Applied Mathematical Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

www.elsevier.com/locate/apm

Prediction of temperature distribution and

phase transformation on the run-out table in the process of
hot strip rolling
Siamak Serajzadeh
Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Sharif University of Technology, Azadi Avenue,
P.O. Box 11365-9466, Tehran, Iran
Received 25 March 2002; received in revised form 21 January 2003; accepted 14 February 2003

Abstract

In this paper a mathematical model based on the nite element method and the Scheil additivity rule is
presented for predicting the temperature distribution and phase transformation behavior on the run-out
table during the hot strip rolling of a low carbon steel. The model considers the austenite to ferrite and
pearlite transformations, the temperature-dependent material properties of the cooling austenite as well as
the austenite work hardening eect on the kinetics of austenite transformation. To determine the validity of
the model predictions, the time-temperature histories of a low carbon steel rod in dierent cooling media
were measured and also hot rolling experiments were performed. Good agreement between the predictions
and the experimental results indicates the reliability of the model.
2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Mathematical modeling; Hot rolling; Run-out table; Austenite

1. Introduction

The knowledge of phase transformation behavior of steel during cooling has always been of
great value to the mill designers. This is because the cooling rate of the steel has a dominant eect
on the nal grain size and phase structure as well as on the phase morphology of the rolled
material [1]. For example, increasing the cooling rate leads to a greater under cooling, which in
turn leads to a higher nucleation rate of the new phase and a microstructure of a ner grain size [2].
Moreover, if the cooling rate of the austenite exceeds a critical value, the type of transformation

E-mail address: serajzad@mehr.sharif.edu (S. Serajzadeh).

0307-904X/$ - see front matter 2003 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/S0307-904X(03)00085-4
862 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

can change from a diusional control process to a displacive one forming the martensite phase
during rapid cooling.
During the last decade the modeling of phase transformation during the cooling of steel has
been studied in a few research works [311]. However, most of the conducted researches have been
concentrated on quenching of steel and resulting thermal stresses or calculation of CCT diagrams
[39]. Although there are a few research works dealing with phase transformations and heat
transfer in run-out table [10,11] but more investigations may be useful to develop on line models
for controlling the phase transformation on the run-out table under real production conditions. In
the present paper, the heat transfer and phase change on the run-out table during the process of
commercial continuous hot strip rolling of a low carbon steel is studied. To predict the phase
transformation as well as the temperature variations in the strip, the Scheil additivity rule and
Avrami-type equation for handling the ferrite and pearlite transformations are utilized. To deal
with the temperature-dependent material properties during cooling as well as with the tempera-
turetransformation relationship, an iterative procedure is employed because of the nonlinear
nature of the problem. The validity of the model is veried by comparing the predictions with the
experimental timetemperature history results of a low carbon steel cooling in air and water and
the practical data results from hot rolling experiments.

2. Mathematical model

2.1. Heat transfer model

In the run-out stage of continuous hot strip rolling process the strip is cooled rapidly by water
sprays to lower the temperature of the steel and to rene the grain structure of the product. To
handle the timetemperature history of the material during the cooling period, the related heat
conduction equation must be solved. The heat transfer equation of the strip can be described as
follows [10]:



o oT o oT oT
k k q_ qc 1
oy oy oz oz ot
where T and t are temperature and time, respectively, and q_ represents the rate of heat of
transformation. q is the density of the rolled stock, c the specic heat of the rolled metal, and k the
thermal conductivity of the rolled stock. When the length direction (x direction) of the strip with
respect to the other dimensions is very large and the velocity of the material along the longitudinal
direction is very high, it is possible to ignore the heat conduction along this direction relative to
that along the y and z directions. In such a situation, Eq. (1) would be valid. To solve this partial
dierential equation, it is vital to know the boundary and initial conditions. The boundary
conditions can be expressed as
oT
k hw1 T  Tw1
on 2
oT
k hw2 T  Tw2
on
 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875 863

where hw1 and hw2 are the convection heat transfer coecients at the impingement and stable lm
zones, respectively. The initial condition for Eq. (1) is the temperature distribution within the strip
just after exiting the last deformation pass. For determining the initial condition for a continuous
hot strip rolling line, temperature and strain elds as well as microstructural changes at dierent
thermal zones in the roughing and nishing stands has been simulated [12]. For this purpose, the
heat conduction equation for the deforming metal should be solved within the various thermal
zones, such as the deformation zones, interstand stages and descaling zones [12].

2.2. Microstructural model

The kinetics of the diusional transformation of austenite to ferrite and pearlite have been
described for the isothermal condition by Avrami equation [1] as follows:
X 1  expbtn 3
here b and n are material parameters that for steels they can be obtained from TTT diagram, t is
the elapsed time from the beginning of the transformation. b and n in the above equation can be
calculated from the following equations:
 
ln1  Xs
ln
ln1  Xf ln1  Xs
n   b 4
ts tsn
ln
tf
Referring to the TTT diagram, Xs and Xf are the detectable start and nish fractions for the
austenite to pearlite or ferrite transformation. The above parameters are usually about 0.05 and
0.95, respectively [13]. The rate equation for the transformation is an additive one [14] if the
kinetic equation can be written as two separate functions, i.e.
X_ f T  gX 5
where f T is a function of temperature alone and gX is a function of the amount of trans-
formation. In such a situation, the Scheil additivity rule would be valid [14]. Using the Avrami
equation it can be derived as
X_ nb ln1  X n1=n 1  X 6
where b is a function of temperature. The rest of the right-hand side of the equation is a function
of X provided n does not vary during the phase transition. On the other words, when n in Avrami
equation dose not vary with temperature the transformation will be additive. In such a condition
the cooling time may be discretized into small time steps of constant temperature. Then, Avrami
equation together with the Scheil additivity rule can be applied to predict the phase change during
cooling of the austenite. By applying this rule, the elapsed time from the beginning of the phase
transition to the ith time step is dened as follows:
2
 31=n
1
ln
6 1  X i1 7
6
ti Dt ti1 ti1 4 7 7
bT i 5
864 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

where X i1 is the amount of phase transition until the i  1th step and Dt is the time step. In this
way the elapsed time associated with the ith time step can be calculated and thus the amount of
transformation in this time interval can be predicted with the aid of Eq. (3).
It should be noted that in Eq. (1), q_ is the internal heat source due to the transformation of
austenite and this term can be expressed as [15]
DXi
q_ DHi 8
Dt
where DHi is the amount of heat of transformation at temperature Ti and DXi is the transformed
fraction. Regarding the heat ow equation, the temperature distribution within the cooling metal
is aected by the released heat of the transformation. Furthermore, the amount of transfor-
mation is a strong function of the temperature. To overcome this complexity, an iterative pro-
cedure is employed until the temperature distribution in each time step converges to a constant
condition.
The Scheil additivity rule was also employed to estimate the incubation time prior to the start
of the ferrite transformation. However, it should be noted that work hardened austenite may be
produced after the last nishing stand due to partial recrystallization in the nishing stage which
in turn this phenomenon can alter the incubation time as well as growth rate of ferrite [16]. In this
work for including the work hardening eect, a one-parameter correction function has been
employed to modify the Scheil additivity rule as follows:
X Dti
1 9
si f e
where Dti is the time step at temperature Ti and si is the incubation time at this temperature and
f e is a function of accumulated strain within the transforming material.
In addition to the eect of accumulated strain, it has been established that the austenite initial
grain size has an important role on the kinetics of transformation [1]. To include the eect this
factor, the Avrami equation can be presented as

m 
dcTTT
X 1  exp  b tn 10
dc
where dcTTT is the grain size used to construct the TTT diagrams, dc is the grain size before the
transformation and m is a constant equal to 1 for ferrite and 2 for pearlite transformations [15].
The eect of cooling rate on the ferrite grain size can be carried out by the model considering
the run-out table conditions. The grain size is given by the following relation for CMn steels [17]:
da0 11:7 0:14dc 37:7R0:5 11
where dc is the austenite grain size before transformation (in lm) and R presents the cooling rate
(C/s). It is worth noting that the work hardening of austenite can alter the kinetics of the
transformation and ferrite grain size. Straining leads to an increase in the dislocation density as
well as in the grain boundary surface area that increases the rate of nucleation. To take this into
account, the grain size equation used by Beynon and Sellars [18] for CMn steels was utilized:
p
da da0 1  0:45 er 12
 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875 865

where da0 and da are the transformed ferrite grain sizes obtained from unstrained and work
hardened austenite, respectively. Here er is the accumulated strain within the austenite.

3. Materials and experiments

In this paper a low carbon steel with the chemical composition, shown in Table 1, was studied.
Using the TTT diagram for this steel, the transformation start and nish times for dierent
temperatures were evaluated. Then, the values of n and b in the Avrami equation for both the
ferrite and the pearlite transformations were calculated. It was found that n for both types of
phase change remain approximately constant and is equal to 0.7 and 3.8 for the ferrite and pearlite
phases, respectively. In contrast, b was found to be strongly temperature dependent obeying the
following equations:


T  620
bf 14:2 exp  Ferrite
25:1

 13
T  595
bp 65:3 exp  Pearlite
4:2
After verifying the additivity rule, cooling experiments were carried out using low carbon steel
cylinders. The cylinders were of 12 mm diameter and 120 mm length. Under these conditions, the
temperature gradient along the length of the specimens can be ignored with respect to the other
gradients. To record the timetemperature history, the specimens were drilled and the K-type
chromelalumel thermocouples were embedded in the drilled holes. Then, the metal bars were
heated up to 900 C and held at this temperature for 10 min, after which they were cooled in the
air and water.
Also, to determine the eect of work hardening on kinetics of transformation, the cylindrical
hot compression samples with height to diameter ratio of 1.5 were heated up to 1000 C and held
for 10 min to be fully austenitized and then cooled to 850 C where they were deformed to dif-
ferent degrees of deformation of 0%, 15%, 45% and 60% and then after 10 s stay at this tem-
perature they were cooled to 750 C for performing ferrite transformation and after dierent
holding time i.e. 2, 10, 30, 100, 200 and 500 s the samples were quenched to room temperature and
the ferrite volume fraction was measured. In addition, hot rolling experiments were preformed to
study the rolling condition on nal microstructure. For this purpose, the samples with dimensions
of 2.5
60
150 mm were heated to 950 C for 10 min and then rolled at dierent rolling gage
and then air-cooled. In order to assess ferrite grain size, the intercept method was employed [1]
and ferrite grain size at various regions of the rolled metal was measured employing three dierent
lines.

Table 1
Chemical composition of the low carbon steel slabs rolled in the hot rolling plant of the Mobarake Steel Complex (in
wt%)
C Mn Si P (max) S (max) Cr (max) N (ppm) B (ppm)
0.14 0.9 0.09 0.025 0.02 0.08 60 10
866 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

To calculate the heat of transformation, the data published by Darken and Gurry [19] were
utilized and the following temperature-dependent relations were derived:
DHc!a 20789  15:623T  0:24T 2 J=kg
14
DHc!p 120848 52:42T  0:158T 2
It should be noted that the thermo-physical properties of the cooling steel are depended on
temperature. Thus, in order to predict an accurate temperature history as well as the phase
transformation kinetics, the variation in the thermo-physical properties with temperature were
taken into account. These properties were represented by the following relations using the data
presented in [19]:
cap 14822:82  495:64T 0:55237T 2  2:0495
104 T 3 J=kg C
cpp 1158:44 11:31T  0:024T 2 1:777
105 T 3 15
ccp 474:622 1:148T

k 59:92  0:0221T  5:4

105 T 2 4:3
108 T 3 W=m K
where cap , cpp and ccp are specic heat of ferrite, pearlite and austenite, respectively. k is the thermal
conductivity.

4. Simulation results

Fig. 1 shows the measured and predicted timetemperature histories at the center of cylindrical
rods at two dierent cooling rates. As can be seen from the cooling curves, there is a good
agreement between the measured and calculated results. Figs. 2 and 3 present the eect of pre-
strain on the progress of ferrite transformation and incubation time. As it is observed incubation
time is a function of pre-strain while the growth rate is not aected signicantly by the pre-strain
especially at lower pre-strains. Based on the relationship between incubation time and amount of
pre-strain the Scheil additivity rule has been employed in the mathematical modeling as follows:
X Dti
1 16
si 1  e2
Figs. 4 and 5 present the predicted through-thickness ferrite grain size and the optical micrograph
of the rolling experiments at 950 C and reduction of 25%, respectively. Regarding the gures, the
predicted grain size varies between 15 and 22 lm while the mean grain size achieved in practice is
about 20 lm also the similar ferrite grain size distribution has been achieved for both the ex-
perimental and simulated results. So, it is found there is a good agreement between the two sets of
data that veries the validity of the model. Also, as it is seen in Fig. 5, the ferrite grain size varies
through-thickness direction, and the sub-surface layer has the smallest grain size. This is due to
the eect of strain accumulation at this region (Fig. 6) together with the eect of higher cooling
rate at surface area.
Based on the proposed model the run-out table of MSC has been modeled. Tables 2 and 3
present the rolling program and Fig. 7 shows the schematic diagram of cooling arrangement on
 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875 867

1000

900 Predicted
900 Predicted
Experimental
Experimental
800
800
700

Temperature (oC)
600
Temperature (oC)

700
500

400
600
300

500 200

100
Cooled in Air Cooled in Water
400 0
0 20 40 60 80 100 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5

Fig. 1. Comparison between the predictions and the experimental temperaturetime history for (a) cooling in air and
(b) cooling in water.

0.8

T=750 C
0.7

0.6
Ferrite Volume Fraction

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

=0
0.1 =15%
=60%
0.0
1 10 100 1000

Time (Sec)
Fig. 2. Ferrite volume fraction vs. time at dierent pre-strains.
868 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

12

10

8
Incubation time (Sec)

T= 750 C
0

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0

Fig. 3. Eect of pre-stain on incubation time for ferrite transformation.

the run-out table in MSC. The total length of the run-out table is 104 m. The distance between the
last nishing stand and the rst water jet is 20 m. Top cooling units are consist of 64 headers
divided into 52 independent water jet blades and 12 independent cooling units each formed by one
laminar header. Bottom cooling is carried out through spray jets. There are four water banks each
having 32 headers, each formed of four rows of sprays and of four rows in the ne cooling zone.
The temperature variation along the run-out table of the hot strip rolling line of the MSC is
displayed in Fig. 8 where the convection heat transfer coecient in the impingement zone and the
stable boiling lm region were chosen as 3200 and 450 W/m2 K based on the applied water
pressure [5], respectively. It can be seen from this gure that the uctuation in temperature at the
surface of the strip is greater than that in the central region while the temperature variation within
the metal has a smoother uctuation.
To predict the kinetics of ferrite and pearlite transformations, it is vital to know the initial
austenite grain size before transformation. Besides, for the prediction of the austenite grain size it
is necessary to determine the temperature and strain eld within the rolled metal after the last
nishing stand and austenite recrystallization kinetics. In this study, the mathematical approach
used for modeling hot rolling line and the rate equations for austenite recrystallization in [20,21],
respectively, were employed to achieve the austenite grain size variation during hot rolling. The
changes in austenite grain size during rolling are illustrated in Fig. 9. Here, the marked changes in
grain structure during and after deformation being due to the occurrence of recrystallization and
grain growth can be readily seen [1]. It is worth noting that the through-thickness austenite grain
 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875 869

Fig. 4. Experimental and predicted ferrite grain size distribution after the hot rolling (initial temperature of 950 C and
25% reduction).

Fig. 5. Grain size of metal after 25% reduction at 950 C.

size distribution should be considered because of inhomogeneity in temperature and strain led
within the rolled metal. Also, the through-thickness grain size variation of austenite just before
ferrite transformation is illustrated in Fig. 10. As it is observed austenite grain size has a non-
uniform distribution along the thickness of the metal and therefore consequent austenite trans-
formation has a dierent kinetics along the thickness. The progress of the pearlite and ferrite
870 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

2.4

2.0

Thickness (mm) 1.6

1.2

0.8

0.4
T0=950 C, Reduction=25%

0.0
0.20 0.25 0.30 0.35

Fig. 6. Through-thickness strain distribution after 25% reduction at 950 C.

Table 2
Roughing program of the hot rolling process in the Mobarake Steel Complex
Stand Work-roll diameter (mm) Reduction (%) Roll velocity (m/s) Descaling
1 1093 15 2.4 +
2 1093 19 2.9 )
3 1093 23 3.4 +
4 1093 27 3.8 )
5 1093 30 3.8 +
6 1163 30 4.2 +

Table 3
Finishing program of the hot rolling process in the Mobarake Steel Complex
Stand Work-roll diameter (mm) Reduction (%) Roll velocity (m/s)
1 660 42.9 1.6
2 660 38.0 1.7
3 660 30.5 2.5
4 660 26.1 3.4
5 660 30.1 4.8
6 660 22.1 6.3
7 660 14.8 7.4
 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875 871

Water Blade Jets and Laminar Headers

The Last Finishing

Water sprays
Stand

Fig. 7. Schematic illustration of cooling arrangement on the run-out table at MSC.

900

Upper Surface
850
Depth of 0.6 mm

800
Temperature (oC)

750

700

650

600

550

500
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Fig. 8. Dependence of strip temperature on time on the run-out table.

transformations at the surface layer and the depth of metal during cooling on the run-out table
are presented in Fig. 11 also, Figs. 12 and 13 display the predicted and experimental ferrite grain
structure after cooling on the run-out table. It is clearly observed that the surface austenite
transforms faster than that in the depth of metal due to ner initial grain size and higher cooling
rate at the surface of metal as well to the eect of accumulated strain at this region. By means of
Fig. 11, the time required for the start and the nish of ferrite and pearlite transformations re-
garding the cooling pattern on the run-out table can be estimated. This means that the phase
changes taking place along the run-out table can be evaluated and controlled. This is especially
vital for the case of the rolling of more complex steels such as dual phase steels for which it is
necessary to control accurately the amount of transformation on the run-out table [1].
872 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

300
Surface
Depth of 1 mm
250

Grain Size (m) 200

150

100

50

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160

Fig. 9. The predicted austenite grain size variations during the hot rolling.

Fig. 10. Through-thickness austenite grain size distribution just after the last nishing stand.
 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875 873

1.0

Ferrite
Pearlite
0.8

Temperature (oC)

0.6 Surface

0.4

Depth of 1 mm
0.2

0.0
0 5 10 15 20
Time (Sec)

Fig. 11. Predicted kinetics of the pearlite and ferrite transformations during cooling on the run-out table.

Fig. 12. Experimental and predicted ferrite grain size distribution along thickness direction after cooling on the run-out
table.
874 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875

Fig. 13. Optical micrograph from the strip cooled on the run-out table.

5. Conclusions

In this paper, a mathematical model is presented which is capable of predicting the micro-
structure during cooling of a low carbon steel on the run-out table. The model is based on the
nite element method and the additivity rule to predict the cooling rate of low carbon steel strip
on the run-out table of the hot strip rolling mills. Furthermore, the eects of phase transformation
and the temperature dependence of the heat capacities as well as austenite work hardening eect
were taken into account. The results indicate that

1. The transformation kinetics varies through the thickness of the strip because of the dierent
cooling rate and amount of accumulated strain within the strip.
2. The ferrite grain size and its distribution through thickness of strip are strongly aected by ac-
cumulated strain within the rolled metal.
3. The amount of work hardening can considerably alter the incubation time while growth rate of
ferrite is not aected signicantly.

Acknowledgements

The author wants to express his thanks to Professor J.J. Jonas for his comments during which
the hot deformation experiments were being performed at McGill University.

References

[1] R.W.K. Honeycombe, Steels: Microstructure and Properties, Edward Arnold, London, 1981.
[2] N. Hatta, J. Kokado, H. Takuda, J. Harada, K. Hiraku, Modelling for cooling process of a hot plate by a laminar
water bar, Steel Research 55 (1984) 143148.
[3] K. Agrawal, J.K. Brimacombe, Mathematical model of heat ow and austenitepearlite transformation in
eutectoid carbon steel rods for wire, Metallurgical Transactions 12B (1981) 121133.
 S. Serajzadeh / Appl. Math. Modelling 27 (2003) 861875 875

[4] C. Verdi, A. Visintin, A mathematical model of the austenitepearlite transformation in plain carbon steel based on
the Scheils additivity rule, Acta Materialia 35 (1987) 27112717.
[5] K.F. Wang, S. Chandrasekar, H.T.Y. Yang, An ecient 2D nite element procedure for quenching analysis with
phase change, ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry 115 (1993) 124138.
[6] D. Homberg, A numerical simulation of the Jominy end-quench test, Acta Materialia 44 (1996) 43754385.
[7] M.V. Li, D.V. Neibuer, L.L. Meekisho, D.G. Attridge, A computational model for the prediction of steel
hardenability, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B 29 (1998) 661672.
[8] K.F. Wang, S. Chandrasekar, H.T.Y. Yang, Experimental and computational study of the quenching of carbon
steel, ASME Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering 119 (1997) 257265.
[9] P.R. Woodard, S. Chandrasekar, H.T.Y. Yang, Analysis of temperature and microstructure in the quenching of
steel cylinders, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions B 30 (1999) 815822.
[10] S. Jahanian, M. Mosleh, The mathematical modeling of phase transformation of steel during quenching, Journal of
Materials Engineering and Performance 8 (1999) 7582.
[11] S.J. Biswas, S.J. Chen, A. Satyanarayana, Optimal temperature tracking for accelerated cooling processes in hot
rolling of steel, Dynamics and Control 7 (1997) 327340.
[12] S. Serajzadeh, A. Karimi Taheri, F. Mucciardi, Prediction of temperature distribution in the hot rolling of slabs,
Modelling and Simulation in Materials Science and Engineering 10 (2002) 185203.
[13] D.A. Porter, K.E. Sterling, Phase Transformation in Metals and Alloys, Van Nostrand Reinhold, Wokingham,
UK, 1981.
[14] M. Lusk, H.J. Jou, On the rule of additivity in phase transformation kinetics, Metallurgical and Materials
Transactions A 28 (1997) 287291.
[15] E.B. Hawbolt, B. Chau, J.K. Brimacombe, Kinetics of austeniteferrite and austenitepearlite transformation in a
1025 steel, Metallurgical and Materials Transactions A 16 (1985) 565578.
[16] Z. Liu, G. Wang, S. Han, Q. Zhang, D. Ma, G. Wu, The development of the two-dimensional temperature
microstructure evaluation coupling computer model for hot strip rolling process, Journal of Materials Processing
Technology 34 (1992) 503508.
[17] C.M. Sellars, The physical metallurgy of hot working, in: Proceedings of the International Conference on Hot
Working and Forming Process, The Metal Society, London, 1980, pp. 315.
[18] J.B. Beynon, C.M. Sellars, Modelling microstructure and its eects during multipass hot rolling, ISIJ International
32 (1992) 359367.
[19] L.S. Darken, R.W. Gurry, Physical Chemistry of Metals, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1953, p. 415.
[20] S. Serajzadeh, A. Karimi Taheri, An investigation on the eect of carbon and silicon on ow behavior of steel,
Materials & Design 23 (2002) 271276.
[21] S. Serajzadeh, A. Karimi Taheri, M. Nejati, J. Izadi, M. Fattahi, An investigation on strain inhomogeneity in hot
strip rolling process, Journal of Materials Processing Technology 128 (2002) 8899.