% 0%
U. ou
0.75
0.70
r_
Strai
0.65
Strain
2

0.60
0.55
0.50
cr
LU
0.45
0.40


0.35
030
0.0
0.2
0.6
0.4
Centre
Thickness
1.0
0.8
(mm)
Surface
5. E+12
4. E+12
Ar Instantaneous
*
Average
3. E+12
2. E+12
l. E+12
O.E+00
0.2
0
Centre
0.4
Fractional
0.6
Position
0.8
Surface
ZenerHollomon
the
Fig. 530 Comparison of the predicted gradients of
),
(Z,,,,
),
(Z,,,,
and
through the thickness,
196
PD
Line
8
1
Gb'
(oc
(I In(I Ob 1/2))+20
1+ In
pb90
= 10 A 
(514)
Energy
= 8.5891E+04
7 = 7.5162E+04
E = 6.4433E+94
5 = 5.3705E+04
4 = 4.2S76E+04
2 = 3.2247E+04
2 = 2.1tj,BE::
Oil
1 1.0790E+94

\
1%
\\3\
The prediction of pi, 15 and 0 by integrating FEM with physical models for hot
flat rolling of aluminium alloys have been reported in section 5.1 to 5.3. It should
be noted that calculation of og has been included in the calculation of pi The
The
1999).
literature
(Baxter
from
11R,
the
taken
et al
variation of
with strain is
fit
1.
This
Fig.
53
distribution
the
well
results
predicted
stored energy is given in
of
from
be
It
1990).
(Hansel
Jensen
seen
can
and
with other researcher's calculation
197
Fig. 531 that the maximum stored energy appears in the surface region. Whilst the
decreases
from
the surface to the centre at exit. Therefore,, we have
energy
ideal
fraction
to
that
the
confidence
say
sufficient
recrystallised should fall from the
during
to
the
centre
normal rolling conditions when the roll is not heated
surface
intentionally.
In industrial hot rolling, the roll temperature is usually less than I OOOCwhich is
lower
for
breakdown
5000C
the
temperature,
than
the
stock
generally about
much
3000C
Under
than
tandem
after
greater
rolling.
such conditions, the
rolling and
it
becomes
Therefore
the
thinner.
slab get
increasingly significant as
chilling effect
fraction
is
by
FEM
difficult
to
conceive why a small
recrystallised predicted
is very
in the surface region for industrial rolling (Brand et al 1996, Mirza 2001). The only
explanation is that the previous modelling results are incorrect.
100
Strain1
At Strain2
1994)
(AfterK/bLaren
K/basured
iedExperirrental
K/bdff
s
w
Cl)
on
ov
Cl)
I
C.
)
C,
0
60
40
)
C.
U
20
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
FracdonalPosibon
of
the
gradients
predicted
between
the
Fig. 532 Comparison
measured and
),
(Zi,,,
Gutierrez
with
model
by
al's
et
fraction
using
the
recrystallised
198
tO.
1.45
=
X 106
e1.5 Z0
75
.
220000
exp
(515)
R7
This tuned equation is then applied for "strain 2". It is clear from Fig. 532 that, the
fraction
drops
low
to
measured
recrystallised
a very
value at the surface, whereas
the predicted lines give fast recrystallisation in the surface region. Although the
influence of shear strain is deleted from "strain 2",, the prediction is far from
definition
does
demonstrates
This
the
that
of
equivalent
strain
changing
satisfactory.
X,
the
not succeed much in reducing
prediction of
The
the
surface
region.
in
be
between
McLaren's
the
present prediction can not
measurement and
comparison
has
These
is
because
that
occurred.
clear
some experimental error
considered
it
SRX.
be
Z:
)
resultsmust therefore excludedwhen evaluating
in
The three reported single pass rolling conditions and measurements are shown
Table 19. It is clear that Yiu et al's experiment (Yiu et al 1990) is more practical
diameter,
terms
roll speed and rolling
than the other two experiments in
of roll
be
Yiu
et al's experiments, it can
temperature. Comparing Dauda & McLaren's and
Mg
increase
the
increases
and
of
percent
fraction
of
with
that
the
recrystallised
seen
the
sites
that
nucleation
of
It
number
recognised
is generally
increase of reduction.
The
for
key
recrystallisation.
the
static
of
occurrence
the
and
stored energy are
199
0.8
and
are correct, and
fraction
the
plus
possible maximum
recrystallised, 39.2%, at the surface, we can
draw a "Modified Experimental" curve for McLaren's experiment, see Fig. 532.
There are two reasons to assume such a curve. Firstly, the purpose of this section is
how to accurately predict at the surface. The most important point is that we know
the maximum fraction recrystallised should be less than 39.2%. Secondly, all
empirical models need to be tuned to the measurementat the centre.
Roll diameter
Rolling temperature
Relative reduction
Roll peripheral speed
% Mg in the alloy
Measured fraction
McLaren
68mm
4000C
24%
21Ornrn/s
<0.001
10.7%
Measured fraction
2.3%
Ylu et al
368mm
4600C
48%
385nun/s
4.45 in Fig. 26a
Fig.
26a
in
4.5%
15%
in
Fig.
26a
39.2%
200
In the following
this modified
"
experimental curve not the measurement. Comparing the curves "Strain I" and
"Strain 2" in Fig. 532, it can be seen that "strain 2" shows a better agreement with
the theoretical curve than "Strain I". But this kind of changing the definition of
is
equivalent strain not convincing.
(Z,,,
The
and
s),.
"Strain
1
by
that
the
symbol
indicates
corresponding
curve
calculated
is
time"
F and (Z ins
64strain
)t
is
curve calculated by "strain 2" and
(Zin.
Y)E
basis of strain appears to give a better prediction than that by averaging with time
for both "strain F and "strain 2". This conclusion was also confirmed by Dauda
following
McLaren
(1999).
In
the
and
computations, all Z, either
Zins
or
Zave
9
are
100
'a
a)
U)
80
(n
Strain 2tine
Strain 2strain
Strain 1tirne
Strain 1strain
K/bdified Experirrental
60
0
40
LL
20
0
0.2
Ce ntre
0.4
Fractional
0.6
Position
0.8
Su rfa ce
Fig.533 Comparison of the predicted profiles by using between (Z,,,,), and (Z,,,,),
201
All curves in Fig. 533 still possibly overpredict the fraction recrystallised within the
An
surface area.
alternative
to improve
method
the prediction
is a recently
developed model Liserre and Goncalves's model (Liserre and Goncalves 1998).
This model was modified
from Gutierrez
purity
Liserre
Goncalves's
and
aluminium.
model is adjusted to 66strain I" at the centre.
The computed results are shown in Fig. 534. Unexpectedly,
distribution
fraction
the
of
recrystallised through the thickness because the
irregular
for
t
some points on the lines. The error is
calculated values of 0.5 is negative
by
"6924"
the
term
introduced
Liserre and
Another method to decrease the difference between the prediction and the
theoretical distribution is in modifying the mode of calculation for Z. "Averaged
Z:)
Zave
ZenerHollomon parameter",
31 will be applied. Fig. 535 shows the predicted
by
Gutierrez
Clearly,
Z,,,,
improves
et
al's
model.
using
significantly
profiles
using
the prediction for both strains.
100
80
60
40
20
0
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Fractional Position
Fig. 534 Comparison between the measured and predicted gradients of the
fraction recrystallised by using Liserre et al's model with (Z,,,,),
202
Strain 1
Strain2
lVbdified Experimental
100
U)
U)
80
60
40
0
20
LL
0.2
Ce ntre
0.4
Fractional
0.6
Position
0.8
Surface
Fig. 535 Comparison between the measured and predicted gradients in the
(Zave
)r
fraction
by using Gutierrez et al's model with
recrystallised
100
80
Sheppard et al
Sellars et al
Gutierrez et al
Dauda & NtLaren
IVbdified Experimental
60
CIO,
a
0
40
m
L
20
0.2
0
Ce ntre
0.4
0.6
Fractional Position
0.8
Surface
203
The comparison of various empirical models is shown in Fig. 536 These empirical
models are all tuned with the measurement at the centre for "strain 2". Contrary to
for
the
model
established
expectation,
commercial purity aluminium (Gutierrez et
does
best
for
the
the rolling of purity aluminium. The other
not
give
prediction
al)
three models provide nearly the same prediction within 70% thickness. Sheppard et
(Sheppard
1986)
et al
al's model
proposed for aluminium alloy AA5056 gives the
best agreement, particularly in the surface area. The predicted fraction recrystallised
by using Sheppard et al's model is nearly half of that predicted by using Sellars et
discrepancy
This
is
model.
with other models
al's
of considerable importance
because only Sheppard et al's models are regressed from rolling tests. The other
three models are established either by plain strain compression (Sellars et al's
(Sellars
et al 1985)) or the torsion test (Gutierrez et al's model (Gutierrez et
model
1988)).
al
In torsion testing, the effect of shear strain is dominant. The phenomenon that shear
is
The
direction
the
magnitude of shear strain much
is not included.
strain changes
(PSC)
In
PSC,
the
than
those
and
rolling.
greater
in plane strain compression
lower
is
test
that
the
than
the
where
rolling
in
at
surface
magnitude of shear strain
the slab is pulled into the roll gap by the net frictional force. Although there is a
direction change at the contacting face in PSC testing, a specified material point at
the interface only experiences unidirectional shear strain. While in rolling, a
forward
first
the
shear strain
experiences a
surface
specified material point at
becauseits entering speed is lower than the roll peripheral speed. The shear strain
disappearsat the neutral point or neutral recrion. After that the same material point
be
From
the
backward
above comparison, it can
shear strain.
experiences a
between
these
in
difference
the
path
strain
concluded that there is a considerable
the
static
the
that
affects
Black
path
strain
testing methods.
show
work
et al's
(1996)
that
Sellars
Rossi
2001).
(Black
reported
kinetics
and
et al
recrystallisation
factor
by
does
of
a
PSC leads to faster kinetics of recrystallisation than rolling
this
so.
should
to
why
but
2.7,
establish
the
able
are
not
authors
approximately
204
From the above discussion, it can be concludedthat the empirical model should be
by
Otherwise,
the
test.
the fraction recrystallised would be
rolling
established
overpredicted.
Now, we should compare the predicted results given by McLaren (1994) with the
Fig.
537
study.
shows the predicted results with Guitierrez et al's model by
present
McLaren. It should be noted the curves marked "strain I" and "strain 2" were
from
irrespective
the
addition
of
increments of shear strain, accumulated
calculated
"Strain
F
"strain
2"
by
different
McLaren
through
the
gap.
roll
and
used
are
of sign
(56)
(57).
from
The
"strain
3"
those
and
in equations
curve
was calculated
with
the net shear at exit. The curve "strain 4" is the result of non plane strain conditions
during experimental rolling. Using "strain 3" and "strain 4" do have a marked effect
Even
the
making so many changes to the strain, the predicted results
prediction.
on
Fig.
5Fig.
Comparing
536
70%
the
thickness
and
region.
are really not good within
37, It can be seen that the present work gives a much better prediction. The reason
(Zave)E
2"
"strain
be
to
the
and
use of
can
attributed
1.2
STRAIN
0STRAIN
1
m
STRAIN
0
STRAIN
LLJ
C/3
0.8
1
2
3
4
MEASURED
C/3
cr:
CD 0.6
Ui
0
iC:)
0.4
U0.2
0t
CENTRE
0.2
0.4
0.6
POSITION
U. b
SURFACE
1994)
McLaren
(After
ftaction
recrystallised
Fig. 537 Predicted gradients in
205
prediction.
120
*
*Sellars
100
k0)
(I,
Sheppardet Ed'smodel
80
et al's model
C,,
C)
a)
60
0
C)
40
LI
20
0
0
0.2
Centre
0.4
0.6
Fractional Position
0.8
Surface
206
the constant A but retaining the constants b and c in equation (540) from existing
models which were constructed for differing materials. If so, incorrect result will be
by
(Mirza
the
simulation
given
et al 2001). Simulation by physical modelling seems
for
future
research work.
essential
recrystallised
for AA5083
et al
for
the
The
temperature
quarter
rise
their
measurement.
corresponds very well with
defomiatlon
due
heat
to
because
is
plastic
the
generation
caused
and centre point
the
loss
heat
the
to
and
roll
the
friction
the
work outweighs
and
interface
Aluminium
surrounding.
heat
have
conductivity.
good
very
a
alloys
The
a
very
within
becomes
uniform
approximately
temperature of the whole section
0.5s.
time
short
of about
207
1.0
0.9
0.8
S
a
0.7
0.6
0.5
SubSurface
Quarter Thickness
Centre
m 0.4
r,r
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Time (s)
Fig. 539 The history of temperature
490
SubSurface
Quarter Thickness
Centre
A,
470
450
430
m
CL
P
IW
410
390
370
350
1.5
2.0
2.5
Time (s)
3.0
208
28
27
26
25
N 24
23
22
*
x
21
SubSurface
Quarter Thickness
Centre
20
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
Time (s)
Fig. 541 Predicted history of Zener Hollomon Parameter
80
m 70
(D
cu
Averaged Z
m Instantaneous Z
60
50
r_
0
40
30
U0 20
E
a
> 10
0
0
0.1 0.2
Centre
209
. f
ASROLLED
2DOpm
i
Fig. 543 Measured micrographs at (a) centre, (b) surface (After Timothy et al 1991)
Fig. 540 shows an obvious difference in the final equivalent strain when leaving
Z:)
the roll gap. The value decreasesfrom the surface to the centre. This phenomenon is
by
distribution
the
caused
of shear strain, which is strong at the surface due to the
rollstock contact, and vanishes at the stock centre due to the geometrical
symmetry. The predicted history of Z is plotted in Fig. 541 by the use of a
logarithm function. It can be seen that Z also decreases from the surface to the
SRA
Z
higher
the
tO
It
tend
accelerate
centre. is generally recognised that 4n strain and
because they produce more stored energy. Therefore, the X,
decreases
should
10.5
210
tO.
=2.7*10"do
2.45
(9.75+3.82
2Z
' 58
exp
183000
GT,
(516)
In Timothy et al's paper, the initial grain size was not reported. To predict the
fraction recrystallised, equation (516) is tuned according to the measurementat the
by
(4.5%)
initial
the
changing
centre
grain size. The tuned initial grain size is 86
for
69gm
Z
Z
the
and
use of ave and ins respectively. The predicted distribution of
fraction recrystallised for the present single pass rolling is shown in Fig. 542. The
two curves give the same trend but differ in value. The measured X,
is 39.2% and
4.5% for the surface (at the 0.95 fraction position) and centre point respectively.
The corresponding micrographs for these two points are shown in Fig. 543. It is
clear that using the Z,,,, gives a better prediction than the use of Z,,,,.
The formula for the calculation of the recrystallised grain size, d,,,,, was also
1986)
in
literature
(Sheppard
the
et al
reported
dl, = 4.79do
e.
Ir
Z 0.075 /
(3.72+1.12E2
(517)
The
Flg.
544.
d,,
The predicted distribution of
through the thickness Is shown In
d rex
by
For
t:
the curve predicted
using
decreasesfrom the centre to the surface.
I
Zm,
e)
16Lrn
at
fits
the
of
15.6Lm
measurement
d,.
with
the
well
which
the centre is
at
'
C,
211
drex
drex
the centre and the surface point. There are significant differences
on the
deformation histories through the thickness, see Fig. 539 to Fig. 541. Theoretically,
drex
decrease
from the centreto the surface.
should
20
18
16
,m
Cl) 14
12
10
Averaged Z
instantaneous Z
6
W
2
0
0
0.4
5.5.5 Determination
X,.
the
influence
of rolling parameters on
of the
FEM
in
that
Fig.
542,
From the curve marked "Averaged Z" presented
it is clear
by
the
experiment
This
that
replace
can
we
Indicates
gives an excellent prediction.
FEM. The advantages of such a replacement are obvious. There is no equipment
limitation, the accuracy of measurement is high, little capital investment is required
andit is fast.
212
HT
L
H, +H2
(HH
(V)
and the slab temperature (T) that are easily controlled, are selected
roll speed
for the study. Each parameter has three values, also called three levels. These values
IL,
in
20.
For
Table
H,,,
the
the values are 0.4283,0.627 and 0.813
ratio
are shown
(equivalent to 50%, 30% and 20% thickness reduction respectively since the roll
fixed.
The
R
H,
thickness
the
values are the same as those
and
are
radius
initial
described in section 5.5.4). For the ratio of T,,,,,, the values are 200C, 600C and
)
I OOOC.
The designed orthogonal table L9(3') is shown in table 21. L9(34 indicates
9
levels
has
test
total
four
three
runs
that there are
and
parameter
parameters, each
AA5083.
The
be
alloy
simulated material is aluminium
needto
conducted.
H,,, IL
T,,,,,(OC)
V(mm/s)
0.428
0.627
20
60
100
200
0.813
100
300
T(uC)
400
450
500
213
IL
..
T, ('C)
,,,
0.428
0.428
0.428
0.627
0.627
0.627
0.813
0.813
0.813
1
1
v(mm/s)
T(OC)
20
60
100
20
100
200
300
200
60
100
20
60
100
300
100
400
450
500
500
400
1
1
300
100
200
450
450
500
1
1 400
62.360
3.692
0.159
0.411
6.798
1.520
0.779
0.090
2.949
The objective of this section is to show the relative contribution of each parameter
X,,.
This
is
task
the
obtained through the analysis of variance (ANOVA).
on
ANOVA uses the sum of squares to quantitatively examine the deviation of the
factor
from
(
the
effect responses
over all experimental mean response
control
Fowlkes and Creveling 1995).
Yi
71i=1
(518)
X,
the
In
to
this
refers
study,
it
the
response.
characteristic
quality
where y, is
.n
4)
Lq
(3
In
level.
the
a
is
the
array
that
the
include
is
number of experiments
,n
constant
in
the
factor
for
levels
shown
are
each
The calculated mean values at different
/L
Hm
I
level
22
Table
from
that
of
be
It
Table 22 under the column y. can
seen
3.
1,2
test
and
runs
is included in
214
Table 22 Level average response analysis using S/N ratio for the
centre point
Variables
Level
Runs
yy
SIN
SINy
Hm IL
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
14.1735
0.862902
0.073067
22.72562
0.059329
2.872739
0.278112
24.53467
0.627
4
5
6
0.813
7
8
9
0.219293
0.016918
1.106695
4
7
14.1735
0.059329
0.219293
600C
2
5
8
0.862902
2.872739
0.016918
1000C
3
6
9
0.073067
0.278112
1.106695
1oomm/s
1
6
8
14.1735
0.278112
0.016918
200mm/s
2
4
9
0.862902
0.059329
1.106695
3
5
7
0.073067
2.872739
0.219293
5
9
14.174
2.873
1.107
450 Oc
2
6
7
0.863
0.278
0.219
5000C
3
4
8
0.073
0.059
0.017
0.428
503F;4q
1.07006
0.447636
23.0295
I 9An77A
9.16592
11.1156
13.17951
35.43283
n z,)rg i cz
8.828117
15.91059
0.88056
T1011
Level 1
Level 2
Level 3
200C
4.817375
Level 2
Level 3
300mm/s
4.894878
1.280774
1.250853
0.485958
9.16592
35.43283
22.72562
11.1156
9.18256
1098689
0.88056
V
Level 1
23.0295
24.53467
13.17951
4.822844
0.676309
23.0295
11.1156
35.43283
1.280774
24.53467
7.839629
8.311628
0.88056
22.72562
1.055033
9.16592
13.17951
8.913068
T
Level 1
Level 1
Level 1
4000C
6.050979
23.0295
9.16592
0.88056
11.0253
0.453436
1.280774
11.1156
13.17951
8.525294
0.049771
22.72562
24.53467
35.43283
2756437
3,4
in
test
runs
Level 3 of the rolling temperature is involved
When
8.
and
the
level
influence
for
all
parameter,
level
one
of
one
performing
average analysis
because
be
every
from different le\'els of other parameters will
counterbalanced
215
different
level once. Thus the effect of one
parameter
will
appear
at each
other
level
on the experimental results can be separated from other
parameter at one
In
level
this
the
way,
effect
of each
parameters.
of every parameter can be viewed
independently.
Hm IL
v
T
Total
Centre
13.7%
Surface
13.9%
2.2%
5.9%
0.1%
84%
100%
2.9%
77.3%
100%
In the Taguchi method, the signaltonoise (S/N) ratio is adopted to analyse the test
(scatter)
(mean)
both
the
S/N
the
The
variation
and
average
ratio can reflect
results.
by
defined
function
S/N
The
is
of quality characterics under one trial condition.
SINIO*LOG(MSD)
(519)
the
The
deviation.
using
for
of
purpose
the
MSD
square
the
mean
stands
where
the
In
this
for
S/N
Investigation,
analysis.
10
the
easier
to
value
constant
is magnify
MSD is expressed as:
MSD = yj
SIN = j(S1N)j
9
i=l
(520)
216
SS
(S
IN)'
/ N, S
(522)
Forthe Ilh factor, the sum of the squaresdue to variation about the
is
mean
3
SSi =jM_,
j=l
*(SIN SIN) 2
(523)
ssi
/SS*100%
(524)
Using the same method described in chapter 4.6.7, the relative contribution of each
method on the X,
both
be
the
at
surface and centre can
calculated and shown in
Table 23. It can be seen that, for both the surface and centre point, the same order is
XV
84%
For
X,
to
the
the
temperature
the
about
given.
contributes
centre
rolling
I
,
6 times the contribution of the Hm I L. The influences of roll temperature and roll
by
1998)
(Wells
the
In
Wells
X,.
use
et
al
the
study
et al's
speedon
are negligible.
X,
the
to
temperature
is about
of sensitivity analysis, the contribution of the rolling
70%, which fit very well with the present work. Roll temperature and roll speed
That
the
than
X,.
is
centre.
the
at
the
surface
at
exert slightly more influence on
217
vital.
It should be noted that the aforementioned analysis in Table 23 is only valid within
the experimental parameters setting ranges. For the Hm /L,
it decreases from
4
initial
breakdown pass towards the values of 0.3 in the
the
approximately
in
finishing hot rolling pass. Raghunathan and Sheppard reported that, for AA5056, at
least 15% thickness reduction is required to ensure that SRX occurs (Raghunathan
Sheppard
1989). To ensure the occurrence of SRX, the minimum reduction is
and
(equivalent
/L)
20%
0.813
H..
to
set
of
in the present study. Due to the limitation
be
large
laboratory
The
the
the
of
mill,
roll speed can not
assigned a very
value.
15.6
from
is
5.2rpm
from
300mm/s
100nun/s
to
to
to
rpm.
equivalent
range
Comparing those roll speeds with industrial rolling, the values appear to be small.
When the roll speed increases, far greater influence could be exerted by the roll
speed.
The average effect of each parameter level on the spread is shown in Fig545.
I,!,
X,
be
From the Fig. 5
that
seen
can
it
45 ,.
decrease
increases with
the
of all
I
observation.
This
experimental
workers'
most
parameters.
with
agrees
L
218
An
u
,0
ry.
c
0.2
0.4
0.6
Hm/L
0.8
20
60
80 100 120
40
Roll Te m pe ratu re (OC)
7
0
d
5
10
(d)
M
CD
0
U)
4
cu
3
2C
.0
20
U
50
100
150
Roll Peripheral
200
250
300
Speed (mm/s)
350
500
450
400
Rolling Temperature (OC)
550
219
The procedure and formulae, which are presented in the following sections, are
first
developed
by
from
extracted
a rolling pass schedule package, which was
Terry Sheppard, and has been modified by Terry Sheppard and the present
data
industrial
lack
Due
to
the
and the complicated nature of
author.
of sufficient
industrial
practical
rolling,
by
the
rolling pass schedule either
optimising
by
the
or
network,
and
neural
system
intelligent methods, such as expert
for
is
the
present
practical
not
method,
conventional constrained optimisation
factors
Some
the
Shape
shape
with
associated
author.
control is not considered.
thermal
design
camber is
and
camber
the
roll
of
control
and
control such as
therefore not considered. At the end Ofthis chapter, three examples are shown.
In the first two pass schedules, the computed rolling load, power and pass
The
third
pass
temperature are compared with industrial measurements.
load
line.
The
for
and
designed
rolling
computed
production
a
new
schedule is
from
industrial
the
other
predictions
temperature
with
are compared
pass
models.
220
Input data fall into two categories: mill stand and driving data, and
rolling stock
data. Mill stand and driving data include the roll diameter, the roll barrel length,
the roll material, the maximum roll force, the maximum roll torque, the
bending
force
maximum
and the maximum power. The rolling stock data
include density, final dimensions, heat expansion coefficient, specific heat
heat
capacity,
conductivity, emissivity, Young's modulus and temperature.
The length is calculated based on the principle of volume equality. The width
deformation
by
described
the
after a pass
is calculated
new spread equation
in
chapter 4.6.8. Although in some passes, edge trimming or end shearing may
least
be
the
applied at
when end
occur,
principle of volume equality will still
shearing occurs
The calculation of the yield strength plays a vital role in ensuring the successof
depends
h
The
design
many
on
gt
streng
the
yield
schedule.
pass
of a rolling
factors: the reduction (determining strain), the roll speed (determining strain
rate), and temperature.
221
Step I to step 6 is repeated until the last pass exit gauge is just greater than the
for
draft
the
finished
The
to
this
meet
adjusted
pass
is
specified
coil gauge.
target gauge. If the last pass reduction is too small or too large to give an
is
determined.
last
load
pass reduction
acceptable rolling
or good shape, an ideal
The drafts on the previous passes are altered slightly to accommodate the ideal
last pass.
222
th
4
No
The rolls pull the slab into the roll gap through the net frictional force at entry to
the roll bite. Since energy is dissipated in overcoming friction, thus increasing
:n
friction means increasing force and power requirements. More seriously, high
friction could damage the slab surface. Therefore, a comprise has to be made to
it
damage
balancing
friction
the
the
could
reduction and
ensure a
coefficient
by
be
dHmaxmay
The
thickness
equating
calculated
reduction
cause.
maximum
the horizontal forces to yield
dHmax
=, u
(61)
higher
Thus,
the
the
R
the
friction
roll radius.
is
coefficient,
where t is the
Z:)
thickness
the
the
possible
ftiction, the larger the roll radius,
maximum
greater is
formula
lower
is
this
than
much
hot
the
In
reduction
practical
rolling,
reduction.
dependent
the
becomes
bite
on
the
more
roll
Propelling
the
into
slab
indicates.
operatorI experience and confidence.
223
dH <
dHmax
H2
H,
=
dH
(62)
The reduction of the first pass is often assigned a value much lower than the
for
draft.
first
There
The
this.
are several reasons
purpose is
maximum possible
to produce satisfactory gauge and an acceptable slab surface since the flatness of
the cast ingot may not be perfect nor the gauge precise. In this context it is also
lubricant.
The
that
the
to
acts
efficiently
as
a
roll
emulsion
ensure
necessary
is
to produce compressive residual stresseson the surfaces to
second purpose
deformation
distribution
life.
fatigue
The
the
the
roll
in
state
and
stress
improve
4.4.
discussed
has
been
breakdown
first
the
the
in chapter
rolling
pass in
gap of
The third purpose, the major reason, is to assure a certain thickness value after
the first deformation since the thickness of the cast and the result of any scalping
be
expected.
is usually as not accurate as should
This average strain rate is simply derived by dividing the total equivalent strain
the
Z:)
through
time
roll gap.
total
the
passing
over
2;rN
e=*
.
60
: K*Ln
H'
dH
H,
(63)
Z
ZenerHolloman
6.2.4 Calculating the
parameter
calculation
and
control
below,
this parameter strongly influences
As discussed
both
of
continuum and structural mechanics.
224
Z =E
exp
A[sinh(a57)]17
__Ldef
8.314T
(64)
IzI
57=
*Ln
aA
21n
Y'n
(65)
It can be seen that the workhardeninor effect, which is obvious in cold rolling or
when the rolling temperature drops below 2500C, is not considered in equation
(65). So that for the case of cold rolling or when the temperature is below
2500C,the constitutive equation must be modified to involve a strain sensitivity
tenn. The NortonHoff Law could typically be applied.
(E
exp(j8T)Em.
EO
(66)
There are several fonnulae available for this calculation. The performance of
been
has
industrial
laboratory
for
fonnula
reported in chapter
rolling
and
each
4.6.6. The new spread coefficient f6miula is written:
225
S", = Ln "2=0.2187
W,
Jill )R
0.1071*(
f R*
WdH
,
848
1.481
0,
H,
H,
2.6978
(67)
It should be noted that this equation is only valid for the ratio W,IHI :! 8, where
the formula is regressed. When the ratio W,1H, > 8, no width variation is
because
deformation
plane
allowed
strain
prevails.
W2
*
W,
)
exp(S,,,
=
(68)
If the operation of edge trimming and shear copping are ignored and the cross
deformation
remains rectangular, according to the principle of
section after
be
leaving
length
the
the
roll gap can
after
workpiece
volume equality,
by:
expressed
LIWIHI
W2H2
(69)
Allowance for edging trimming or shearing can be dealt with at the appropriate
pass.
6.2.9 Rolling load models
load
for
fonnulae
the calculation of rolling
There are three commonly used
OrowanPascoe's
Sim's
They
1957).
during hot flat rolling (Larke
equation,
are
Z:I
by
loads
found
Larke
that
calculated
Ekelund's
rolling
equation.
equation and
data
those
than
Sim's equation are always more in accordance with measured
226
by
obtained use of the OrowanPascoeand the Ekelund equations(Larke 1957).
HenceSim's equation is adoptedin the presentschedulingprogram.
P=c
WJR(H,
H2)
 Qs
(610)
is
W
the stock width, R is the roll radius, the Q, factor is defined as
where
(H
7c tan
Hj
H,
H2H,
R2H2
Ln
HIH,
(611)
is
Hn
the thickness at the supposed neutral point in the roll gap. The
where
in
(610)
is
a*
equation
called the modified plane strain yield stress. In
symbol
hot rolling, especially in the hot rough rolling, there is a strong
Z) friction between
distribution
To
the
through
thickness
4:
and
stock,
shear
stress
not
uniform.
)
roll
is
take into account this effect, u* is defined by (Atack et al 1988):
IM2
2
a
J3
(612)
1984):
(Lalli
by
Lalli's
be
expression
where m, can calculated
) 0.5
(I
MI=
(613)
_M2C2
The
Generally.
is
of
m,
value
(613),
In equation
constant.
are
and
c
m
associated with
distribution
the inhomogeneous
for
formula
the calculation
The
thickness.
empirical
(rate)
through
strain
of
ofM2
(Atack
by
et
is given
al 1988):
IL
*
H,,
0.25
0.75
+
in, =
and
(614)
227
(tf
F=P
I
+ th
)J3 1
257
(615)
is
P
load
the
rolling
where
when no tension is applied defined in equation (6t
front
the
is
coiling tension and t b is the back coiling tension.
Due to the elastic deformation of the roll, the phenomenon of roll flattening
occurs. An assumption is made that the arc of contact remains circular in shape,
being
R,
R'
than
the nominal radius of the roll.
greater
its radius of curvature is
R'
=1+
R
C*P
W, *(HI H2
(616)
* 105
_V2 )/7rE=2.1
3
just
found
that
iterations were sufficient.
present authors
Sim's
load
equation
6.2.11 Calculating the modified rolling
using
VR77(HI
W.
)
H, *QS
2)
(617)
2
where a"
flow
stress.
modified
Where a
is the
228
a=
VR
*dH
Xn
(618)
VR * dH is the
contact length, Xn is the distance from the entry to the
where
/
When
W,
H,
9,
lever
be
the
>
point.
neutral
arm can
calculated by
FR7
0.5
CR'
(0.5 
37* 4LI
R
dH
(619)
A'=
for
during
0.43
the preparatory stages of rolling and
rolls used
where
A/=0.48 for finishing rolls (Larke 1957).
TORQUE
Pa
TOROUE
 Pa
for
done
2Pa,
work
Fie, 62 Basic torque for both rolls equals
Z*
1962)
Larke
(After
47rPa
both rolls per revolution equals
6.2.13 The torque J
J= 2P a
229
(621)
ob
= cosi
7R#0.5 * dH
(622)
R lf
vbile
H, +H2
22
wl
*
+W2
Rl*CH
(623)
*J*O
77
AT ..at =
where fl=0.95
PC
h
(624)
vbite
is the coefficient
from
the plastic
of energy converted
heat
is
density,
the
deforination energy to heat,
the
capacity.
c
slab
is
jo
6.2.18 Temperature loss to the rolls
2[H
,Troll
R(T,,,, 
Trol
w
.
(W2
p*c*
VR
*
dH
dH
VRT*dH
dH)* H.,
(625)
230
where
HR
IS
the conductive heat transfer coefficient between the rolls and the
T,,,,,,
last
the
slab,
is
pass stock temperature in degree Kelvin.
[T.4
Itail
Ar
WI
ar
T4
mat
22
amb
T
tail
+HC
p *C
1.25
T
1WI
T
tail'
mat
amb
22
Ih
2 2' 2)
(626)
Tarnb
where
is the ambient temperature degree Kelvin,
in
tall
exposed
slab
air, Hc is the convective heat transfer coefficient
between the stock and outside media such as rolling emulsion and air, a, is
the StephanBoltzmann constant, A, is the emissivity.
p*c*.
Iw Ih
V'2 2' 2)
(627)
AT,,,,, AT,,,,,
T+
lead
'AT
ATtail
(628)
Kdf
41rN
60
aP'
(629)
231
Kbearing
47r
*
::
P"
2
*, U, */Iol
DrN
60
(DI
+D2)
(630)
=Kdef+Khearing
(631)
0P
=K
total/
Klim
(632)
L2
(633)
6.3 Verification
=I/+t
fail
(634)
by an industrial schedule
232
Table 24, from which the predictions and the measurements in terms
of
workpiece temperature, rolling load and total power are compared. The rolled
material is aluminium alloy AA3003. The cast ingot is 580 mm thick, 5000 mm
long and 1800 mm wide. The starting rolling temperature is 5600C. The required
exit thickness is 3 mm. Rolling is performed in a single stand fourhigh
The
mill.
nominal working roll diameter is 990mm. The diameters of
reversing
bearing
roll
and the supporting roll bearing are 660 mm and 950 mm
working
respectively. The maximum roll load is 30MN, and the maximum power
is
M.
7.360
available
From table 24, it can be seen that a total of 19 passesare required to produce a
The
for
from
relative reduction
satisfactory product.
each pass increases steadily
the beginning to the end. To achieve a satisfactory rate, the roll speed also
increases from the first pass and remains at the speed limit after pass 12 where
A
17,18
plane strain conditions prevail.
coiling operation is performed in pass
definition
19.
14.
The
The
Z7)
of the
and
shearing operation is conducted after pass
determined
gauge where shearing occurs and which passesare coiled are usually
during the initial design of the mill.
The variations of the computed pass temperature, rolling load and total power
for each pass are plotted in Fig. 63 to Fig. 65. It can be seen that Fig. 63 shows
is
first
12
for
the
drops
the
slab not
that the temperature
passes where
slowly
long. Less time is spent on passage through the roll gap and exposes in the
is
longer.
More
time
As
the
spent on
slab gets
rolling continues,
interpass time.
for
longer
hence
to
the slab is exposed air
period.
a
passing through the roll gap,
becomes
the
At the same time, as the slab gets thinner,
roll chilling effect
drop.
large
temperature
Z:)
increasingly
significant, resulting in a
14
v
v2
E
CA
kr)
00
kr )
"Zt
ff)
00
r, 
00
10 Cl)
tr)
rn
(I
C: )
rkf)
C' 4 C4 C' 4 
m
t
11.0 r
C7,
\C
r
r
Iql kr)
kr)
r
11.0 rfn
tr)
rn
\C) Oo rn
C14 
r
rn
tl
110
110
Zt
C7, 11
.2
Co
0) LO (D Lf) (0
OD 1 OD LO ;ILO LO 
6
CD C.
0
>1
Er
CO
C6 C6 C6 C6 C6 C6 06 C6 6
0)
1 Lr)
0
0)
rD CD IM
IIR 0 LO N
CY)
o
C6 r r (D rl:
OC) N
0)
co
Ce)
CY) r
C3)
cy)
qt
0
C.
co
00 0)
C3) co
0)
Lo
cc) C.
0
CY) Ict
t
r,
0
C.
It
cy)
0
r
co
00
0')
rLr)
'tt
CY) N
CO Nt
(D
0
C.
a)
c::
u
Lr)
tr)
C)
rco
CY)
(.0
U)
LO
(,0
r
co CY) r
kr)
kr)
tr)
Co
Ce)
a;
c)
kr)
tf)
V)
m
Lr)
Lf)
Co
CC) C))
kn
o
co
r
o
N
6
CC)
C6 C6 C6 co co CC)C6 C6
Ep
r C:) C6 Ict
C6 C6 C6 C6 C6 C6 C6 C6 6
(o
zl m co
'IT
r
r
Lo (D
,:1 r
N
00
114 00
U)
co
;t
CC) 0)
CN
0)
0)
CD
CO
0) c3i c6 r: 00
C)
m
V)
4
C4
C,
kr)
Lr)
kr)
Co
CC) U)
V)
C6 co 6
0 0
C.
cc) co
CC)
10
N
00 CC) rrl LO LO ICT CC) (D 0)
co
Z'
.
LO CV) 1 (0
CO CO tl 0) 00
N
CO CD C

zI
CO
0') cc
00 t'
't
Nil
00
CN
cy)
0)
00
LO
U)
't
C)
U')
CD
OD
C)
,I
L6
C)
CN
C)
C)
0)
0)
r
C)
IC kr) (N 00
cl
C:) cc)
6
c7i
c)
C) Lr) U) 'Cl 'tt
C.
cz
;
4
C)
Lo
C/)

Lo
Lr)
Lr)
T
"r
T
Lo
"t
't
Lo
cl
LO
U)
,t
,t
00
co
r 00 co co co cc)
C,4
C14
t
,
4
,
6
,
6
CN
cy;
rl_
co
t
(
CY)
(D
(::
I; 0) CO
0
zt CY) CY) CN C14 T C
CY) CY) CO CO CO 00
q
C\l
CD
U)
Lo
Lo
C;)
0)
cc) CD
Co
LO
Lo
Lo
LO
't
C,4
0
0)
N
CD
C)
N
CD
C)
ct
N
C)
0
0)
LO
CO CO rO C0 CD
c")
,T 'IT
7
"t
7
It
CO
"T
LO
1
C%4
0
CT)
C0
CN
0
M
C0
C)
6
C6
CN C)
1,::
C%4
0
M
(D
C%4
C)
0)
CO
',T
7
CM
CD 0)
0)
co
C4
C, 4
Do
fn
(n
00
oc
C'4
kr)
tr)
tr)
tr)
kr)
Lr)
C: )
00
M.
E
0
C, 4
oo
Do
00
kr)
00
kr)
cz
H
cr
rn
. Zl
a_
C1
rn
kf)
C, 4
rn
00
tj
PAGE
NUMBERING
AS
ORIGINAL
235
600
500
400
2300
,
Prediction
Measurement
E 200
100
0
10
15
20
Pass Number
Fig.63 Comparison of the pass temperature for hot rolling of aluminium alloy
AA3003
The predicted
well
with
the industrial
The heat transfer coefficient between the rolls and the slab used in the
heat
kWm
K1.
The
100
2
choice of
calculation of the average pass temperature is
4.
discussed
been
has
hot
in chapter
transfer coefficient in industrial
rolling
Here, only one point is emphasised: this coefficient varies with rolling
f6miulae
Other
the
as
chosen
are
in
used
constants
conditions considerably.
236
16
14
Prediction
`12
Z
2miu
m
8
Measurement
2
0
05
10
Pass Number
15
20
Fig. 64 Comparison of the rolling load for hot rolling of alurninium alloy
AA3003
Fig.64 clearly shows that the predicted rolling load also agrees very well with
the measurement except pass 12 and pass 14. All rolling loads are less than the
limit
becomes
load
limit,
30MN.
In
the
the
this
schedule,
power
rolling
pass
To
main constraint.
control the temperature variation and preventing edge
limit
by
be
the
of
simply satisfying
cracking, the reduction can not
chosen
for
limit
load
to
rolling
pursue a maximum productivity, especially
and power
the first few passes. This process is usually repeated several times to find the
designing
Therefore,
a pass schedule is not
appropriate reduction and roll speed.
be
Many
considered
aspects must
a simple mathematical optimisation problem.
load
The
the
is of paramount
rolling: 5
calculation of
and adjusted properly.
.
load,
The
the
for
predicted rolling
greater the accuracy in
importance
industry.
C)
automatic control
the less effort necessary is required in use of the gauge
become
less
Higher
a possibility.
investment
system.
product quality and
237
10
9
8
7
%. 00
6
5
4
Prediction
3
2
Measurement
1
0
0
10
15
20
Pass Number
Fig. 65 Comparison of the power for hot rolling of aluminium alloy
AA3003
Fig. 65 shows the comparison between the predicted and the measuredpower. A
very good agreement is given. Generally, the prediction is slightly higher than
the measurement. An underpowered unit is the most obvious risk since this will
lead to a reduction in productivity due to stalling. Thus we must ensure that the
motor is more than adequate for any immediate or future workloads.
6.3.2
This 19pass schedule, see Table 25, is taken from the literature (Atack et al
1988). The material is aluminium alloy AA5052. The cast ingot is about 540
The
1371
long
temperature
8173
thick,
is
starting
rolling
wide.
mm
and
mm
nim
is
is
Rolling
3.81
The
5220C.
thickness
mm.
required exit
approximate
The
fourhigh
in
nominal working roll
reversing mill.
performed
a single stand
diameteris 9651nni.
238
The heat transfer coefficient between the rolls and the slab used
in the
2
calculation of the average pass temperature is 50 Min K1. Other constants
formulae
the
used in
are chosen as m=0.6, c=0.6, T,011=373K,Tamb=313K,
a, =5.67xlO', E, =0.5, Hc=20 kWM
2 K.1
from
taken
the measurement. The measurement of temperature was conducted
is
by radiation pyrometer. Thus it is not surprising that higher predictions are given
for the last few passesthan the measurement.
From the above two examples, one conclusion can be drawn: the present
temperature, rolling load and power model are reliable and show a fairly high
accuracy.
600
500
400
16
Prediction
300
Measurement,
200
100
0
0
10
15
20
Pass Number
for
hot
temperature
Comparison
rolling of aluminium
Ficy.66
of the pass
AA5052
alloy
d
La
d
1 11
&(D
bli
(D
>=
<
s
E
U')
E
u
u 1) N
cy) ,IN
4
N
4
I
(o
cc) cc) N
1 0
flo
(L)
C.
0 Lf)
CU
r
co
o
0)
00
r
(D
r
LO 0)
(o
CY) CY) co
co 00 t:
OD qt OD C.
0
N
C%4 (y) 00
0)
LO
r(co (o
LO CN
0 CY) T.cc)
) LO CY) m 0
CN
I .
r,
 .
r,
C14 N
(D
1 CY) CY) 00
L6
LO 0)
M "It
U)
CN
LO
0)
U)
CO
CY)
1:0 
CY) co CY) C)
.
.
"i
94, CN CN
Lo
.
ICT LO 0) N
;1 04 ;1 M
LO
LO
0
LO T.LO N
rlC)
'It
cl
(Y)
C14
N
N
T
r (N co OD 00 0
C) OD T V T (D
CD LO CY) T o) 00
ce) vi C56
<
CO N
0
C.
N
LO 
CD (6 pl LC5(6 4
(6 (6 cc; (D
L6
C
Itt
00
cl
CY)
It
TC
,
LO
0)
CY)
liziCY)
It
CY)
Lr) (D
m
P N0) 00 rl0
C. T CY) N
rl_
C) N
OD
0) CY)
co
CD C) CY)
C) 0
0
co
rl(D
lqt
a)
r,_
0) M C)
T C
00 LO 0) 0)
E;
c:
E
;:T CY) 0) 1 00
M LO qT 0) C)
00 00 (3) LO N
" 6
lit
lc:
N
cz
0)
0')
C)
LO N
ce) LO rlC") LO r(D tt
00 6
6
6
C;
OC)
IN
6
Tl6
CN
(D
0)
'q:r "t
O C? ci
0)
a)
CY) c
0
(D
tlrll 04
LO
co
C%4
C)
N
C)
co
rl00

CY)
C5
I
C CD
LO
ct
C44
0
bl)
2
LIJ
C.)
10
Qc)
U')
T
lqr
CC) (.0
LO
cy)
a)
LC) C.
0
T
CD
U)
ct
00
C)
cyi
c3i
,I
110
CIA
V)
:T
.
Lo
(D
co
CO
r
C.
0
oo
TCY)
t: r
I
r
ff)
'tt
00 00 00 00 rn rn t*
*
6
oo oo C, 06 oc C)o r
kr)
tr)
kr)
U
7
U) Lf.)
kr)
CO CO CY) C3)
r':
C6
Ir
TLr)
Lr)
U)
00
tr)
, I
Lr)
Lr)
Lr)
kr)
tr)
kr)
04
0
(.
o6 0
0
LO LO
CN 0)
Lr)
Lr)
CY)
(: )
U*)
Lr)
'I
T r
zl 0)
ci
tf)
U')
C)
T
tn
LO
r r
C' (6 C6 C.
co
C7"
CO
t'
C7,
T
r.
c7s,
'T
co
C.
0
C7. )
r
rl
C)
a)
CY)
C14
C3)
cy)
qj
C0
T
U)
1
T
, t
r
00
C)
CY)
LO 0c) co
NT , cy)
Lr)
Lo
r
ci
r
Ep
Lo
C,
r
cc)
zl
,1
rl
P
Lr) U)
Lr)
Lr)
(0
CO r 0
CO
CN
cy") CY) 00
LO
r
LO
q:t
C\l
C,
CY)
LO
C'
C'
CO
00
kr)
V.)
C)
Lr)
V)
It
I
rN CY) CD C (P
N
N
lqt
6
C6 (M r
C) (M
r,LO "'t '14 'It
q1t
Lo
V)
Lo
U)
LO
Lr)
Lr)
Lo
Lo
U)
LO
(D
CO ( 0
(0
(0
co
CD
rO
(D
(D
.
.
C0
.
co
r
0
C.
Lr)
co
M
P,
C9
;IM
N
;T
C3) C)
CC)
(D
CN
CO
(D 00 CC)
CD
0 C:) C:)
C14 C'14 C
c))
(s)
6
Cj
cc)
Lo
cy)
C.0
cz
F
T
Lo
,I
,t
CD
U)
CC)
C%j
Lo Lo
C4 N
,:
r
"M
61
C
cc)
.
1
Lo
05
3 q
CY)
Lr) r
1 (3)
64
C'14 N
I
WIT
rC)
Cq
C%4 04
r,
4
4
:
j
.: C6 5co c) : "t "4
0
C.
co
C"i
Lo
CIA
cy)
r,
"t
C:)
Co
fl0
0)
co
Lo
C/
cr,
":j.
C
"t
Lf)
'T
0
(D
)
rN
0:
CD I C\l I r
(y)
r,
CY)
00
CD
T
1q:
6
T'
fl
CY) ('f)
r rI
CN
CC)
Itt
CO
00
LO
LO
LO
C)
r,
C,
CD
I
LO
LO C:) co
r N
00 ,, 0)
cy) CY) CN C'4 r,  "'r,  r,1

C,4

fn

'tt

00
rl ':
0)
Cr)
00
co
Lrs
CY)
CY)
co
(9 Lr C0 U) 00
Lr) CY)
N
I
p
a)

r
co
C)
CN
"T CY)
TC3) LO
00 't
CY) C14 (N tV
(D
CN
4
Lo

I
17y)
C0
I
cc)
LI)
o
cyi
"ZI,
CC)
Lo
LO
I
t")

,c

r
OC

""

240
25
Measurement(Average)
20
Prediction
ooft%
Measurement(Maximum)
10
0
5
10
15
20
Pass Number
Fig. 67 Comparison of the rolling load for hot rolling of aluminium
alloy AA5052
10
9
8
7
6
%... o
5
0
CL
Prediction
Measurement(Average)
Measurement(Maximum)
1
n
10
15
20
Pass Number
hot
for
68 Comparison
Fi:o,.
the
rolling of aluminium alloy
power
1111of
AA5052
241
reversing mill.
conducted.
To avoid any possibility of leaking industrial sensitivity, some necessary mill
setup parameters, such as the roll speed, the entry and exit thickness can not
listed here. Only the computed rolling load and the average workpiece
temperature are shown. For simplicity, predictions from two industrial models
are abbreviated as "Ind I" and "Ind2" in the following figures. These two models
from
two international wellknown aluminium companies. It should be
are
emphasisedhere that the present author knows nothing about their models. Only
the predicted results are provided.
Pass
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
T (OC)
T (OC)
T (OC)
P (MN)
P (MN)
P (MN)
P (MN)
Present
"Ind I
"Ind2"
Present
"Ind I
('Ind2"
FEA
283
277.698
276.065
277.376
277.962
283
279
277
278
279
279
277
275
274
276
270
267
263
256
252
244
239
233
17.1215
17.6393
24.9643
23.9578
23.0938
22.3626
21.7006
21.0306
20.1967
15.5
15.3
22
21.33
20.33
19
18.17
16.67
15.6
271
268
226
19.4054
18.45
18.76
26.26
25.92
25.3
24.6
23.89
22.03
21.03
20.04
218
18.7377
19.16
18.33
19.07
27.26
27.24
27.41
24.91
22.47
19.72
17.54
15.81
14.03
277.789
276.81 8
274.972
274.963
10
273.853
11
271.552
15
13.67
242
30
25
20
15
10
Present work
Indl
lnd2
FEA
0
10
12
Pass Number
different
by
load
methods
Fio.r.69 Comparison of the rolling
predicted
industrial
I,
(Ind I and Ind2 are the abbreviation of industrial model and
2
model respectively)
243
design of rolling pass schedule is not an easy task even for those larger
have
companies who
a considerable amount of industrial data.
300
C)
250
0
zuu
CL
E 150
100
Present work
Indl
A Ind2
50
0
10
12
Pass Number
Ind2
I
the
temperature(Ind
are
Comparison
610
and
Fig.
the
workpiece
of
2
1,
respectively)
model
industrial
and
model
abbreviation of industrial
244
Modelling the multipass hot rolling by using FEM is not an easy task. The
complicated relationship of the flow stress, microstructure, temperature, and the
has
be
to
equivalent strain all
considered simultaneously. Lack of precise data of
any aspect may cause computing errors. However, due to the dearth of sufficient
data
and the complex nature, the work in the simulation of multipass
industrial
hot rolling of aluminium alloys is an emerging technology. It is therefore normal
to ignore one or two factors.
The main drawback of the finite element analyses in this pass schedule is the
difficulty
between
and
of consideration of static recrystallisation
recovery
flow
In
the
the
the
microstructure variation on
influence of
passes. other words,
fully
is
not
stress
deal
how
is
to
the
with the accumulated
reflected in
problem
computation,
hot
that
the
In
accepted
generally
it
is
rolling
process,
equivalent strain.
Recovery
by
is
only plays
softening mechanism mainly caused recrystallisation.
If
it
is
hence
recrystallisation is assumed
omitted.
always
a very minor role and
by
be
flow
little
the
have
pass
the
accumulated
strain can
to
stress,
effect on
be
is
total
the
reduced
If
will
strain
considered,
and
occurs
recrystallisation
pass.
by the X(0 !X:! I)* 100 percent of the recrystallisation. The remaining strain
isO
passedinto next pass
X)ET
ET
'where
(2001)
Mirza
(1999)
by
Winden
static
et al
According to the work
and
hot
industrial
first
the
during
the
does
in
passes
six
occur
not
recrystallisation
first
For
directly.
the
be
Hence
the
AA3104.
accumulated
strain can
rolling of
if
doubted
be
FEA
from
load
all
not
should
seven passes, the computed rolling
boundary conditions, and the mechanical and thermal properties are applied
the
FEA
be
the
overpredicts
69,
that
Fig.
slightly
From
seen
can
it
properly.
deformation
local
the
The
that
first
for
is
load
reason
the
passes.
seven
rolling
for
the
of
calculation
adopted
are
rate,
temperature
strain
and
as
such
variables,
is
local
greater
usually
the
rate
In
strain
FEA.
the
flow
plate surface,
the
stress in
245
than the averagedvalue in the roll gap and the local temperatureis lower than
the averagedpasstemperature.Hence the calculation of load by FEA is likely to
be greater than by the normal pass schedule.Thesepass schedules
are usually
subjectedto arbitrary constantsto overcomethis problem.
The effect of the accumulated equivalent strain on the computed rolling load
is
by
accomplished
changing the flow stress through two ways. For those kinds of
constitutive equations that include the strain term, such as NortonHoff law (see
(66)),
influence
flow
the
the
the
equation
of
strain on
stress is obvious. The
second way is more complicated. In metal forming, it is generally accepted that
more than 90% deformation energy is dissipated into heat. The plastic
deformation work can be simply calculated by
W=U*E
(635)
This means that the greater the accumulated equivalent strain, the more plastic
deformation work is done, the more heat is generated, and hence the possibility
description
flow
higher
This
The
therefore
temperatures.
stress is
reduced.
of
by
load
FEA
decline
the
the
curve predicted
rolling
of
can reasonably explain
for the later rolling passesin Fig. 69.
by
either empirical models or physical models.
246
The Fl) and the analytical approach always underpredict the surface temperature of
the slab, and when the ratio of roll radius/slab thickness decrease, the predicted
by
FD
improves.
The
the
the
temperature
slab centre
value in
precision
predicted
fits well with the measured temperature, but there is a high level of error when
friction
heat
due
to
the
generation and
omission of
using the analytical approach
by
FEM
in
distribution
the
The
the
temperature
would appear
slab predicted
work.
to be the most accurate.
Due to the limitation of equipment capacity, the slab used in laboratory experiments
lower
is
thermal
the
than
The
the
mass
thennal
much
slab
mass of
is usually small.
drop
large
in
temperature
even in
a
of rolls. The chill effect is significant, resulting
the
the
thermal
slab
of
In
mass
the slab centre. the early passes of industrial rolling,
Contrary
to
the
chill effect is not obvious.
is of the same order as the rolls and
laboratory rolling, the temperature in the slab centre remains sensibly constant even
between
difference
temperature
in
after 2 passes. To minimise the striking
247
The significant difference in spread behaviour between the slab surface and the slab
centreconfirms the need to employ a threedimensional FEM programme to analyse
the slab rolling processes.
FR(5
The equation <C0.06
HI
for
lateral
For
the
the
prediction
of
is valid
profile.
the early passes in the industrial rolling practice, all existing spread formulae,
fomiula
formula,
fall
Winden's
However
Winden's
to
the
except
predict
spread.
does not give a good prediction for laboratory experimental result and may not be
it
because
applicable when considering a variety of mills and roll passes
only
but
factors,
less
the
the
considers
reduction,
neglects the most
important influence
important factor, the ratio of width to the slab thickness.
248
Through integrating FEA with the Taguchi experimental design method, it is found
that the ratio of width to thickness has overwhelming influence on the spread,
followed by the thickness reduction, the ratio of the roll radius to thickness and the
slab temperature.
11
LnW' =0.2187*
W,
0.1071 , *Idh
vrR
H,
0.848
H,
1.48
2.6978
Subgrain size can be modelled accurately by FEM provided that the correct
methodology is followed. In the prediction of microstructural evolution, accurate
Aberrant
models
empirical
when
given
are
temperature
results
prediction of
is vital.
by
Previous
work
are applied directly into FEM without any modification.
Dashwood et al and Chen et al. all failed to give rational explanation to the
for
The
suitable
not
is
model
two
these
empirical
to
equations.
modification made
the prediction of subgrain evolution since it is established in the steady state regime
249
just
is
The
a
statistical
relationship.
physical model based on temperature,
and
increment of strain, strain rate and previous state of subgrain size can predict
distribution
hot
of
subgrain
size under
accurate
working conditions and widely
Metallurgical
parameter.
varying
initial
the
the
such
as
steady
state
subgrain size,
subgrain size, and the
parameters,
d45=
The
equation
characteristic strain.
AS
Cs(5S
S
More
still
is
not
mature.
 o5)dE
is
dislocation
to
the
required
relate
subgrain
size
with internal
metallurgical work
density.
On the modelling
of dislocation
density,
misorientation
hardening behaviour
Various physical models have been successfully linked with the commercial FEM
dislocation
density,
i.
The
misorientation
predicted results, e. subgTain size,
code.
It
fit
the
that
flow
the
the
indicates
observation.
experimental
stress, well with
and
FEM
feasible.
Integrating
to
the
the
physical models
present research thoughts are
industry
It
be
to
with a powerful
more precise. provides
code enables simulation
tool to improve and optimise the existing processes.
TI with time can not reconcile the prediction with the measurement effectively,
basis
Z"
improve
the
"averaged
significantly
can
strain
of
the
on
while averaging
increments
basis
Z
history
the
of
of
on
of
the prediction accuracy. Averaging the
Changing
the
basis
Z
time.
the
of
better
than
on
averaging
strain gives
prediction
equivalent
all
since
in
recommended
not
is
methods
summing strain components
in
enough
be
time
small
the
is
the
increment
theoretically
if
same
strains should
FEA. Except Liserre and Goncalves's model, all remaining empirical models give
250
Good agreement with FEM results and the industrial measurement shows that the
for
the design of a rolling pass schedule is reliable and is
present method
large
by
difference
The
those
comparable with
models used
companies.
marked
between predictions by the use of different industrial models indicate that the
designof rolling pass schedule is not an easy task even for those industrial company
that have access to huge amounts of industrial data. The temperature, rolling load
high
this
accuracy.
andpower model given in
chapter show very
251
Henseland Spittel's and Voce's model. We should note that Hensel and Spittel's
has
been
set as one of the default constitutive equationsin the latest version
model
FORGE3
FORGE2.
A new material databasehas also been provided for
and
of
variousaluminium alloys.
The ideal way to cope with the flow stress is in using the physical model, which is
basedon dislocation density, subgrain.size and misorientation.
evolution
dislocations to networks to
(i.
Various
testing
be
e. plane strain
methods
subgrains) should
established.
be
torsion)
systematically studied, and establish
should
compression, rolling and
Further
SRX
work
for
to
models.
testing
reliable
establish
procedures
experimental
SRX
texture
evolution.
to
and
the
is using
simulate
physical
252
The accuracy of the power model needs to be improved. A new formula for the
be
lever
Extending
the
proposed.
arm
should
present pass scheduling
of
calculation
for
four
for
from
to
three
tandem
reversing
mill
or
stands
a
single
stand
package
Designing
is
the
the
an
expert
system
and
making
package
object.
next
rolling
friendly to the user would make the design package more commercial.
re)
tr)
r14
00 M
C7 00
C.d =
M
00
C Cl\
,
W  crs
011\CrI
00 00 \.10 lc
(71\ cl OC) 00

0, o"
z
73
kr)
00 00 00 lc Cl
C711\
(7 cl C7\ c7l

(01 C:11\
, , c., C". = =
=
q
03 7 0 C7N
M C13z
>, ct ct
cz
ct
>
>
m
;..4 ;, 0 0
0 0
C73 M
to
c: z
: v
bO "
03 =
C3 M
q
C4
, 7" C7
U.,
e14
rA
,,
0
;..,
; 0.4
C.)
4.. a
u
F = E "o t,0
.
u
4
U
4
&
0
&C.
)
U
C4
bj)
 C)
="
&
r.
11 1
U
;.. (
03
rA
rn
10
tf)
C7 00
oll
rIt
00
\c
kr)
00
kr)
C:
IC 
7T
00
r'l
(, I Cq
C C C 0 C) C) C C)
rn
IN
Iin = (::
)
',I ,
=,
c) C5
.
('A
.
R ci)
C>
C4
)
(C:
oc
11C
00
OC)
00
011
r"
OC)
(1)
00
OC)
F
cl
6,
C*)
cl
C4
C4
N
8
0:
cn
ct
C13
ct
IND
cl)
.
S4
C14
CIA
C)
C4
C)
C:, (:::
(:) C14
tr) (::
)
C
CA)
rn
)
(:::
(:::
C))
(:: )
lz
lei
Ic
x
un
06
00
ct
tj)
to
cz
C14
al
cl
u
E
'r
E 0
C4
tr)
tr)
C14
W')
0
4Z
C4
C4
00
CIA
C14
00
00
tr)
Iz:
05
rA
ct
4
Ln
CIO
00
cz
Q.
ci
40
C)
(1)
4
tr)
kr)
256
Appendix
Constants
in the constitutive
z(
Ln IA+A
Alloy
is
1050
1100
2011
2014
2014*
2014**
2024
3003
3004
3005
3105
4047
5005
M57S
S052
5054
5056
5083
5182
5456
6061
6063
6105
7004
70SO
7075HI
707SH2
7075113
7075114
7150HI
715OH2
7150113
0.04
0.037
0.045
0.037
0.0128
0.0152
0.0283
0.016
0.0316
0.0344
0.0323
0.0248
0.04
0.029
0.02
0.016
0.015
0.015
0.015
0.062
0.0191
0.045
0.04
0.045
0.035
0.0269
0.0141
0.01
0.012
0.01
0.01
0.013
0.01
1999)
cc
equation
(Sheppard
FA+
+1I
n
3.84
3.84
5.66
3.712
5.13
5.27
3.49
4.27
4.4S.
3.6
4.96
4.83
2.65
5.8
5.1
S.24
5.43
4.82
4.99
1.35
3.2
3.55
5.385
3.502
1.28
2.86
5.41
6.14
7.8
8.5
5.7
6.1
S. S
and
12def
157000
156888
IS8300
142000
131309
144408
128913
148880
164800
193850
183100
179300
129300
183576
155000
155167
173600
166900
171400
174200
161177
145000
141550
145000
153000
151500
129400
158432
155336
156325
161402
158806
159832
Qdf
exp
G
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
8.314
GT
InA
26.66
26.69
24.67
19.2
22.23
24.41
21.959
19.6
26.9
28.21
29.87
29.98
20.47
26.65
24.20
24.47
26.61
23.05
23.11
22.48
23.5
19.3
22.5
20.51
20.12
22.85
20.75
26.32
27.54
27.14
29.8
29.2
30.7
Remarks
PH.SS
4% Cu
24hr. Soak
SI.Ht. F.Cool
F.HtSI. Cool
F.HtF. Cool
F.HtF. Cool
F.HtSI. Cool
SI.HtF. Cool
t1r)
0
IQII
0
ItT
CA
00
oc
CC)
00
00
00
*ri
Q
14
C
ct
4
cz
ct
rf)
C)
I
ls:
cl
kn
rn
tn
'IT
01
.
ei
C)
C)
C:
C)
C)
'lz
C)
'It
rn
r
rn
clq
Ln
4
rn
V)
*r.
'Z
Cd
OW
C14
C14
IC
cn
Appendix
Experimental
for 4% Cu binary
by hot torsion
1983)
CN
t
F4 rJ
N

oc
"t
kn
OC
c,
r, 4
"I
7q
(, 4 CIA
F4
C,41
t11
'f"
rcN
c, 4 c,,
r, 4 N
1"1"
V)
:
OC
CN C,4 C4 "
(, 4 C,4 m
rn
rn
',1 4) W)
,o
fn
"')
n
C"'
"C:
r,
r, 4
')
\,
Co",
fDn
")
t
zj
IN
tr) te)
V) kr)
mw
kr)
tr)
kr)
00
oc
vi
oc
(r)
oc
00
r
T ff
kr)
tr)
V
C,
r
tr)
c
C)
F4
C4
r4 r, 4
rn
00
coc
r, 4
oc C7,
rI r
rn
zc
m 
te)
r
"r"

* I: tC4
rn
kr)
t
kn
ke)
***
Z V v) oo
CI1
. e
C4
011 r
00
V_
CD
e
r
oc
le
Pl
0
16j
0
o',
r('l
trq
't
(N
r'l
r"t
l=
(N
C> Z

rr CD

C> r
*
r
CD 00 r
(r)
rn
011 \IC rn
CD
':E
ri
0
0
lZ
0
C40
C/)
J
rn
kr)
f)
(14
CD oc
r1
Ep
c)
;..4
rM.
.
CZ
"
C.
c"
0
:
u
1:
C.,
=0
00
C)
261
Appendix 7
Different definitions of equivalent strain accumulated along a streamline at exit to
the roll bite (McLaren 1993)
Strain1:
V(ex
)2
+ e2
_ el,
3x
+ e2
+6
e2
in
direction,
is
direction,
is
the
thickness
the
the
the
F,,
strain
rolling
strain in
where Ex
fixed
directions,
is
these
the
computed with a
x
shear strain on a plane containing
and e.,,,
coordinate system.
Strain2:
2+
AF3
2+F2
+6E sn
F
n)sn
direction,
is
direction,
the
thickness
the
E,,
strain in
where e., is the strain in the rolling
directions
these
computed with an sn
and esn is the shear strain on a plane containing
to
the
to,
streamline.
to
n
normal
an
s
parallel
maintain
coordinatesystem which rotates
Strain3:
2
F
s
+E2
n7
ny
+E2
sn
sn
jEsyl
I
sign
of
irrespective
accumulated
streamline,
where
is the shear strain along a
throughthe roll bite.
Strain4:
jD
f 13
":
C2 +
1jE2 1A
1
2
2,
dt
21,3
+
1,
262
Appendix
Measured
microstructural
gradients
(McLaren
Annealing
8
in Aluminium
slabs
1994)
426s
Annealing
787s
Fractional
Recry.
95% Conf.
Fractional
Recrys.
95% Conf.
Position
Fraction%
limit
Position
Fraction%
Limit
10.7
2.2
31.8
3.2
0.2
12.8
2.3
0.2
31.2
3.2
0.4
11.4
2.2
0.4
32.4
3.2
0.6
15.9
2.5
0.6
34.5
3.3
0.8
15.1
2.5
0.8
32.1
3.2
0.9
8.8
2.0
0.9
28.3
3.1
0.95
2.3
1.2
0.95
12.7
2.9
263
Appendix 9
The selection of constitutive equation
This work on finite element analysis commenced in January 2000. At that time, the
NortonHoff law was the only available constitutive equation. However, the
author
had the constitutive equation expressed by the hyperbolic sinh function. To
use
@
FORGE3 the hyperbolic sinh function was utilised to regress into the NortonHoff
law excluding the strain hardening term. All analyses in sections 4.2,4.31 4.4
and
4.5 were carried out by the use of the NortonHoff law without the strain hardening
term.
Since the virtual manufacturing group at Bournemouth University bought the
FORTRAN program, Compaq Visual Fortran 6, in June 2000, the second
development on FORGE2/30 became possible. The hyperbolic sinh function was
FORGE2/30.
In order to compare the difference between the hyperbolic
added into
function
sinh
and the NortonHoff law regressed from the hyperbolic sinh function,
work in section 4.1 was carried out. It was found that the hyperbolic sinh function
gives slightly better results that the NortonHoff law does. Hence the hyperbolic
sinh function was adopted in the following analyses, such as those in section 4.6
4.7,
and
and chapter 5 and Chapter 6.
When this thesis was completed, new versions of FORGE2/30 were launched. A
new material database, "FPDBase", is enclosed with the new versions. A new
constitutive equation, the Hansel & Spittle's model, was made available for various
aluminium. alloys. In order to study the influence of strain hardening ((elastic
deformation) on the computed rolling load and temperature, some two dimensional
Nortonby
&
Spittle's
Hansel
the
the
the
analyseswere conducted
model,
use of
Hoff law and the hyperbolic sinh function. These results are then analysed and
4.1
keep
To
thesis,
the
the
was
section
original
compared.
structural consistency of
be
independently.
It
form
in
the
should
rewritten
of a short communication and put
noted that there are still some minor problems in this communi cation, such as the
time difference in attaining the steady state for the different constitutive models.
The present author has referred this problem to the developer, TRANSVALOR. A
satisfied reply has not been received.
264
Abstract:
1. Introduction
The research focus in the simulation of hot flat rolling has progressed from the prediction of load and
torque to the modelling of microstructure evolution. Previous work shows that temperature plays a
final
development
the
role
in
of
microstructure than any other plastomechanical
more important
In
such
as
strain,
strain
rate
and
stress.
most rolling experiments, the measurement of the
parameters,
been
deformation
has
The
the
strain
prevails.
carried
out
at
stock
centre
where
plane
microstructure
finite element method (FEM) technique for twodimensional (including axisymmetric) problems has
data
inaccuracy
by
The
the
the
physical
now
of
input
analysis errors caused
reached a mature stage.
become a major factor. One of the most important physical parameters is the material flow stress.
Three constitutive equations, the Norton Hoff law, The hyperbolic sine function and the Hansel &
[13]
It would be useful
flat
in
hot
Spittle's model, have usually been adopted
the simulation of
rolling
.
to determine the most suitable equation for aluminium alloys in the simulation under hot working
FEM
to
In
these
analysts, are
this
are
of
concerned
which
questions,
condition.
communication,
The
flat
for
hot
FORGE2",
FEM
two
A
processes.
rolling
is run
program,
answered.
commercial
computed rolling load and temperature are then compared with experimental measurements.
2.
Constitutive
equations
exp(X).
C"
law used in FORGE2 is written as:
em
eo
.(F+
)n
(1)
index,
3
the
stramhardening
n
is
K,
the
sensitively
rate
strain
is
where
are material constants, m
For
E
constant.
a
small
is
C
rate,
the
strain
E
equivalent
the
is
index,
equivalent strain
0
is
fl
198,
K
n
=0.11.
Mpa,
m
=0.0
Aluminium alloy AA5083,
=0.00524,
=2160.29
The hyperbolic sine function can be written:
Iln
IZ
Cr
A, an
Ln
F(*, 2 17
?_+1
(2)
_r
A4
literature
the
in
Their
given
are
interpretations
physical
are constants.
[4]. Z
is termed the
Qdef
Z=E
temperaturecompensated strain rate, with a definition as
exp
GT
Qdef
is
the
where
,
264
265
G
for
deformation,
is the universal gas constant. For aluminium
activation energy
alloy AA5083,
Qd, = 145101 U/mol, A= 1.02EI o, a =0.0 14, n =3.65.
The Hansel & Spittle's model is expressed:
mlTM2
e
MI
M2
M3
M4
'M3
M4
(3)
and0.00913.
3 Finite element analysis model
in this paper, aluminium alloy AA5083 is investigated. Two singlepass rolling processesare
analysed.The rolling conditions are shown in Table 1. The relative thicknessreductions for thesetwo
6.7%
48%
are
and
respectively. Plane strain deformation is assumed.Due to symmetrical
processes
half
is
the
top
stock modelled. The element sizes in the roll gap are 2.5 mm and 1.5
conditions,only
mm respectively. The 6node triangle element is used.
Table I Rolline nass schedules
Entry
Exit
No.
thickness
thickness
47.13mm
50mm
I
30mm
15.6mm
2
Rolling
temperature
Roll speed
10 rpm
.10 rpm
____2830C
485GC
Roll radius
460mm
184mm
Measured
pressure
0.879 ton/mm
0.9
190

0.8
170
Hansel283_0.81
150
Nlorton_2830.81
Flansel485_2.45
130
Nlorton_485_2.45
Ffyperbolic2830.81
110
E 0.7
E
0
CD
Ch
Ftyperbolic485_2.45
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
90
IL 0.2
70
0.1
50
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.2
Equivalent Strain
0.4
Time (s)
0.6
I
Fig.
265
266
The critical strain to reach the steady state regime in Fig. 1 0.26
is
and 0.12 for the deformation at
2830Cand 4850C respectively. After the critical strain, the effect
of work hardening balancesthe
effect of softening, the flow stressdoes not changethereafter. Most aluminium alloys
show
a
similar
curve to that given by the Hansel & Spittle's model in Fig. ] [57]The major difference between
.
different Al. alloys is the value of the critical strain required to
achieve a steady state deforination.
The magnitude of critical strain depends mainly on the deformation
conditions. The value usually
from
0.01
during
varies
creep to less than 0.5 under hot deformation. If the flow stressstill increases
increase
of equivalent strain when the equivalent strain is greater than 0.5, it is usually
with
regarded
that errors have occurred in the experiment.
The predicted rolling pressures for the first rolling pass schedule is compared in Fig.2. The
mean
equivalentstrain of this pass can be calculated by
E=2
In
HO
250
In
V3
47.13
H,
3
0.068
(4)
MN
60
R*
7H
H
Ln
H'
H2
0.81
(5)
The measured rolling pressure during the steady state stage Is 0.879 ton/mm. The
predicted averaged
rolling pressures are 0.897,0.933
and 0.777 ton/mm for the Norton Hoff law, the hyperbolic sine
function and Hansel & Spittle's model respectively. The relative computation
errors are 2%, 6.2%
law gives the best fit with the measurement. It also can be
and 11.5% respectively. The NortonHoff
seen that the hyperbolic sine function slightly overpredicts the rolling loads and the Hansel &
Spittle's model underpredicts the rolling load. The answer can easily be found from the
curves
zn
presentedin Fig. L In practical industrial rolling, the relative thickness reduction is usually less than
10% for the first few breakdown rolling passes.The distribution of deformation through the slab
thickness is inhomooreneous.In most regions, steady state deformation is not achieved. If the
hyperbolic sine function is applied, we would expect that the rolling, load would be overpredicted
Fig.2 also indicates that using a complicated constitutive equation as Hansel & Spittle's model does
not necessarily mean that the result will be better than the use of a simple model such as the
hyperbolic sine function. One obvious advantage of the hyperbolic sine function is due to its'
Qdf
background,
for the deformation.
the
term
the
physical
suchas
of
activation
energy
,
ZD
t11)
It can be seen that there are significant differences in the time to reach the roll bite for these three
I
constitutive equations.But, the time spending on the passageof the roll gap is the same.The reason
for this phenomenonis due to the convergenceproblem. It should be noted that FORGE20
1has been
developedbased on the NortonHoff law 910J.
The other two constitutive equations are the later
extensions.
It is understandablethat there is a difference in the computed rolling load between different models.
The problem is that, the difference of the computed rolling pressurebetween the NortonHoff law
and Hansel & Spittle's model, see Fig.2, appears to be fairly large. Since at the nominal rolling
temperature2830C with a strain of 0.068 and a strain rate of 0.81, two curves correspondvery well
(seeFig.1). The difference between the two flow stress curves is 3.94%. However, the computed
rolling pressuredifference by the use of these two models is 9.5%. The reasoncould be attributed to
the derivative of the flow stress vs. strain rate. To have a clear understandof how the flow stress
function affects the computed results, it will be useful to briefly review the fundamentalformulae of
therigidviscoplastic finite element method
I
For rigidviscoplastic materials, the following functional exists:
7r =k
E(j
IF FjujdS

(6)
266
267
IF Fi6udS
=0
(75CdV
(7)
Where
C The incompressibility constraint on admissible velocity fields in
equation
(7) is removed by using the penalised form of the incompressibility as
J,T
ffbeI'dV
+Kf
tv (5tvdV I
T&,
F
=0
ds
(9)
(A
a, 7r
avlavj
a V,
AVj =0
VO, namely
(10)
V=VO
The first term of Eq. (10) are expressedas
Pjj V, dV + f, KCj Vj C, dV

V,
EF
FNil dS
=f
P dV+
EY2E
PI.,VKVmPw dV +f KCj C, dV
(12)
are involved in equation (12). The influence of different flow stress functions
on the computed results thus depends both the flow stress and it's derivative.
For the hyperbolic sine function, the derivative of the flow stress with the equivalent strain rate is
obtained as
AH
tanh(aff)
(13)
exp(
[sinh(ad')]
(ad7)
RT
anE
anAcosh
and the NortonHoff law
MIE
(14)
/E
(15)
Fig_.
3 compares the derivative of flow stress vs. temperature based on the equation (13), (14) and (15)
difference
does
There
different
exist
a
significant
under
temperature and strain rate conditions.
function
(without
hyperbolic
between
strain
different
the
sine
among three
especially
models
hardening term) and the Hansel & Spittle's model or the NortonHoff law (including the strain
hardening term). Sensitivity analysis on the mesh size was also conducted. The element size in the
for
histories
the
the
The
same
is
from
1.5mm.
remain
2.5mm
to
computed pressure
roll gap reduced
three constitutive equations.
267
268
30
0.8
25
E
E
20
0.7
0.6
0.5
15
0.4
Hyperbolic_283_0.81
10
E2 0.3
CL
CM 0.2
Z
Hyperbolic485_2.45
.0
4
HyperbolicSine Function
Hansel & Spittle's kbdel
NortonHoff Law
0.1
it
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
2
Time (s)
0.5
Equivalent Strain
Fig. 3 Comparison
V3
,JH,
(16)
15.6
21rN
=
60
2
R
dH
H,
* Ln
H2
2.45
=
(17)
460
480
470
460
m
440
420
400
450
CL
CD
440
380
360
430
340
420
320
0.0
MnseerbolicSine Function
I& Spittle's Nlodel
19 NortonHof Law
)( Measurement [121
0.5
1.0
3.0
3.5
4.0
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
Time (s)
268
269
The predicted temperature histories are compared with the experimental measurements [121 Fig. 5
in
and Fig. 6. Surprisingly, three models give nearly identical curve shape for both the centre and the
They
differ
point.
just
in the time taken to reach the roll bite. It should be noted that the
subsurface
do
know
initial
the
authors
not
position of the measured points. The tracing points in FEM
present
computation are initially located at the halfstock length. This indicates that, unlike rolling pressure,
temperature is not sensitive to the constitutive equation. It is clear that an excellent agreement with
the measurement has been given for three models. The heat transfer coefficient at the roll contact is
free
kWM2
K1
25
the
to
and
surface is set to 0.01 kW M2K1.
set
4. Conclusion
The selection of the constitutive equation should consider the actual deformation condition. The
is
strain
an important criterion. For the small deformation, the choice of the hyperbolic
critical
function
tends to overpredict the rolling load. The difference between the three models is
sine
for
large
deformation
the
negligible
under which the steady state deformation is usually
achieved.
2. The influence of different flow stress functions is introduced into the finite element analysis
flow
by
the
stresscomputation, but also by the derivative of the flow stresswith
results,not only
strain rate.
3. Unlike rolling load, temperatureis not sensitive to the changeof constitutive equation.
Z:
)
Reference
1. J.L. Chenot and M. Bellet. In: Hartley P., Pillinger
I. & Sturgess C.(editors). Numerical
C)
deformation
development
Research,
1992,
of
material
processes,
and
applications.
modelling
London. Springer Verlag, 179224.
C
2. M. A. Wells et al. Metallurgical and materials transactions B. v29B (1998), 709719.
3. M. S. Mirza et a]. Materials science and technology. 17 (2001), 874879.
4. T. Sheppard. Extrusion of aluminium alloys. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston U. S.A.,
Dordrecht, The Netherlands 1999, ISBN 0412590700.
5. K. Karbausen et al. In: J.H. Beynon et al. (editors). ModellingC, of metal rolling processes 3.
London, 1999.300309.
6. J.H. Shi et al. Materials science and technology. 13, (1997), 200216.
7. Eli S. Puchi et al. 1998. In: T. Sao et al. (editors). Sixth International conference on Aluminium
alloys, Toyohashi, Japan, July 1998,395400.
8. X. Duan and T. Sheppard. Three dimensional thermal mechanical coupled simulation during hot
be
(To
Sciences
Mechanical
Journal
International
3003.
published).
of
rollina of aluminium alloy
9. Raj Hans. et al. Engineering Computations. V9, n5, (1992), 575586.
10. Y. Germain et a]. Structural Analysis Systems: Software  Hardware  Capability  Compatibility
SAS
Proceedings
the
Industry,
Analysis
&
Structural
of
CAD/CAM
4:
Volume
Applications.
in
World Conference
H. Shiro Kobayashi, Soolk Oh, Taylan Altan. Metal forming and the finite element method.
Oxford university press, 1989.
hotrolled
the
to
of
testing
evolution
12. H.L. Yiu et a]. The use of planestrain compression
simulate
deformation
Hot
(editors).
G.
Langdon
of
T.
In:
al
et
in
alummium alloys.
microstructures
the
by
of
the
committee
metals
nonferrous
aluminum alloys. Proceedings of a symposium
810,1990.509525.
October
Michigan,
Detroit,
minerals, metals and materials society,
rn
269
270
Reference
Aretz, H. et al. 2000. Integration of physical based models into FEM and
in
forming
simulation
of
metal
application
processes. Modelling
Simul.Mater. Sci.Eng. 8,881891.
Attack, P.A. et al. 1996. Control of thermal camber by spray cooling when hot
Ironmaking
23(l),
6973.
aluminium.
and
steelingmaking.
rolling
Attack P.A et al. 1988. An adaptive scheduling and control system for a single stand
for
hot
rolling of aluminium. Proceedinqsof the AluminiurnAssociation
reversing mill
RollingMill Gauge, Shape and Profile Control Seminar,Atlanta, Georgia,USA, June 89
1988.
Atack, P.A. and Robinson, I. S. 1990. Adaptation of hot mill process models. Journal
60,535542.
technolog
processing
materials
of
.
Backofen, W. A.
1972. Deformation
AddisonWesley
processing.
publishing
company.
Barnes, Howard R. et al. 1996. Aluminium flat products plant technology and
future trends. MPT international. 6,5059.
Baxter, G. J. et al. 1998. Effect of magnesium content on hot deformation and
Sao
In:
behaviour
of aluminiummagnesium alloys.
subsequent recrystallisation
T.et al. (editors). Sixth International conference on Aluminium alloys, Toyohashi,
Japan,July 1998,12331238.
Baxter, G. J et al. 1999. The influence of transient strainrate deforination
Acta
AlI%Mg.
deforined
conditions on the
microstructure of aluminium alloy
material. 47(5), 23672376.
Behrens, A. et al. 1999. Assessment of deformation sequences using damage
(editor).
Advanced
Geiger,
M.
technology
forging.
In:
of
mechanics in cold metal
th
New
SpringerVerlag,
Sept.
1999.
1924
6
ICTP,
plasticity 99: Proceedings of the
York, 1999.23112316.
BertrandCorsini C. et al. 1988. A three dimensional thermornechanical analysis of
hot
flat
hot
Application
to
forming
rolling and
steadystate flows in hot
processes.
E.
Onate,
Chenot
J.
L.
In:
forming
and
processes.
shaperolling. Modelling of metal
(editors). Modelling of metal forining processes, 1988. Kluwer academic
publishers,271279.
271
272
Chung, S.H. and Hwang, S.M.. 1999. An integTated finite element computer
for
in
the
the
prediction
of
strip
simulator
profile
cold strip rolling. In: Beynon, J.H.
(editors).
Modelling
of metal rolling processes3. London, 1999,343349.
et al.
Chung, WK; Choi, S.K.; and Thomson, P.F. 1993. Threedimensional simulation
by
finiteelement
the
the
edge
rolling
process
explicit
of
method. Journal of material
38(12),
85102.
technology.
processing
Compaq computer corporation. 1999. Compaq Fortran languange reference manual.
Cotner, J.R. and McG, W. J. 1969. Tegart. Hightemperature deformation of
high
Journal
alloys
at
strain
rates.
aluminiumMagnesium
of institute of metals. 97,
7379.
Czlapinski Witold et al. 1989. Optimization strategy and model forming for heavy
Metallurgical
plate rolling.
'plant and technolog . 12(l), 4453.
Dashwood, R.J. et al. 1996. Computer prediction of extrusion limit diagrams.
Proceedings 5th international aluminium extrusion technology seminar. Chicago,
USA!, 1996,331339.
Dauda,T.A. and Mclaren A. J. 1999. Simulation of singlepass hot flat rolling of Al3%Mg using the finite element method and the kinetics of static recrystallisation.
In: Beynon, J.H. et al.(editors). Modelling of metal rolling processes 3. London,
1999,257266.
Davies, Chris H. J. 2000. The cellular automaton simulation of microstructural
Materials
deformation
during
research society
processing of metals.
evolution
syMposiumproceedings. 578,457468.
for
data
increasing
The
Dean, T. A. and Flu, Z. M. 1999.
requirements on empirical
(editor).
M.
Geiger,
In:
forming
process simulation packages.
use in metal
th
Sept.
1924
ICTPI
99:
Proceedings
Advanced technology of plasticity
o the
1999.SpringerVerlag, New York, 1999.542550.
different
Edberg, Jonas. 1992. Three dimensional simulation of plate rolling using
friction models. In: Chenot, Wood & Zienkiewicz (editors). Numerical methods in
industrial forming processes, 1992,,Balkema, Rotterdam. 713718.
the
on
deformation
temperature
rate
Engler, Olaf et al. 1996. Influence of
and strain
(6),
87
fur
Metallkunde.
Zeitschrift
AlMnlMgl.
recrystallization nucleation in
454464.
273
Gelin, J.C. et al. 1993. Identification and modelling of constitutive equations for hot
from
the plane strain compression test. Proceedings o
rolling of aluminium alloys
is' international conference on modellin of metal rolling processes, 2123, Sep,
1993,Imperial college, London, UK.
Grosman Franciszek. 1997. Criteria flow stress ftinction choice for numerical
forming
Chandra
In:
T.
Sakai
(editors).
T.
Proc.
processes.
and
of
plastic
simulation
Intern. Conf. On Thermornechanical Processing of Steels and Other Materials
(THERMEC'97), 1997, The Minerals, Metals and Materials Society, 20472052.
Gutierrez, 1. et al. 1988. Static recrystallization of commercial purity aluminium
Materials
hot
deformation
the
science and
steady
state
regime.
within
after
A.
102,7784.
engineering
Hand, R.J. et al. 2000. Temperature changes during hot plane strain compression
testing. Materials science and technology. 16,442450.
Hansen,Niels and Jensen, D. Juul. 1990. Mechanisms of deformation, recovery and
deformation
Hot
(editors).
G.
T.
Langdon,
In:
of
al
et
recrystallisation of aluminium.
Z
by
the
Proceedings
nonferrous metals committee
a
symposium
of
aluminum alloys.
810,
October
Michigan,
Detroit,
of the minerals, metals and materials society,
1990.319.
ZRWang,
In:
Hartley, P. et al. 1993. Numerical modelling of rolling processes.
(editors). Proceeding of the fourth international conference on technology of
742747.
Academic
Beijing.
September,
publisher,
plasticily,
forming
finite
Hartley, P. et al. 1997. Elastic plastic
element modelling of metal
Advanced
(editors).
P.
Gilonnini,
M.
Predeleanu,
In:
damage
and
with
evolution.
136143.
Elsevier
1997.
defects,
science,
methodsin materials processing
developments
in
Texture
property
Hollinshead, P.A. 1986.
and mechanical
London.
University
D.
Ph.
of
hot
thesis,
aluminium alloy
rolling.
flat
hot
in
Helmi, A. and Alexander J.M. 1968. Geometric factors affecting spread
206,11101117.
iron
and steel Institute.
rolling of steel. Journal of the
274
275
Advanced technology of plasticity 99: Proceedings of the 6Ih ICTP, 1924 Sept.
1999. SpringerVerlag, New York, 1999.19411948.
Lehert, W. et al. 1999. Hot rolling in the process of thermomechanical treatment.
in: Geiger, M. (editor). Advanced technology of plasticity 99: Proceedings of the 6th
ICTP, 1924 Sept. 1999. SpringerVerlag, New York, 1999.19571966.
Lekhov, 0. S. et al. 1987. Optimisation of basic parameters of rolling complex for
billets.
Steel
in
USSR.
17
(2),
7880.
the
of
production
Lenard, J.G. and Pietrzyk, M. 1992. Rolling process modelling. In: Hartley P.,
Pillinger 1. & Sturgess C.(editors). Numerical modelling of material deformation
development
Research,
and applications. 1992, London. Springer Verlag,
processes,
275303.
Lenard, J.G., Pietrzyk, M. and Cser, L. 1999. Mathematical and physical simulation
hot
the
properties of
rolled products. Elsevier science.
of
Li, GuoJi; Kobayashi, Shiro. 1984. Analysis of spread in rolling by the rigidfinite
plastic,
element method. Numer Anal of Fonn Processes. 7188
Liserre, G. et al. 1998. Contribution to the modelling of microstructure evolution
during thermornechanical processing of commercial purity aluminium. In: Sao Tet
(editors).
Sixth
Aluminium
Toyohashi,
Japan,
International
alloys,
al.
conference on
July 1998,395400.
Liu, C. et al. 1987. Finite element modelling of deformation and spread in slab
271283.
29(4),
International
Journal
rolling.
of mechanics science.
Lubrano, M. and Bianchi, J.H. 1996. A simple model for online control of skin
Id
Conf,
The
NMRP.
2
Int.
deformation.
from
finite
pass
element analysis of rolling
IOM. London. 574583.
Luce, R. et al. 1999. Microstructure multipass rolling simulation using physical
Modelling
(editors).
H.
J.
Beynon,
In:
integrated
into
FEM.
of metal
et al.
models
rolling processes3. London, 1999,218226.
Macgregor, C.W. and Palme, R.B. 1951. The distribution of contact pressuresin the
81,669679.
).
Eng.
Baslc
ASME(J.
Trans.
rolling of metals.
Mdntyld, P. et al. 1992. Improved thickness and shape accuracy with advanced pass
255263.
329
technolog
scheduling in plate rolling. Journal of materials processing
,
Marthinsen, K. and Nes, E. 2001. Modelling strain hardening and steady state
defonnationof AlMg alloys. Materials science and technologv. 17,376388.
276
277
6
Proceedings
the
99:
In: Geiger, M. (editor). Advanced technology of plasticity
1n of
LCTP, 1924 Sept. 1999. SpringerVerlag, New York, 1999.19231930.
278
279
edition.
Eleventh
1993.
data
stands and
280
281
282
Zhu, Q. and Sellars, C.M. 2001. Effect of transient strain rate conditions on
In:
The
Al5%Mg
behaviour
high
alloys.
recrystallisation
purity and commercial
of
first Jointinternational conferenceon recrystallization and grain growth. August 2731,2001, Aachen, Germany.
Zieniiewicz, O. C. et al. 1981. General formulation for coupled thermal flow of
in
Methods
for
Numerical
Journal
metals using finite elements. International
Engin,
17(10), 14971514.
Mult mai mult decât documente.
Descoperiți tot ce are Scribd de oferit, inclusiv cărți și cărți audio de la editori majori.
Anulați oricând.