Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

Available ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Availableonline
onlineatatwww.sciencedirect.com
www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
Procedia Manufacturing 27 (2019) 124–129
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

ICAFT/SFU/AutoMetForm
ICAFT/SFU/AutoMetForm 2018
2018

Selected
Selected effective
effective methods
methods of of increasing
increasing the the durability
durability ofof forging
forging
tools
Manufacturing Engineering
tools in
Society hot forging
International processes
Conference
in hot forging processes 2017, MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
2017, Vigo (Pontevedra), Spain
a a* a a b a
Z.
Z. Gronostajski
Gronostajskia,, M.
M. Hawryluk
Hawryluka*b ,, P.
P. Widomski
Widomski a, M. Kaszubaa, B. Nowakb, S. Polaka,
, M. Kaszuba , B.a Nowak , S. Polak ,
Costing models for M. capacity
M. Rychlik
Rychlik optimization
b, J. Ziemba
, J. Ziemba
a
in Industry
a, M. Zwierzchowski
, M. Zwierzchowski a 4.0: Trade-off
a
a between used capacity and operational efficiency
Wroclaw University of Science and Technology/Department of Metal Forming and Metrology, Lukasiewicza 4, Wroclaw 50-371,
Wroclaw University of Science and Technology/Department of Metal Forming and Metrology, Lukasiewicza 4, Wroclaw 50-371,
tel. +48713202173, Poland,bbKuźnia Jawor S.A., Kuziennicza 4, Jawor 59-400,tel. +48 76 870 76 07, Poland
tel. +48713202173, Poland, Kuźnia Jawor S.A., Kuziennicza 4, Jawor 59-400,tel. +48 76 870 76 07, Poland
A. Santanaa, P. Afonsoa,*, A. Zaninb, R. Wernkeb
Abstract
Abstract a
University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
b
Unochapecó, 89809-000 Chapecó, SC, Brazil
The paper presents the possibilities of applying selected methods and techniques which increase the forging tool durability.
The paper presents the possibilities of applying selected methods and techniques which increase the forging tool durability.
Currently, the most popular of them include: the choice of the tool material for a given process or operation, its heat and thermo-
Currently, the most popular of them include: the choice of the tool material for a given process or operation, its heat and thermo-
chemical treatment, the surface engineering techniques (nitriding, hybrid layers, etc.). It is also important to select the appropriate
chemical treatment, the surface engineering techniques (nitriding, hybrid layers, etc.). It is also important to select the appropriate
technological conditions (e.g. related to the determination of the optimal temperatures, application of the cooling-lubricant
Abstract
technological conditions (e.g. related to the determination of the optimal temperatures, application of the cooling-lubricant
method as well the method of its administration), or construction and technological solutions, as well as control and measurement
method as well the method of its administration), or construction and technological solutions, as well as control and measurement
systems,the
Under which can beof
concept the systems for4.0",
supervising the work of the tools.
will The application
to of
bethe proposed methods realized in
systems, which can be the"Industry production
systems for supervising processes
the work of the tools. be pushed
The application of increasingly
the interconnected,
proposed methods realized in
cooperation with the forging industry exhibits the highest effectiveness in improving the durability of forging tools as well as
information based
cooperation with theon a realindustry
forging time basis and,the
exhibits necessarily, much more
highest effectiveness in efficient.
improving In
thethis context,
durability of capacity optimization
forging tools as well as
resolving many problems related to the quality and properties of the forgings.
goes beyond
resolving manythe traditional
problems aimtoof
related thecapacity maximization,
quality and properties of contributing
the forgings. also for organization’s profitability and value.
Indeed,
© 2018The lean management
Authors. Published and
by continuous
Elsevier B.V. improvement approaches suggest capacity optimization instead of
2019 TheAuthors.
© 2018The Authors. Published
Published by by Elsevier
Elsevier B.V.
B.V.
maximization. The study of capacity optimization
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license and costing models is an important research topic that deserves
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an openfrom
contributions accessboth
article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee This
the practical and theoretical perspectives. paper presents and discusses
of ICAFT/SFU/AutoMetForm 2018. a mathematical
Selection
model forand peer-review
capacity under responsibility
management based on of the scientific
different committee
costing modelsof(ABCICAFT/SFU/AutoMetForm
and TDABC). A generic2018. model has been
developed and itTool;
Keywords:Forging; was Wear
used to analyze idle capacity and to design strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
Keywords:Forging; Tool; Wear
value. The trade-off capacity maximization vs operational efficiency is highlighted and it is shown that capacity
optimization might hide operational inefficiency.
1. 2017
© Intoduction
The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
1. Intoduction
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
Die forging is currently one of the most advanced techniques used for the mass production of responsible parts.
2017.
Die forging is currently one of the most advanced techniques used for the mass production of responsible parts.
Despite many unquestionable advantages, die forging has, unfortunately, also disadvantages, the most important being
Despite
Keywords:many unquestionable
Cost Models; advantages, die forgingIdle
has, unfortunately, also disadvantages, the most important being
the low durability ofABC; TDABC;
the shaping Capacity
tools. Management;
Currently, Capacity;
it is estimated Operational
that Efficiency
the costs of tools can amount to even 8-15% of the
the low durability of the shaping tools. Currently, it is estimated that the costs of tools can amount to even 8-15% of the

1. Introduction
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 713202164
* The
Corresponding
cost author.
of idle Tel.: +48
capacity is 713202164
a fundamental information for companies and their management of extreme importance
E-mail address: marek.hawryluk@pwr.edu.pl
E-mail address: marek.hawryluk@pwr.edu.pl
in modern production systems. In general, it is defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
in several ways:
2351-9789© 2018Thetons of production,
Authors. available
Published by Elsevier B.V. hours of manufacturing, etc. The management of the idle capacity
2351-9789© 2018The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
This is anAfonso.
* Paulo open access
Tel.:article under
+351 253 510the761;
CC BY-NC-ND
+351 253license(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
This is an open access article under the CC fax:
BY-NC-ND 604 741
license(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection
E-mail and peer-review
address: under responsibility of the scientific committee of ICAFT/SFU/AutoMetForm 2018.
psafonso@dps.uminho.pt
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ICAFT/SFU/AutoMetForm 2018.

2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review
2351-9789 © under
2019responsibility
The Authors. of the scientificbycommittee
Published Elsevier of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
B.V.
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of ICAFT/SFU/AutoMetForm 2018.
10.1016/j.promfg.2018.12.054
 Z. Gronostajski et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 27 (2019) 124–129 125
2 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

total production costs. In fact, taking into account the time needed to replace the used equipment and the cases of
unexpected destruction of the tools, these costs can increase up to 30-50%. In addition, tool wear significantly reduces
the quality of the forgings. The most common defects due to tool wear are: errors in filling the die cavity, underfilling,
overlaps, barb, burr, distortion, scratches, delamination, micro- and macro-cracks, etc. This, in turn, affects the
functionality of the final product resulting from the forgings. The high competition on the market enforces a continuous
cost reduction as well as production of high quality forgings on the producers of forged products, which raises high
interest in the problem of low durability. The definition of tool durability is quite flexible; it is often assumed that the
durability of the tool is expressed by the number of operations that can be carried out using this tool to obtain products
of the required quality. In contrast, from the point of view of the tool itself, durability is associated with the resistance to
the destructive factors occurring during the operation. In the case of forging tools, these factors are intense thermal
shocks, cyclically varying mechanical loads and intensive friction [1]. As a result, the following wear mechanisms
occur in the surface layer of forging tools: abrasive wear, thermal and mechanical fatigue, plastic deformation and
fatigue cracking. Figure 1 presents the most common examples of failures of forging tools created as a result of the
above mentioned destructive mechanisms.

Fig. 1. The most frequent damage of forging tools (a) abrasive wear; (b) thermo-mechanical cracking; (c) a grid of thermo-mechanical cracking
and chipping of the surface layer; (d) plastic deformation; (e) and (f) a fatigue crack.

2. Methods used to improve durability

Currently, there are no clear criteria for the selection of methods improving tool life. Only the general directions
are known, so any industrial forging process must be analyzed individually, as the process parameters resulting from
the technology or the tribological conditions between the shaped material and the tools, as well as many other
factors, are closely related to the specific process. Figure 2 presents an example diagram showing different
classifications of the available methods for the improvement of tool durability [2].

Fig. 2. Methods to improve the forging tools durability.

126 Z. Gronostajski et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 27 (2019) 124–129
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing00 (2018) 000–000 3

In general, three groups of factors influencing the durability of forging tools can be distinguished [3]. These factors
are related to: a) the tool: type of material, shape, construction, technology (including: thermo-chemical treatment,
hybrid layers, etc., b) the forging: material, shape, initial temperature of the blank, surface quality, dimensional
tolerance, c) the operation: process parameters, type of machine, forging technology. The last two factors related to
the forging and exploitation for the already developed technological process is usually predetermined and remain
generally constant. Possible changes may only concern the factors related to the tool [4]. In the following sections,
the authors have presented the original results of their current research on the durability of forging tools, which has
partially been published in the cited works. Our new contribution is the application of pre-compression in the die
construction, the application of a new hybrid treatment, i.e. hard-facing combined with nitriding, and the application
of our original lubrication system. These three methods significantly increase the durability of forging tools.

2.1. Type of tool material

The basic factor affecting the durability of forging tools is the type of the tool material used. The operating
conditions of the forging tools require from technologists choosing a tool material which will meet the expectations
concerning their work as much as possible. The specific loads transmitted by the forging tools require the use of
materials having the following properties: high hardness, high abrasive wear resistance in terms of tool operating
temperature and resistance to thermal fatigue and high yield strength (over 1500 MPa).
Tool materials that meet the above-mentioned requirements are tool steels for hot work, which is why forging tools
are usually made of these steels [5]. Currently, the most commonly used materials are: 1.2343, 1.2344, 1.2367, 1.2999,
etc. The typical heat treatment of these steel grades consists in hardening and two or three time tempering. In these
steels, the secondary hardness effect is used, appearing at a tempering temperature of approx. 500°C. Currently,
specialist tool steels are also introduced (eg: alvar, dievar, hotvare, orvar suppreme, unimax, viadar of a Swedish
producer or thermodur 2367 or 2999 from a German manufacturer) as well as other alternative tool materials. These
steels are characterized by high strength, hardness and abrasion resistance in the temperature range of 250 – 700°C.
Moreover, these steels are also resistant to rapid temperature changes, which is of great importance in the case of
repeated heating and cooling of the top layer of the tools [6].
The properties of hot-work tool steels depend on the chemical composition and the appropriate heat treatment. In
these steels, the concentration of carbon is limited to approx. 0.3 ÷ 0.6%. This is due to the need to ensure the
required resistance to thermal fatigue and dynamic loads. The main alloying elements are Cr, W, Mo and V, causing
the effect of secondary hardness during tempering. The Mo content additionally increases the resistance to
tempering during the operation, while vanadium increases the resistance to abrasion and thermal fatigue. Figure 3
presents a comparison of the use of various tool materials for forging equipment.
The presented test results indicate that, in the case of a die for CVJB, characterized by "softer" cavity geometry,
the proposed new tool material (Thermodur 2999) enabled a significant reduction of abrasive wear (Fig. 3a and 3b).
In the case of die inserts used to forge yoke forgings, where the tools contained sharp corners, which could be an
area of stress concentration – notch, the use of Thermodur 2999 steel showed significantly worse results than in the
previously (originally) used V37CrMoV5-1 steel. The analyzed tool crashed after 1040 forgings, while the average
durability is about 8000 pieces.

(a) (b) (c)

                        
Fig. 3. The amount of wear on a die used to forge a CVJB housing: (a) made of UNIMAX steel, after producing 8371 forgings;
(b) made of Thermodur 2999 steel, after producing 9663 forgings;
(c) a damaged die insert used to forge a yoke forging made of Thermodur 2999 steel after 1040 pcs. 
 Z. Gronostajski et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 27 (2019) 124–129 127
4 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

2.2. Construction and shape of tools

In order to increase the durability of the tools exposed to cracking, pre-compression is applied, reinforced by a
single ring or a larger number of concentric rings between which there are shrink or press-fit connections. A change
of the state of stress can substantially reduce the cracking of the tools. The creation of sufficiently high compression
(high loop compressive stresses) during the installation interference should compensate for the very large peripheral
tensile stresses during forging. In addition, reducing the external diameter of the die caused an increase in the
material effort; the reduction in the weight of the tool is obviously beneficial for economic reasons. Selected results
from the FEM modelling are presented in Figure 4. The influence of pre-compression on the circumferential stress
distribution is significant.

Fig. 4. Distributions of circumferential tensile stresses on the die surface obtained by pressing an additional sleeve between the tool and its
holder: a) sleeve thickness – 0.25mm, b) 0.4mm, c) 0.7mm; d) FEM model of tooling constructed in Pro/ENGINEER

Also, the shape of the used tools has an impact not only on the course of the forging process but is also an important
factor affecting their durability. In the literature, a lot of space has been devoted to the optimization of the die cavity. It
turns out that one of the ways of reducing excessive pressures occurring on the die or punch is to choose the optimal
profile of the tools. Unfortunately, it turns out that determining the correct outline and its implementation are difficult and
quite cumbersome. The problems of shape optimization are usually solved with the use of mathematical methods [7].

2.3. Application of surface engineering techniques

The degradation mechanisms observed in the forging tools used in semi-hot and hot forging processes and related
primarily to the surface layer of the tools. In view of the above, modifying the properties of the surface layer of the forging
tools is the most effective way to improve their durability [8]. Shaping the properties of the tool surface layer is possible
owing to the development of surface engineering methods. In general, the techniques for shaping the properties of the
surface layer can be divided into: techniques based on thermo-chemical treatment (diffusion layers), deposition
techniques for CVD and PVD coatings, mechanical techniques (burnishing, shot-peening, etc.), beam techniques
(ion implantation, laser processing), hybrid techniques.
Hybrid surface treatment seems to be the best way to improve the durability of hot forging tools, especially the
use of PVD or CVD layers combined with nitrided layers. In hybrid/duplex layers, the synergic effect of the
advantages of both used treatments can be achieved, which provides new wear resistance [8-9]. Another promising
type of hybrid layers are the layers combining hardfacing (surface arc welding techniques) with nitriding. It is
known that surface arc welding using powder wire is an effective method of forging die regeneration. Regenerative
surface welded (hardfaced) tools are resistant to plastic deformation; they also exhibit good hardness and proper
wear and fatigue resistance in the surface layer. Furthermore, the commonly used nitriding technology increases the
resistance of hot forging tools, as it delays abrasive wear and the surface layer tempering effect. The hybrid layer
combining hardfacing and nitriding exhibits the greatest durability improvement effect and raises the resistance to
fatigue cracking, abrasive wear and plastic deformation. The following results of exploitation tests of die inserts
examined after 3 kinds of surface treatment proof the effect of increased durability. The performed research
involved tools (made of X37CrMoV5-1 steel) after regenerative hardfacing, tools after regular gas nitriding and
tools which underwent both these treatments in the order as mentioned.
128 Z. Gronostajski et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 27 (2019) 124–129
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing00 (2018) 000–000 5

After the tests, three representative tools were selected for further analysis. In Figure 5, one can see a scan of the
worn surfaces compared with the scans of the tools before the operation.

Fig. 5. Comparison of the tool surface scans before and after the operation of 7500 forging cycles:(a) of a hardfaced tool; (b) of a gas nitrided
tool; (c) of a hardfaced and nitrided tool.

In Figure 5, the effect of durability improvement is significant and the tool after hybrid treatment exhibits lower
wear in all the analyzed areas, which is about twice as low in depth and occurs on a smaller part of the working
surface. To confirm this effect, the selected results of microstructural observations made under a scanning electron
microscope are presented in Figure 6.

a) b) c) d) e) f)

Fig. 6. The SEM view of dies in the flat front area:(a) a hardfaced die; (b) a nitrided die; (c) a hardfaced and nitrided die; view of dies in the die
bridge area taken after d) hardfacing, e) nitriding, f) both hardfacing and nitriding

The SEM analysis confirmed that the durability of the tools depends on the type of surface treatment. On the
surface of the hardfaced tools (Figure 6a and 6d), one can observe deep, extensive abrasive furrows and cracks with
the depth of about 0.3-0.5 mm, undergoing surface deformation. The nitrided tools showed good abrasion resistance
and they did not undergo plastic deformation in the flat zone (Figure 6b), but exhibited abrasive wear in the die
bridge area (Figure 6e). The tool after hardfacing and nitriding (Figure 6c and 6f) showed the highest resistance to
abrasion and deformation, which could also be observed on the scan shown in Figure 4c.

2.4. Application of special solutions

Other special solutions may include: forging and cooling devices dedicated to a given process. Such devices
enable precise delivery of a fixed dose of lubricant and setting of the work cycle, which, as shown by the authors'
research, enables a significant (several percent) increase in the durability of forging equipment [10]. Figure 7 shows
a comparison of the old manual lubrication with the new one developed by the authors and additionally, the use of
various tool materials for die inserts. The presented comparison of insert scans (Figure 7) points to interesting tool
wear results. Namely, it can be seen that, in all the cases, the application of the new lubricating device, enabling
precise setting of the lubricant dose, caused a reduction of the tool wear. It can also be observed that ensuring better
tool lubrication conditions resulted in certain shifts in the wear of selected tool areas in the case of the X37CrMoV5-
1 inserts (Figure 7a and 7b). Comparing the tool made of Unimax (from Uddeholm- ESR remelted chromium-
molybdenum-vanadium alloyed tool steel) after 16000 forgings (Figure 7d) to the insert made from the same
material but with the old lubricating device (Figure 7e), clear differences in wear to the disadvantage of the latter
can be seen. In turn, a comparison of the type of tool material used for the inserts makes it possible to observe that
Unimax steel (Figure 7c) provides greater protection against wear compared to X37CrMoV5-1steel (Figure 7b).
 6 Z. Gronostajski
Author et al.Manufacturing
name / Procedia / Procedia Manufacturing 27 (2019) 124–129
00 (2018) 000–000 129

Fig. 7. Comparison of the scanning results for die inserts: (a) made of X37CrMoV5-1 steel after 9,000 forgings with the old lubrication system;
(b) made of X37CrMoV5-1steel after 8000 forgings with the new lubrication system; (c) made of UNIMAX steel after 8000 forgings with the
new lubrication system; (d) made of UNIMAX steel after 16000 forgings with the new lubrication system; (e) made of UNIMAX after 16000
forgings with the old lubrication system [10].

3. Summary

The paper discusses selected effective methods of improving the forging tool durability, which, based on the
research and experience of the authors, provide the highest effectiveness in increasing tool life. At present, there are
no clear criteria for the selection of methods improving tool durability; only general directions are recognized. That
is why, every process, or even operation, should be analyzed separately. As it has been proved in the work, the
proposed directions of increasing tool durability on the basis of the currently applied methods, with the
demonstration of their applicative character, justify the use of the latter. Currently, it seems that surface engineering
methods, in particular the use of PVD hybrid layers, are very effective, although expensive. Also, the development
of own methods dedicated to specific forging applications, such as specialist solutions, including the original
lubrication system, provide good results in this area.

Acknowledgements

This study was founded by the National Centre for Research and Development, Poland (NCBR);
grant no. POIG.01.03.01-02-063/12.

References

[1] Kocańda A, Określenie trwałości narzędzia w obróbce plastycznej metali, In: Piela A, Grosman F, Kusiak J, Pietrzyk M, editors.
Informatyka w Technologii Metali, Wydawnictwo Politechniki Śląskiej, Gliwice, Poland, 2003, p. 213-256.
[2] Hawryluk M, Review of selected methods of increasing the life of forging tools in hot die forging processes, Arch. Civ. Mech. Eng.
2016;16(4): 845-866.doi.org/10.1016/j.acme.2016.06.001.
[3] Hawryluk M, Zwierzchowski M, Marciniak M, Sadowski P, Phenomena and degradation mechanisms in the surface layer of die inserts
used in the hot forging processes, Eng. Fail. Anal. 2017;79:313-329.doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2017.04.036.
[4] Zhu F, Wang Z, Lv M, Multi-objective optimization method of precision forging process parameters to control the forming quality, Int. J.
Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2016;83(9-12):1763-1771.doi:10.1007/s00170-015-7682-1.
[5] Bendjoudi Y, Becker E, Bigot R, Abdelaziz R, Contribution in the evaluation of a performance index of hot forging dies, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 2017;88(5-8):1187-1201.doi:10.1007/s00170-016-8829-4.
[6] Persson A, Hogmark S, Bergstrom J, Thermal fatigue cracking of surface engineered hot work tool steels, Surf. Coat.
Technol.2005;191:216-227.doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2004.04.053
[7] Gronostajski Z, Hawryluk M, Kaszuba M, Niechajowicz A, Polak S, Walczak S, Jabłoński D, Die profile optimization for forging constant
velocity joint casings, Arch. Metall. Mater. 2011;56(2):551-558. doi: 10.2478/v10172-011-0059-z
[8] Mazurkiewicz A, Smolik J, The innovative directions in development and implementations of hybrid technologies in surface engineering,
Arch. Metall. Mater. 2015;60(3):2161-2172.doi.org/10.1515/amm-2015-0362.
[9] Smolik J, Gulde M, WalkowiczSuchánek J, Influence of the structure of the composite: 'Nitrided layer/PVD coating' on the durability of
forging dies made of steel DIN-1. 2367, Surf. Coat. Technol. 2014;180-181:506-511.doi.org/10.1016/j.surfcoat.2003.10.152.
[10] Hawryluk M, Gronostajski Z, Ziemba J, Dworzak Ł, Jabłoński P, Rychlik M, Analysis of the influence of lubrication conditions on tool
wear used in hot die forging processes, Eksploat. Niezawodn.2018;20(2):169–176. http://dx.doi.org/10.17531/ein.2018.2.01.