487

Canadian Metallurgical Quarterly, Vol 41, No 4 pp 487-496, 2002

Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum
Published by Canadian Institute of Mining, Metallurgy and Petroleum
Printed in Canada. All rights reserved

MODEL FOR PREDICTION OF MICROSTRUCTURAL

EVENTS DURING ROD HOT ROLLING OF
AUSTENITIC STAINLESS STEEL
T. EL-BITAR1, A. ISMAIL1, I. RASHID2 and M.R. EL-KOUSSY3
1

Central Metallurgical R & D Institute, CMRDI, Cairo, Egypt

2
ARCOSTEEL, El-Sadat City, Egypt
3
Faculty of Engineering, Cairo University, Egypt

(Received August, 2001; in revised form May, 2002)

Abstract A mathematical model is constructed representing the non-executable equations to determine the mean flow stress (MFS) using both Sims and Ekelund approaches. The model considers the
redundant strain calculations. Solving the equations of the model develops a numerical solution and consequently the MFS is then calculated. The numerical values are taken from the rod mill logs, particularly when the interpass times are short, since the laboratory equipment cannot be used. The calculated MFS
values are then related to the inverse of the absolute rolling temperature to determine the non-recrystallization temperature (Tnr), the strain accumulation and the cyclic softening / dynamic recrystallizing
zones of the austenitic stainless steel.
At the finishing and prefinishing stages, the accumulated deformation and the deformation heating
affect temperature raising. However, at both stages, the coefficients of friction (m) decrease as the effect
of the rolling velocity becomes predominant. The MFS values calculated by Ekelund are always higher
than those calculated by Sims. The Tnr is detected as 1143 C. However, between 1143 and 1081 C, with
0.03 seconds interpass time, a stress accumulation zone is detected. At the high strain rate, 103 s-1, in the
temperature range 1063 and 1018 C, dynamic recrystallization is initiated. At higher strain rates (12001500 s-1), cyclic softening / dynamic recrystallizing is initiated. The finishing temperature is found to be
the most attributable to the grain size, whereas, the sub-grain structure is mainly due to multi-passes
deformation.
Rsum On construit un modle mathmatique reprsentant les quations non-excutables pour
dterminer la contrainte moyenne dcoulement (MFS) utilisant lapproche de Sims et celle dEkelund.
Le modle considre les calculs de dformation redondants. En rsolvant les quations du modle, on
dveloppe une solution numrique et, consquemment, la MFS est ensuite calcule. On utilise les
valeurs numriques des journaux dentres du laminoir, particulirement quand le temps entre les
passes est court, puisquon ne peut pas utiliser lquipement de laboratoire. Les valeurs calcules de
MFS sont ensuite relies linverse de la temprature absolue de laminage pour dterminer la
temprature de non-recristallisation (Tnr), laccumulation de dformation et les zones cycliques de
ramollissement/recristallisation dynamique de lacier inoxydable austnitique.
Aux tapes de finissage et de pr-finissage, la dformation accumule et la chaleur de dformation
ont pour effet dlever la temprature. Cependant, aux deux tapes, le coefficient de friction (m)
diminue mesure que leffet de vlocit de laminage devient prdominant. Les valeurs de MFS
calcules par Ekelund sont toujours plus leves que celles calcules par Sims. On dtecte Tnr 1143 C,
cependant, entre 1143 et 1081 C, avec 0.03 s dintervalle de passe, on dtecte une zone daccumulation
de contrainte. un taux lev de dformation, 103 s-1, dans la gamme de temprature entre 1063 et
1018 C, la recristallisation dynamique est initie. des taux de dformation encore plus levs (12001500 s-1), ladoucissement/recristallisation dynamique cyclique est initi. On trouve que la temprature
de finissage est attribuable principalement la taille de grain, alors que la structure du sous-grain est
principalement due la dformation par passes multiples.

CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

488

T. EL-BITAR, A. ISMAIL, I. RASHID and M.R. EL-KOUSSY

INTRODUCTION
The mean flow stress (MFS) is usually used to detect the
events that take place during hot rolling [1]. These
microstructural events are like recrystallization, strain
accumulation and g-a phase transformation [2]. For
instance, three critical temperatures of steel rolling are recognized [3]. These are the temperatures below which the
recrystallization of austenite no longer takes place, Tnr, and
the start, Ar3, and finish, Ar1, of the austenite to (a +
Pearlite) transformation. Boratto et al. [3], were the first to
develop the procedure used to determine the Tnr, Ar3 and
Ar1 temperatures. These critical temperatures are located
on the inverse points of the curve relating the MFS to the
inverse of the absolute temperature [4]. Consequently, fractional softening and grain size can be expected [5].
Different mathematical modules and numerical models
have been developed to detect the MFS from the mill logs
[6,7]. Most of these models use Sims approach [8] to calculate the MFS.
The most controlling factor separating conventional
rolling and dynamic recrystallization rolling is the length
of the interpass intervals and in particular whether this is
longer or shorter than 1 second [5]. Long interpass time
processes are those that involve reversing mills or when
early in the reduction process in the tandem mills. On the
other hand, in the rod finishing rolling, although the nominal pass strains are below the critical strain for dynamic
recrystallization (DRX), the interpass times are too short
for significant amounts of conventional static recrystallization (SRX) to occur [9]. As a result, the strain accumulates
from pass to pass until DRX is initiated. At the completion
of a pass involving DRX, the recrystallization that occurs
is no longer dynamic, rather it is metadynamic (MRX)
[10]. On the bases of previous works [11, 12], the MRX
process generates fine austenite grain sizes at high values
of Zener-Hollomon parameter which are at high strain rates
and relatively low temperature.
Physical simulation of rolling schedules by mean of
torsion tests has proved to be very powerful in the design
of rolling passes for reversing mills [3]. However, the high
strain rates associated with the finishing stages cannot
readily be achieved using laboratory equipment [13]. The
short interpass time processes are those that involve continuous mills, particularly when these are located at the finishing end of an operation, so that the stock is moving relatively quickly. Under these conditions, the strain rates can
be as high as 100-1000 s-1 (in the finishing stands of rod
mills) [14] and the associated deformation times are of the
order 1 ms.
Most of the previously published models were dealing
with hot flat rolling; however, there are few modeling
works on the rod hot rolling. The aim of the present work
is to construct a model for the evaluation of MFS from the
CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

rod mill logs, particularly when the interpass times are too
short, to detect the non-recrystallization temperature, the
strain accumulation and softening zones of the austenitic
stainless steel.
In the present work, a previously constructed constitutive model for flat hot rolling [15] has been adapted and
validated to cope with rod hot rolling [16]. The results of
the adapted model are compared with those obtained from
mill logs. The adapted model has been developed by introducing further equations that help precise computation of
different parameters instead of treating them either as constant terms or neglecting their effects [16].
MODEL EQUATIONS
The mathematical model mainly depends on Simss
approach [8] and the developed Orowan method [15]. The
roll pressure can be calculated at the exit side by using
Simss approach
1
1

2
S+ p
h R2

-1 R
= 1 + ln + tan . j
k
h2 h2
4
h2

(1)

However, it can be calculated at the entry side as

1

S- p
h R2
= 1 + ln +
k
4
h2 h2
1
1

tan -1 R 2 .q - tan -1 R 2 .j

h2
h2

(2)

By definition, the neutral point is that which lies on the

arc of contact between the exit and entry sides.
Furthermore, the normal roll pressure at the exit side (S+ )
is equal to that at the entry side (S-). More succinctly, at the
neutral point S+ = S- where the right hand side of both
Equations 1 and 2 is equal to each other and the angle q
becomes the neutral angle (fn), then

fn =

h X
h2
tan 2
R
R 2

(3)

where

sf

1
1 h1 kexit
Z
X= ln

2 2 m h2
sb
1 - k

entry

(4)

MODEL FOR PREDICTION OF MICROSTRUCTURAL EVENTS DURING ROD HOT ROLLING

489

where K=1 for the steel rolls, t should not be less than 700
C and v the roll velocity in m/s. and not more than 5.0.

and
R
R
tan -1
a
h2
h2

Z=2

(5)

( MFS) Ekelund =

P
W R Dh QEkelund

(12)

where a is the bite angle

h - h2
a = cos 1 - 1
2 R

-1

QEkelund = 1 +

1.6 m

(6)

R Dh - 1.2 Dh
h1 + h2

(13)

As previously stated in Equations 12 and 13, Ekelund

paid attention to both m and Dh. Sims did not care about m,
but he paid attention to the thickness difference (Dh) [8].

at the same time

h -Y
f n = cos -1 1 - 1
2 R

(7)

( MFS) Sims =

3P
2 W R Dh QSims

(14)

then
where
Y = h2 + 2 R(1 - cos f n )

(8)
QSims =

However, due to the excessive loads acting upon the rolled

stock, the working rolls behave elastically and the roll
radius, R, increases to R according to the formula developed by Hitchcock [17] where
P.c
R = R1 +

W .Dh

(9)

h2
4(h1 - h2 )

(15)

R Y2 p
-1 h1 - h2
ln
p . tan
h2
h2 h1h2 4

The strain rate can be calculated by the following equation [8,20].

e =

where P is the rolling force, W is the width and c is an elastic constant and is equal to

2pU
60

R
h1

(1 - e )
e

ln

1
1- e

(16)

where
c=

16 1 - n

(10)

pE

where n is Poissons ratio and E is the Young modulus for

the working roll material. c has different values according
to the roll material, [18].
c= 2.21 x 10-4 mm2/kg for steel rolls.
c= 2.53 x 10-4 mm2/kg for chilled cast iron rolls.
c= 4.35 x 10-4 mm2/kg for cast iron rolls.
The roll flattening R should not be more than 2R.
The coefficient of friction (m) is one of the factors
affecting the location of the neutral point on the arc of contact. This coefficient is influenced by the rolling temperature t in C which is proposed by Ekelund [19] with the following relationship;

m = K (1.05 - 0.005t ) - 0.056 v

(11)

e=

h1 - h2
h1

(17)

ROLL MILL AND DATA COLLECTION

Numerous data are collected from the roll mill of the
ARCOSTEEL Company in Egypt. These data cannot readily be achieved using laboratory equipment [13]. The roll mill
consists of 32 stands. The mill stands are divided into 10
stands for the roughing stage, 4 stands for the intermediate
rolling stage and 8 stands for finishing stage to produce bars.
It is also possible to use the remaining 10 stands for the prefinishing stage for the production of wires. The mill has horizontal roll stands followed by vertical ones. Consequently,
the width of the rolled stock is considered as the input thickness for the next stand. The initial billet dimensions were
162.3 162.3 mm. The shape and dimension of the grooves
in rolls as well as the effective roll radius (R) are given in
Table I. The roll mill is completely automated and computer
controlled and monitored. The rolling temperature (t) is
CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

490

T. EL-BITAR, A. ISMAIL, I. RASHID and M.R. EL-KOUSSY

taken as the mean value of the temperatures recorded at the

exit side of the roll bite. The rotational roll speed (U) is used
to compute the rolling velocity (v) which is the bar velocity
at the exit side of the roll bite. The rolling force (P) is considered as the mean of two values recorded with the aid of
load cells mounted on both roll necks.

MATERIAL
The rolled material is austenitic stainless steel billets to
produce 6.0 mm diameter wires. The steel chemical composition is presented in Table II.

Table I Some data extracted from mill logs

Pass

Pass
shape

Effective
roll radius
(R)
mm

Exit bar
width
(W)
mm

h1
mm

h2
mm

Rolling
temp. (t)
C

R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R10
I1
I2
I3
I4
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
F7
F8
PF1
PF2
PF3
PF4
PF5
PF6
PF7
PF8
PF9
PF10

Box
Box
Box
Box
Box
Box
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O
Ov
O

286.05
282.20
291.65
295.05
231.35
226.75
241.00
237.60
245.65
242.80
201.85
199.30
205.15
202.75
207.15
204.60
158.65
156.20
159.40
156.95
159.60
157.85
102.00
100.95
84.70
84.05
85.15
84.65
85.80
85.10
86.15
85.65

171.0
140.0
141.8
112.0
111.2
86.0
76.2
67.3
60.3
53.2
47.2
41.5
39.4
32.6
30.6
25.2
25.7
19.8
21.7
16.7
17.8
14.6
15.6
12.4
12.7
10.6
10.4
8.9
8.9
7.4
7.3
6.1

162.3
171.0
118.5
141.8
90.1
111.2
70.2
76.2
67.3
60.3
53.2
47.2
41.5
39.4
32.6
30.6
25.2
25.7
19.8
21.7
16.7
17.8
14.6
15.6
12.4
12.7
10.6
10.4
8.9
8.9
7.4
7.3

120.0
140.0
88.0
112.0
69.0
86.0
58.0
67.3
43.0
53.2
33.5
41.5
25.0
32.6
20.0
25.2
15.0
19.8
12.0
16.7
11.0
14.6
9.4
12.4
8.0
10.6
6.8
8.9
5.5
7.4
4.6
6.1

1194
1178
1165
1156
1148
1143
1000
996
988
992
966
973
970
983
973
988
995
1018
1012
1034
1041
1056
1047
1063
1063
1064
1064
1067
1067
1072
1075
1081

Rotational
roll speed
(U)
rpm
8.8
11.1
14.3
17.4
29.2
37.9
15.4
19.4
25.7
31.8
51.4
62.5
81.1
100
129.3
160.8
268.3
340.8
395.4
476.8
523.9
616.6
1098.4
1348.1
1921.8
2271.2
2777.9
3282.9
4034.3
4767.8
5831.5
6891.7

Rolling
force
(P)
ton
166.6
139.9
189.0
132.7
128.8
93.1
116.5
77.2
115.6
67.1
78.1
46.9
69.6
40.1
51.9
32.3
38.1
21.8
27.1
14.6
18.4
11.1
11.5
6.8
8.0
4.6
6.4
3.6
6.0
3.6
4.9
3.1

Table II Chemical composition of steel

Element
wt. %

C
0.03

Si
0.3

CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

Mn
1.8

Ni
9.36

Cr
18.3

Mo
0.4

Cu
0.35

Al
.003

P
.020

S
.025

N
.079

491

MODEL FOR PREDICTION OF MICROSTRUCTURAL EVENTS DURING ROD HOT ROLLING

NUMERICAL EVALUATION

EXECUTION OF MODEL EQUATIONS

The numerical evaluation is the executable form of the

model equations. The calculations are presented by the
commercial Excel software technique. The model is provided with the initial rolling values as shown in Table I. It
is constructed to go through the different equations of the
model in a consecutive manner to solve these equations
with the help of the provided initial rolling values at each
stand. The model thoroughly calculates the neutral angle
(jn) and consequently the neutral thickness (Y) by using
not only Sims theory, [8], but also by Ekelund assumptions
[19]. The roll elastic behaviour due to excessive rolling
loads is taken into consideration [17]. Steel rolls were used
with a Hitchcock constant (c) equal to 2.21x10-4 mm2/Kg
[18].

Table III summarizes the numerical values resulting from

the execution of the model equations at each of the mill
stands.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
Interpass times (t) as well as rolling temperatures (t) are
considered as important factors affecting the MFS values
and consequently influence the final properties of the rolled
material. Figure 1 represents both interpass time (t) and
rolling temperature (t) at the different stands of the roll mill.
The interpass time decreases continuously from one stand to
the other. On the right hand side of the same figure, the
rolling temperature falls down to the end of the roughing
stage. Afterwards, the rolling temperature rises again.

Table III Some calculated values from rolling data

Pass Flatten. 1000/T Bite. Interpass Roll Nom. Redun. Total Strain
Roll
K-1 angle time (t) velocity Strain Strain Strain Rate,
radius
(a)
Sec.
(v)
(e.)
(R')
Rad
m/sec
s-1
R1
R2
R3
R4
R5
R6
R7
R8
R9
R10
I1
I2
I3
I4
F1
F2
F3
F4
F5
F6
F7
F8
PF1
PF2
PF3
PF4
PF5
PF6
PF7
PF8
PF9
PF10

287.51
284.21
294.47
297.64
234.16
228.90
247.66
244.37
249.93
252.33
205.60
208.09
210.00
210.86
213.31
215.33
163.75
162.69
165.05
163.06
165.99
166.09
105.17
104.75
87.39
88.03
88.13
89.65
89.54
91.18
90.73
93.36

0.682
0.689
0.695
0.700
0.704
0.706
0.786
0.788
0.793
0.791
0.807
0.803
0.805
0.796
0.803
0.793
0.789
0.775
0.778
0.765
0.761
0.752
0.758
0.749
0.749
0.748
0.748
0.746
0.746
0.743
0.742
0.739

0.387
0.333
0.325
0.319
0.303
0.335
0.226
0.194
0.316
0.171
0.314
0.169
0.285
0.183
0.247
0.163
0.254
0.194
0.222
0.178
0.189
0.143
0.227
0.179
0.228
0.155
0.214
0.134
0.200
0.133
0.180
0.121

0.41992
0.28642
0.21678
0.17528
0.09905
0.08444
0.14000
0.09542
0.11736
0.05142
0.05828
0.02579
0.03351
0.01751
0.01826
0.00966
0.00905
0.00544
0.00535
0.00357
0.00345
0.00221
0.00197
0.00127
0.00114
0.00065
0.00074
0.00039
0.00047
0.00027
0.00029
0.00017

0.26
0.33
0.44
0.54
0.71
0.90
0.39
0.48
0.66
0.81
1.09
1.30
1.74
2.12
2.80
3.44
4.46
5.57
6.60
7.83
8.75
10.19
11.73
14.24
17.04
19.98
24.76
29.09
36.23
42.47
52.58
61.78

0.349
0.231
0.343
0.273
0.308
0.297
0.221
0.143
0.517
0.145
0.534
0.148
0.585
0.219
0.564
0.224
0.599
0.299
0.578
0.300
0.482
0.230
0.513
0.267
0.506
0.201
0.524
0.181
0.562
0.215
0.544
0.215

0.097
0.083
0.081
0.080
0.075
0.084
0.055
0.047
0.078
0.041
0.078
0.040
0.070
0.044
0.060
0.039
0.062
0.047
0.054
0.043
0.046
0.034
0.055
0.043
0.056
0.037
0.052
0.032
0.048
0.031
0.043
0.028

0.446
0.81
0.314
0.83
0.424
1.52
0.353
1.55
0.383
3.02
0.381
3.48
0.276
1.58
0.191
1.58
0.595
3.87
0.186
2.93
0.612
7.97
0.188
5.95
0.655
14.75
0.263
12.37
0.624
26.29
0.263
22.80
0.661
55.45
0.346
52.44
0.632
91.15
0.343
79.63
0.528 122.69
0.264 100.85
0.569 225.96
0.310 202.20
0.562 389.06
0.238 304.99
0.576 616.40
0.213 464.29
0.610 1008.49
0.246 791.07
0.587 1588.54
0.243 1262.44

Neutral
angle
(jn).
rad

Neut. MFS Fric. MFS

thick. (Sims) Coef. (Ekel.)
(Y), Kg/mm2 (m) Kg/mm2
mm

0.125 124.5
0.117 143.9
0.112 91.7
0.112 115.8
0.108 71.7
0.116 89.1
0.088 59.9
0.079 68.8
0.106 45.8
0.071 54.5
0.105 35.8
0.070 42.5
0.096 27.0
0.074 33.7
0.087 21.6
0.066 26.1
0.088 16.3
0.076 20.7
0.079 13.0
0.070 17.5
0.071 11.8
0.059 15.2
0.082 10.1
0.071 12.9
0.083
8.6
0.064 11.0
0.078
7.3
0.056
9.2
0.073
5.9
0.055
7.6
0.067
5.0
0.050
6.3

8.23
10.21
12.58
11.67
14.79
13.17
24.72
22.90
19.75
27.03
20.64
29.64
22.22
27.47
23.06
30.48
25.33
28.23
23.12
23.63
22.28
25.42
22.07
23.82
22.87
26.74
22.56
28.12
24.58
32.00
25.71
34.91

0.438
0.443
0.443
0.442
0.436
0.428
0.528
0.525
0.519
0.509
0.506
0.490
0.467
0.440
0.407
0.363
0.303
0.261
0.264
0.253
0.250
0.242
0.247
0.239
0.239
0.238
0.238
0.237
0.237
0.234
0.233
0.230

8.08
9.73
12.25
11.21
14.35
12.83
22.25
20.52
18.60
24.26
19.68
26.82
22.00
25.85
24.17
30.34
30.57
31.59
29.49
26.85
28.06
28.42
27.90
26.85
29.11
29.13
29.22
30.60
32.81
35.92
34.62
39.79

CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

492

T. EL-BITAR, A. ISMAIL, I. RASHID and M.R. EL-KOUSSY

1200
0.1
1100

0.01

1000

0.001

900
35

0.0001
0

10

15

20

25

30

Stand number
Fig. 1. Interpass time and rolling temperature at different stands

It is evident that the interpass time decreases as a result

of the reduction in the cross-sectional area and consequently increases in the length of the rolled stock. Hence, the
rolls rotational speed would increase from one stand to the
other (as shown in Table I) to cope with the elongation of
the rolled stock.
Due to high amounts of accumulated deformation especially after the roughing stage, the deformation heating generated leads to a temperature rising of the rolled stock. At the
same time, after the roughing stage, the interpass time
decreases sharply from one stand to another (0.1 to 0.0001
sec.). Short interpass times and the high amount of deformation heating compensate for the loss in stock temperature
during rolling and even lead to temperature riising. This
process favours the deformation process of the austenitic
stainless steel as it exhibits high resistance to deformation by
losing its high temperature [21].
Figure 2 represents both the rolling velocity (v) and the
coefficient of friction (m) at the different roll mill stands.
The rolling velocity increases up to pass 6 when the velocity decreases then rises again continuously to cope with the

0.5
10

0.4
0.3

10

0.2
0.1

0.1
10

15

Figure 3 shows a presentation of the rolling force at different mill stands. The presentation is a comparison between
the measured values at the mill logs and the prediction from
an adapted model [20] constructed for rod hot rolling calculations. The predicted values are always lower than those
measured. However, the difference in value is much higher
at the roughing stage than at the intermediate and finishing
rolling stages. However, the two curves have the same trend,
where the trend of the rolling force decreases continuously
from one stand to the other as the cross-sectional area of the
rolled stock decreases. The difference in rolling force
between the measured and predicted values occurs because
it is difficult to represent and measure the actual amount of
reduction in cross-sectional area in rod rolling processes
where the actual amount of reduction is much more than that
theoretically measured at each stand [22]. This difficulty
leads to a deficiency in modeling the rod rolling processes.
One of the targets of the present work is to evaluate the
mean flow stress (MFS) for each pass by both Sims and
Ekelund approaches. The MFS is presented against the reciprocal of the absolute value of the rolling temperature in
Figure 4. This presentation reflects clearly the behaviour of
the austenitic stainless steel during deformation under the
specified conditions. The MFS values calculated by Ekelund
are always higher than those calculated by Sims. This is
because Ekelund considered the value of the friction coefficient and Sims did not pay attention to it.
200

100

20

25

30

35

Rolling velocity, m/sec

Coefficient offriction

0.6

On the other hand, the coefficient of friction (m) decreases throughout the roughing stands and begins to rise sharply
at stand 7 due to the loss of some of the rolling temperature
and velocity as a side effect of the lopper existence.
Afterwards, m decreases again where the effect of the rolling
velocity becomes predominant over the effect of rolling temperature (Equation 11) [18].

Rolling velocity, m/s

Coeficient of friction

increase in stock length due to the accumulated reduction in

the cross-sectional area from stand to stand. The drop in
velocity at stand 6 is due to a lopper effect which exists
between stands 6 and 7.

Mill log data

Predicted data

175

Rolling force, ton

Interpass time, sec.

Rolling temperature, C

Rolling temperature, C

Interpass time

150
125
100
75
50
25
0
0

Stand number
Fig. 2. Coefficient of friction and rolling velocity at the different mill
stands
CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

10

15

20

25

Pass number
Fig. 3. Presentation of rolling force at different mill stands for both mill
log and predicted data

Mean flow stress, Kg/mm2

MODEL FOR PREDICTION OF MICROSTRUCTURAL EVENTS DURING ROD HOT ROLLING

45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
0.65

(2)
1081 C

493

(4)
1018 C

Sims
Ekelund

(3)
1063 C

(5)
966 C

(1)
1148 C

0.675

0.7

0.725

0.75

0.775

0.8

0.825

0.85

1000/T, K-1

Fig. 4. MFS calculated by both Sims and Ekelund approaches against

1000/T

It is clear that point 1 represents the temperature of the

non-recrystallization (Tnr) process where the MFS begins to
rise sharply. Up to point 1, 1148 C, fully static recrystallization should take place after each rolling pass where the
interpass time and rolling temperature in this region are relatively high and permit for this conventional recrystallization [13]. This process is indicated as the rate of increase in
MFS with 1/T is relatively low. When strain hardening is
occurring at a temperature below Tnr there is a sharp increase
in slope as is evident from point 1 to point 2, (1081 C) [5].
The interpass time in that region markedly decreases from
0.1 to 0.03 seconds and consequently the strain rate increases greatly from 1.5 to 14.75 s-1, where there would not be a
chance for stress annihilation, [13], but rather stress accumulation. At the end of the strain hardening region, the material exhibits softening [23] from point 2 to point 3 (1063 C).
This softening occurs as a result of dislocation density
decrease and vanishing damaged substructures. However,
the grains still pancaked.
However, when dynamic recrystallization is initiated
(followed by metadynamic recrystallization), the rate of
increase of the mean flow stress drops away from that associated with the strain accumulation from point 3 to point 4
(1018 C) where the strain rate becomes very high on the
order 103 s-1 [14], which would lead to dynamic recrystallization. Consequently, the austenite grain size is refined to a
grain size of the order of 15 to 20 mm quite independent of
the initial grain size,[24]. From point 4 to point 5 (966 C)
where the strain rate becomes around 1200-1500 s-1, the
austenite grain size is refined in successive recrystallization
events [24] that is the material exhibits cyclic softening /
dynamic recrystallizing [23].
Figure 5 represents the microstructure of a 6.0 mm
diameter wire produced at a rolling temperature of 1081 C
with a 1262 s-1 strain rate. The micrograph reveals
austenitic coarse grains with sub-grain structures. The
coarse grains were created as a result of a high finishing
rolling temperature (1081 C). However, the sub-grain
structure is due to the multi-pass deformation with
increased strain rate from one pass to another. The sub-

Fig. 5. Microstructure of a 6.0 mm wire 100 (rolling temperature 1081

C with 1262 s-1 strain rate)

grain structure emphasis which has been discussed in the

range between points 3 and 4 in Figure 4.
On the other hand, finishing rolling at a lower rolling
temperature (988 C) with a moderate strain rate (22.8 s-1)
would result in a high Zener-Hollomon parameter (Z) value
according to the following formula
Z= e. Exp [ Qdef / RT]
where Qdef is the activation energy for deformation.
Consequently, high values of the (Z) parameter favours the
initiation of dynamic recrystallization with fine austenitic
grains [25 ].
This is clearly represented in Figure 6, which is a
microstructure of a 25 mm diameter rod after passing stand
F2 at the previous deformation conditions. The microstructure presented in Figure 6 represents point 5 in Figure 4.

Fig. 6. Microstructure of a 25 mm diameter rod 100 (rolling temperature 988 C with 22.8 s-1 strain rate)

CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

494

T. EL-BITAR, A. ISMAIL, I. RASHID and M.R. EL-KOUSSY

Both microstructures presented in Figures 5 and 6 confirm what was detected in Figure 4 ensuring that the finishing temperature is the most attributable to the grain size;
whereas, the sub-grain structure is mainly due to multi-passes deformation. All that was reported regarding the
microstructure emphasizeses that the detection of
microstructure events during hot deformation by the MFS
temperature relationship is a reliable method.
CONCLUSIONS
1. At the finishing and prefinishing stages, the accumulated deformation and the deformation heating affect temperature rising.
2. The coefficients of friction (m) decrease throughout the
roughing stands and begin to rise sharply at the intermediate process. Afterwards, m decreases again as the effect of
the rolling speed becomes predominant.
3. The MFS values calculated by Ekelund are always
higher than those calculated by Sims.
4. The Tnr is detected as 1143 C.
5. Between 1143 and 1081 C with 0.03 second interpass
time, there would not be a chance for stress annihilation but
rather stress accumulation.
6. At a high strain rate, 103 s-1, in the temperature range
1063 and 1018 C, dynamic recrystallization of the austenite grains is initiated.

Sa
fn
h1
h2
W
c
R
R
Kexit
Kentry
sf
sb
Y
v
U
ov
o
t
x
xr
xt
x.
P
Z
Qdef

7. As the strain rate continues increasing (1200-1500 s-1),

the steel exhibits cyclic softening / dynamic recrystallizing.
8. The finishing temperature is the most attributable to the
grain size; whereas, the sub-grain structure is mainly due to
multi-passes deformation.

MFS
t
T
Tnr
m
DRX
SRX
MRX
S+

Meaning
mean flow stress
rolling temperature
absolute rolling temperature
non-recrystallization temperature
coefficients of friction
dynamic recrystallization
static recrystallization
metadynamic recrystallization
normal roll pressure at the exit side

CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY

Units

1.

J. Jonas, The Hot Strip Mill as an Experimental Tool,

Proceedings of Thermomechanical Processing of Steels
Conference, 24-26 May 2000, London, UK.

2.

T.M. Maccagno, et al., Determination of Recrystallization

Stop Temperature from Mill Logs and Comparison with
Laboratory Simulation Results, ISIJ International, vol.
34(11), 1994, pp. 917-922.

3.

F. Boratto, R. Barbosa, S. Yue and J. Jonas, Proceedings

International Conference, Physical Metallurgy of
Thermomechanical Processing of Steels and Other Metals
(Thermec88), 1988, ed. Tamura, ISIJ, Tokyo, p. 383.

4.

F. Siciliano et al., Mathematical Modeling of the Mean

Flow Stress, Fractional Softening and Grain Size During Hot
Strip Rolling of C-Mn Steels, ISIJ International, 1996, vol.
36(12), pp. 1500-1506.

5.

J. Jonas, Dynamic Recrystallization-Scientific Curiosity or

Industrial Tool, Materials Science and Engineering, 1994,
vol. A184, pp. 155-165.

Kg/mm
C
K
C

Kg/mm2

Kg/mm2
rad.
rad.
MM2
MM2
MM2

MM2
MM2
Kg/mm2
Kg/mm2
Kg/mm2
Kg/mm2
MM2
mm/sec
Rpm

sec

sec-1
ton

erg

REFERENCES

NOMENCLATURE
Symbol

normal roll pressure at the entry side

bite angle
neutral angle
bar thickness before rolling
bar thickness after rolling
bar width
elastic constant
effective roll radius
flattened roll radius
flow stress at the exit side
flow stress at the entry side
forward tension
backward tension
thickness at the neutral angle
roll velocity
rotational roll speed
oval pass shape
round pass shape
interpass time
nominal strain
redundant strain
total strain
strain rate
Rolling force
Zener-Hollomon parameter
activation energy for deformation

MODEL FOR PREDICTION OF MICROSTRUCTURAL EVENTS DURING ROD HOT ROLLING

6.

K. Minami et al., Mathematical Modeling of Mean Flow

Stress During the Hot Strip Rolling of Nb Steels, ISIJ
International, 1996, vol. 36(12), pp. 1507-1515.

7.

F. Siciliano, Mathematical Modeling of the Hot Strip

Rolling of Nb Micro-Alloyed Steels, Ph.D. Thesis, McGill
University, Feb.1999, Montreal, Canada.

8.

9.

R.B. Sims, Calculation of Roll Force and Torque in Hot

Rolling Mills, Proceedings of Institute of Mechanical
Engineers, 1952, vol. 166, pp.75-81.
P.D. Hodgson, R.F. Gloss and G.L. Dunlop, 32nd Annual
Mechanical Working and Steel Processing Conference, ISS
of AIME, 1991, Warrendale, PA USA, p. 527.

10. R.A. Petkovic, M.J. Luton and J.J. Jonas, Recovery and
Recrystallization of Polycrystalline Copper after Hot
Working, Acta Metall., 1979, vol. 27, pp. 1633-1648.

495

16. T. El-Bitar and I. M. Rashid, Adaptation of Constitutive

Model for Hot Rod Rolling, submitted to 8th International
Conference on Steel Rolling, to be held in Orlando, Florida,
USA, Sept. 9-11, 2002.
17. J.H. Hitchcock, Elastic Deformation of Rolls during Cold
Rolling, ASME Research Publication, 1935, Roll Neck
Bearing, p. 33, American Society of Mechanical
Engineering, New York.
18. T. El-Bitar, A Computer Program for the Calculation of Roll
Force and Torque with Strip Tension in Cold Rolling, Iron
and Steelmaker, 1993, pp. 87-96, May and Transactions of
Iron and Steel Society, 1994, vol. 15.
19. S. Ekelund, The Analysis of Factors Influencing Rolling
Pressure and Power Consumption in the Hot Rolling of Steel,
translated from Jernkontorets Ann., 1927, vol. 111, p. 39.

11. J.J. Jonas, Int. Conf. Recrystallization in Metallic Materials,

Recrystallization 90, 1990, ed. T. Chandra, Metallurgical
Soc. of AIME, Warrendale, PA, USA, p. 27.

21. T. El-Bitar, P. Funke, M. Mekkawy and K. Mohamed,

Conduct of Si-steel Alloys under Conditions of Hotrolling, IRC 92, Processing, Properties and Applications of
Metallic and Ceramic Materials, 1992, vol. II, pp. 10311036, Sep. 7-10, Birmingham, U.K.

12. C. Roucoules, P.D. Hodgson, S. Yue and J. Jonas, Softening

and Microstructure Changes Following Dynamic
Recrystallization of Austenite, Metall. Trans. A, 1994, vol.
25A, p. 389.

22. P. Cetlin, S. Yue and J. Jonas, Simulated Rod Rolling of

Interstitial Free Steels, ISIJ, 1993, pp. 488-497.

13. T.M. Maccagno, J.J. Jonas and P.D. Hodgson, Spread Sheet
Modeling of Grain Size Evaluation during Rod Rolling,
ISIJ International, 1996, vol. 36(6), pp. 720-728.

23. J. Lenard, F. Wang and Nadkarni, Role of Constitutive

Formulation in the Analysis of Hot Rolling, J. of
Engineering Materials and Technology, 1987, vol. 109,
October, pp. 343-349.

14. H. Yada, et al., Strength and Structure Changes under High

Strain-rate Hot Deformation of C Steels, Trans. Iron and
Steel Inst. of Japan, 1983, vol. 23, pp. 100-109.

24. J. Pertula and P. Karajalainen, Grain Size Effects on Flow

Stress in hot Compression Test, Steel Research 68, 1997,
No. 3, pp. 115-118.

15. T.A. El-Bitar, Constitutive Modeling and Analysis of Hot

Flat Rolling, 1st European Rolling Conference (HUNGAROLLING96), 1996, vol. I, pp. 4-6 September,
Balatonszeplak, Hungary.

25. C. Sellars and J. Whiteman, Recrystallization and Grain

Growth in Hot Rolling, Metal Science,1979, March-April,
pp. 187-194.

CANADIAN METALLURGICAL QUARTERLY