QUESTIONS, ANSWERS, MORE QUESTIONS

Twenty - five Years of Experience in Discussing Rolls and Rolling Technology

Dr.-Ing. Karl Heinrich Schrder
ESW, Eisenwerk Sulzau-Werfen
A-5451 Tenneck, Austria
Phone: +43 6468 5285 100
E-mail: ks@esw.co.at
Key Words: rolls, mechanical properties of rolls, coefficient of friction, quality assurance

INTRODUCTION

Roll makers always ask about rolling conditions and the necessity to choose the right grade of roll material
(whether the decision is right or wrong is proved in the mill) and roll users always ask about the mechanical
and physical properties of roll material. Sometimes they feed these figures into their rolling model, but
sometimes they also need them for unknown reasons. This information is very rarely useful for selecting the
right supplier.
In July 1978 John M. Dugan published in AISE (No. 15222) an article about "FACTORS WHICH
INFLUENCE ROLL SPECIFICATIONS" [I], the book consists of 88 pages. At that time- as I had only
been in roll-business for less than three years - I hoped to find help. However, fortunately he did not really
give 'factors which influence' - otherwise I would have had trouble in using these factors correctly.
Rollmakers do their job as well as possible and they try to reproduce success without to many theories
because they know that it is easy to have a good theory - and much more sophisticated to have a good
product - however it is more important to have a good product instead of a good theory!
Dugan was not really concerned about rolling conditions 'which influence roll specifications' - he knew too
much - but he discussed all kinds of roll failures due to rolling accidents. However, he did know that not too
much roll abuse can be compensated by the best roll grade.
In Oct. 1985 I presented a paper in Cleveland on "Inspection Parameters which control Performance of
High Chrome Rolls" [2] discussing the influence of roll surface hardness, residual stresses, roll
composition, etc. - but since then, l amstill asked the same questions.
Rolls usually do not fail due to normal rolling conditions, but due to mill accidents.And mill accidents are
hard to describe quantitatively, so discussions continue - besides some clear events - for a long time.
Luckily most mills improved their rolling conditions, reduced cobble rates etc. and the roll grades have
been improved aswell.Theoverall roll performance is rising.
On the way to achieving better performing rolls many properties are discussed, however this is a long
story of misunderstandings, misinterpretations etc. The main problem was and is that mechanical
properties are

42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

tested with specimen under one directional stress - however, in rolls we have more or less always (2)
3dimensional stresses and the roll surface is always loaded complexly by mechanical, thermal and
corrosion systems.And rolls are loaded with residual stresses. We have to distinguish carefully whether we
mean material / specimen properties or roll behaviour! If this distinction is not made endless
misunderstandings occur.
There are many examples for false theories like for example:
theory of importance
stories ...
theory of stress relief in compound rolls due to plastic deformation of core material
theory about oxidation of roll surface, while in reality the oxide layer only is built by strip scale
Everybody needs models, 'theories', to develop new ideas - but these should only be discussed in public
when proved. A good result is not necessarily the verification of a theory.
It took me many years to understand the different thinking of roll users and roll makers and how they
approach the same problems. Therefore in this paper I want to cover some of the most frequently discussed
questions in a (my) general way to summarise 25 years of personal experience.

MECHANICALPROPERTIES
Basic properties of tools like rolls and properties of the material the tools are made of, are two totally
different sides of a coin, and very often this difference is ignored. However, when we start to discuss
mechanical properties, we have to distinguish whetherwemeanmaterial-orroll-properties.
Hardness - is the most boring subject of discussions! Why ??
There are many methods and measurement instruments with basically (but not exclusively) 2
systems: static measurement: HV, HB, HRC
dynamic measurement: Shore C, D, ...; Equotip D, E, ...
and there are conversion/confusion tables, which neglect / ignore statistical variations and induce more
accuracy than exists.
Hardness is strongly influenced by the roll surface conditions. Roll surface hardnessmaybemeasuredsome
Shore (1 ShC = 10 HV) too high due to work hardening or some Shore too low due to annealing by wrong
grinding compared to the 'real'material hardness.
And the variation of hardness in rolls is much higher than most people believe: For rolls standard deviation
can reach 30 HV [2, 3] and even the range of normal specifications is only 5 ShC (= 50 HV) (average 2 =
average 6 ShC -> this means: no process capability - or everybody has to average average values - till there
is no more variation).
What is the purpose of hardness readings? Answer:
For roll makers: they control the process of roll manufacturing.
For mill people: They should control Work hardening [4] by hardness measurement to avoid roll failure
due to surface fatigue. However, work hardening only occurs after plastic deformation and increases
with yield strength of the material. Fatigue often starts at stress raisers (cracks) with stresses far below
the yield strength
42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

For science: Many material properties are strictly related to hardness, there are all kinds of rules - but it
is necessary to know the rules [5].
Another question: Why do mill people want to discuss hardness?
It is the only property besides dimensions that can be tested by incoming inspections. However, after
mentioning the facts above there is no further comment.
Mill people believe in hardness giving information about roll quality and roll performance, however this is
helpful only in rare exceptions. Fig. 1 shows that different roll grades with totally different properties were
always produced in the same range of hardness.

Fig. 1: Range of barrel hardness and content of carbides of different roll grades
A wide variation of hardness has almost no influence on roll performance, see Fig. 2 and Fig. 3. The
same roll hardness of different rolls of one grade can be achieved by various matrix micro structures
and various amount and type of carbides which have a high impact on roll behaviour - not on hardness!
The relation of hardnesses of b.u.r.s to WRs is often discussed, and even here no easy answer is available.
Besides; we have to consider whichmaterial in the mill is softest to take plastic deformations in case of an
42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

accident: That is the rolled sheet in HSM (in so far as no specialities are rolled) - and b.u.r. may have the
same hardness as WR, and that is the b.u.r. in CSM - and b.u.r.s should be definitively softer than WRs
However special situations always need special care.

Fig. 2: Tonnage performance of lCDP work rolls 680x1900 mm, excluding mill accidents

Fig. 3: Tonnage performance of lCDP work rolls 680x1900 mm, including lost mm due to mill
42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

Compression strength - is directly proportional to hardness (R - 3,5 x HV) for most materials made of
iron (grey iron, steel, high-chrome-iron or - steel,HSSetc.),butcompression strength is never required for
a roll - however safety against impression marks, local plastic deformations and in this case the shear
stress is to be discussed. Shear is calculated as the difference of 3-dimensional stresses,

where 6r,;, for rolls is highly influenced by the residual stresses, while i,a, is represented by the roll
hardness. For rolls of the same hardness this means, that the material which represents the highest level
of residual stresses gives the best resistance againstmarks.
How to avoid marks, intrusions?
Easy - just avoid local overloads, which 'should not' happen in normal rolling conditions! Tensile strength - Why should we discuss tensile strength?
High tensile strength of core material is mainly required to avoid thermal breakage of rolls, brittle,
spontaneous breakages due to high temperature gradients in a roll, where the residual tensile stress in the
core material is an additional prestress. The easiest way to avoid thermal breakage is to minimize
thermal gradients and this can be achieved by good rolling / cooling strategies and proper handling of
rolls.
There is a theory that the firecrack pattern of roll surface is related to tensile strength (and to fatigue
strength), however the question of crack propagation has to be discussed in relation to residual stress and
microstructure as well. The best way to achieve a good roll surface is excellent roll cooling. The roll
grade andwearhassomeinputonrollproperties.However,rolling conditions are important aswelt!
Fatigue strength - Who knows what?
Figures of fatigue strength gained from tests with standard small specimen are practically useless, and we
have to consider: size of rolls, notches, impact, environment, superposition of different multiaxial
stresses etc., etc. So we have only our experience with rolls and measures for many possible cases!
Fatigue strength is of high importance for high stressed filets of back up rolls and for all kind of spalls.
Fatigue strength is highly influenced by notches and residual stress (Smith Diagram!). There are some
basic figures of tolerated stress - however, in cases where there is corrosion fatigue everything is
different and we have to fight corrosion first [6].
Spalls: An interesting example of fatigue failures are saddle spalls of WR in HSM finishing stand
originating in core (grey iron with lamellar graphite) material of high chrome iron roll, which were
experienced in high stressed rolls in some mills, due to changes in rolling strategies early in the 1980s
(later in ICDP rolls as well) [7]. There have been different methods to avoid this type of failures:
lower tensile pre-stressing (lower residual stresses in the rolls) or - core material with higher fatigue
strength, ductile iron versus grey iron with lamellar graphite, and the latter solution was adopted by all
rollmakers in general.
Another example of fatigue problems are spalls in ICDP or HSS rolls. These materials are very
notchsensitive, so it is highly recommended to eliminate all kinds of cracks, whenever these rolls are
reground, otherwise typical `cats' - tongue band type spalls may occur. [8]. High chrome iron or steel
material ismuchlesssensitive.
Residual stresses have a high impact on fatigue [9], and fracture mechanics might be helpful in solving
problems.
42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

Torque - is not reported (or only very rarely) to create fatigue failures. Torque damage of drive ends of
rolls (45 breakage) is normally a spontaneous breakage due to one single giant overload, so the limit
for torque is considered as static torque strength ( ~ 80 % of tensile strength).
Young's modulus - the customer asks fbr this - but is it a%gore or a variable?
Young's modulus of compound rolls is a mixture of Young's modulus of core- and shell material and
can be precisely measured, however the 'mixture' varies during roll life, when the shell materialthickness is reduced to almost nothing. However it seems there was never any real problem, whatever
the figure was!
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES OF ROLL MATERIALS
are often discussed for some rolling models, however - to my knowledge - none of the roll makers is
capable of testing thermal conductivity, specific heat, at room - or elevated temperature etc., etc.
These properties are always taken from literature or measured by high-tech-research institutions. There is
not much sense in asking the individual roll maker - even they are supposed to answer all questions of their
customers, of course!
Who can give good answers? Nobody! But answers are requested.
PROPERTIES FOR EASY TESTING OF MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Wear - Who knows the answer? Which parameters are of importance?
Wear is an object of libraries without any easy answers! Rolling conditions are of high importance for
the wear of rolls. For example: High Chrome Iron b.u.r. don't wear in cold strip mills (these rolls fail due
to spalling, low resistance against crack-propagation), but they wear like butter in the sun in hot strip
mills.!
The reason? Rolling conditions!
Basically the diagram of Khrushov is helpful, Fig. 4: for one material wear resistance increase with
hardness; at the same hardness wear resistance increases with the percentage of carbide forming elements,
Fig. 5 shows the influence of various alloying elements.

Fig. 4: Diagram of Khrushov [5, G]

42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

Fig. 5: Wear versus alloy equivalent (Range of alloys: 0,30 - 0,44%C; 0,02 - 0,38%Si; 0,31 - 0,83%Mn;
1,18 - 3,03%Cr; 0,08 - 3,04%Mo; 0,26 - 1,92%V and 1,42 - 5,85%W) - from [10].
For hot rolling of steel the temperature of rolled material is very important. For a long time there has been
theory of hard (high temperature) and soft (low temperature) oxides on the strip which might influence
wear, but last year at the WMSP Conference in Baltimore [11] this theory was regarded as obsolete,
because there is never enough time during rolling to build up oxides in the right equilibrium phase because
the time between the stands is too short - but nevertheless it is true that wear is less when the temperature of
strip surface is low (less than 900 C), skin cooling of strip is evident to reduce wear in hot rolling of steel something that has been known formanyyears, especially when adamite was used for W.R. material (some
20-30 years ago). And: hot rolling of stainless steel - almost no scale - increases wear heavily. And
especially strip edges of stainless steel - at lower temperatures - increase wear, the work roll roughens - due
tomicro-sticking or other reasons.
Wear is at a minimum with HSS-rolls, however they are not used world wide for the very last stand of
HSM due to sticking problems, where specific pressure is at its maximum [12].
Lubrication reduces wear and sticking, but there are still problems to be solved.

Coefficient of friction - Why is the coefficient of friction higher with HSS-rolls than those with High
Chrome Iron or ICDP?
The coefficient of friction is under discussion, especially for HSS-roll-material. CRM [13] did some basic
studies for the European rollmakers (CHEF) and it turned out that there is no real difference between the
various materials for work rolls for hot rolling: ICDP, high chrome iron and HSS. They studied the
coefficient of friction as a function of deformation, Fig. 6. Lubricants change the contact conditions and
thus the coefficient of friction as well - however the difference between the various materials remains
negligible.

42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

Fig. 6: Evolution of the coefficient of friction of different roll grades with and without lubrication
(FEMCoulomb model with barreling) [13].
However CRM [14] at last year's WMSP-Conference in Baltimore presented the results for the coefficient
of friction during rolling - calculated from measured rolling - separation force versus calculated separation
force which show a totally different situation, Fig. 7. This does not correlate with above mentioned results!
We have to consider roll surface during a rolling campaign and the change in roll surface, mainly the fire
crack pattern! Fig. 8 shows the different fire crack pattern for different materials - heavy primary cracks
influence the coefficient of friction more than the structure of carbides or anything else [15].
The coefficient of friction is influenced more by rolling conditions than by the roll material properties! In
mills where roll cooling is most efficient the difference in coefficient of friction between different materials
is not evident. Indeed, somemills never reported any increase of separation force!
And even under severe rolling conditions, lubricants may minimise the increase incoefficient of
friction!!
Banding / Peeling - How to improve roll-, strip surface?
Banding or peeling is a problem inmanymills.ItisknownandproventhattheoxidelayeronW.R. is built up
only of strip oxides, oxidation of rolls never was proven (and it is almost impossible because roll surface
temperature never exceeds 550 C, and this only in contact with rolled material under exclusion of oxygen).
Banding is a mill problem and it really can't be solved by roll material grade so far, although there are some
variations [16]. Great improvements have been achieved by better roll / strip cooling systems.
It seams evident that the rolled-on layers of oxides on WRs are stripped of when light gauge is rolled
with high reduction in the early stands of the finishing mill.
42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

Fig. 7: Evolution of the coefficient of friction during a rolling campaign [14].

Fig. 8: Surfaces of worn work rolls, etching 12" Nital, SEM.

A - high chrome work roll
B - HSS work roll
Angle of incidence of the electron beam is 45 to the roll surface.

42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

QUALITY ASSURANCE

Some years ago the ISO 9000 ff quality standard was introduced to keep the quality of mass produced
cars and parts for automotive industries or others under control. Rolls are customer specified single
products. Such systems are undoubtedly useful for controlling 'industrial production', for instance rolls.
However, something is different: Each roll is 'handmade' and within very narrow tolerances. For
making rolls - we are talking about small figures, tenth of rolls, never talking about big numbers,
which are necessary for real statistics (min. 100 pieces of the same design!) - no S.P.C is applicable!
ESW is certified, of course! But what does this mean? Process-, machining capability?!

For process capability the tolerances should be wide compared to standard deviation of the process!! This
might be true for the chemical composition of rolls - which is not specified by our customer. However, our
customers ask for T.I.R. less than 5 micrometer, our measuring devices show only digits of 1 micron!!
There is no process capability! Hardness variation (see above) is larger than the tolerance! No process
capability! In case process- and machining capability do not exist, it is necessary to check each individual
specification - which is done anyway with each roll!!
What purpose do questions about capabilities have? - We know.

We have to produce, piece by piece into the tolerances, with no way of statistical approval, we have to
produce - to check - to produce - till it fits!!
We have to meet our customers' requirements - but, because machine- and process capabilities are out of
reach for single produced parts (rolls), we have to work like an artist to reach the goal.
Due to high-tech data analysis we are capable of improving our process, but we have to manufacture
each single roll according to the specifications.
There is no way of buying machines which guarantee machining capability for rolls! We have to work
hard to reach the goal!
And to find out something about the quality of a roll maker's product it is not only helpful to check the
quality system, it is useful to check the scrap rate, the claim rate - and to analyse the reasons and details.
ISO 9000 ff is useful for professional inspectors - it is of no use when deciding about the quality of rolls
produced, each individual roll has to be tested carefully.
Statistical evaluations are helpful for roll-makers in determining their actions to improve the roll quality - it
is of no use for our customers! To prove performance figures, we should keep in mind: 100 is a good number
for statistical evaluations, numbers below 10 are not good for statistical statements.

42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

CONCLUSIONS
1. Roll makers and roll users frequently have to discuss experiences, performance results, special
requirements of the mill. Roll failure problems can be solved by good co-operation.
2. To avoid misunderstandings and misinterpretations everybody should distinguish very carefully
whether roll properties or the properties of the roll materials are concerned.
3. Statistical findings are useful for roll making to improve the process of roll production - statistical
process control (SPC) is only applicable for (automated) mass production.
4. Theories are sometimes useful for (commercial) discussions and may help to create new ideas. However
facts about roll performance (without and with loss of useful stock due to mill accidents) are most important
for roll development.
5. The best way for roll makers to achieve better rolls is to ensure that better materials and improved
manufacturing processes are used and that roll users take account of rolling conditions and improved
rolling processes.
Good and close co-operation between both sides is essential
REFERENCES
1. J. M. Dugan, "Factors which influence roll specifications", Association of Iron and Steel Engineers,
July 1978
2. K. H. Schrder, " Inspection parameters which control performance of high chromium rolls", Proc. of
the 27`h Mechanical Working and Steel Processing Conference, Cleveland, October 1985
3. Investigation Report of CRM: "Hardness deviation"
4. K. H. Schrder, "Beitrag zum Verfestigungsverhalten der Stahle durch Kaltverformung", Z. fur
Werkstofftech., 11 (1980), S. 73-76
5. K. H. Schrder, W. Eilert, "Zur Entwicklung der Qualitaten fair Kaliberwalzen", Stahl and
Eisen 104 ' 984) Heft 20, S. 1005-1008
6. K. H. Schroder, "State of the art of rolls for the production of flat rolled products", World Steel &
Metalworking, Vol. 6 1984/85, pp. 120-124
7. K. H. Schrder, "Heavy spalls originating in the cores of high chromium rolls", Metallurgical Plant
and Technology, issue No. 2/1986, Verlag Stahleisen
8. K. H. Schrder, "Remarks on the measurement of, distribution in and influence of residual stresses in
heavy construction units with large cross section", Residual Stresses in Science and Technology Vol. 2,
DGM 1987, pp. 927-933
9. "Rolls for the Metalworking Industries", Publication of Iron and Steel Society, 1990, p. 139, 235
10. Werkstoffkunde Stahl Hrsg. Verein Deutscher Eisenhuttenleute Berlin; Heidelberg; New York; Tokyo;
Springer; Dsseldorf: Verlag Stahleisen
42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000

11. Discussion at 41st Mechanical Working and Steel Processing Conference, ISS, Baltimore 1999

12. K. H. Schrder, "Rolling conditions in hot strip mills and their influence on the performance of work
rolls", Metallurgical Plant and Technology, issue No. 4/1988, Verlag Stahleisen, pp. 44-56
13. Centrum voor Research in the Metallurgie, "Friction measurement in hot-rolling by means of
the tribological ring compression test", Investigation Report of CRM, May 1997
14. D. Steinier, D. Liquet, J.Lacroix, H. Uitjtdebroeks, J. C. Herman, "Effect of processing parameters in
the front stands of a HSM on the performance of HSS work rolls", 41st MWSP Conf., ISS, Baltimore,
1999
15. K. H. Schrder, B. Feistritzer, M. Windhager, K. H. Ziehenberger, "Progress of carbide enhanced ICDP
(and remarks on the coefficient of friction of HSS work rolls in hot strip mills", will be presented at the 37th
Rolling Seminar Conf.,ABM, Curitiba 2000
16. ESW - paper, in near future

42nd MWSP Conf. Proc., ISS, Toronto 2000