Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 39 (1993) 357-371 357

Elsevier

Measurements of friction during the warm

rolling of aluminum

J . G . L e n a r d a n d Z. M a l i n o w s k i 1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario,
Canada N2L 3G1
(Received July 2, 1992; accepted in revised form February 3, 1993)

Industrial S u m m a r y

The parameters and variables that affect the normal pressure and the friction stress at the
roll/strip contact surface during flat rolling include those determined by the material, the
rolling mill and the process. Of the process parameters, the least researched one appears to
be the temperature and that is the concern of the present study. Specifically, it is the
dependence of the coefficient of friction in the roll bite on the temperature there that is
addressed. The dependence of the roll-separating forces, roll torques, forward slip, interfacial
normal and shear stresses and hence the coefficient of friction, on the reduction are measured
and reported for nominal temperatures of 22, 100 and 300°C, the actual surface temperatures
of the strips during the pass being calculated using an elastic-plastic finite element model of
the process. The measured values of the interfacial stresses are substantiated independently
and are found to be reasonable. The results may enable engineers in the aluminum industry
to model the flat-rolling process with some confidence, using the experimentally developed
values of the coefficient of friction in the roll gap.

Notation

a,b c o e f f i c i e n t s o f flow c u r v e s
cp specific heat
h heat-transfer coefficient
k thermal conductivity
l distance between two lines on the roll surface
ll distance between impressions on the strip surface
lx , ly direction cosines of the outward normal to the boundary surface

Correspondence to: Prof. J.G. Lenard, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of

Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada N2L 3G1.
1Permanent address: University of Mining and Metallurgy, A1. Mickiewicza 30, 30-059
Krakow, Poland.

0924-0136/93/$06.00 © 1993 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved.

358 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements o/ fi'iction

q rate of heat input

Q rate of heat generation due to plastic deformation
S roll-strip contact surface
Sr forward slip
S~ free surface
So surface on which the initial temperature is specified
T temperature
Ta ambient temperature
To initial temperature
temperature of the surroundings
U x ~ Vy components of the velocity field
X, y cartesian coordinates
V volume
effective strain
/-/ave average frictional coefficient
tTp flow stress
0"0, 0" 1 coefficients of the flow curves

1. I n t r o d u c t i o n

Characterization of the stresses and forces in the contact zone during rolling
is usually done by prescribing the coefficient of friction there, the magnitude of
which is affected by the parameters of the process, the parameters of the mill,
the material to be rolled, the material of the work roll and the properties of the
lubricant. Rabinowicz [1] lists these in terms of two categories: those depend-
ent on the surface and those that depend on the bulk of the material. The first
group includes roll and strip roughness and hardness, surface energy, the
tendency of the surfaces to adsorb molecules from the atmosphere or to acquire
a film of different chemistry than the parent metal, chemical reactivity and the
chemical compatibility of the two bodies. Bulk properties include the yield and
ultimate strengths, the elastic modulus, Poisson's ratio, the bulk modulus,
strain and strain-hardening sensitivity, density, anisotropy and the atomic
structure. The process parameters include the relative velocities of the roll and
the strip, the reduction, the temperature, the dimensions of the work rolls as
well as the parameters affecting the mill dynamics. If a lubricant is applied, its
properties - chemical composition, additives, viscosity, density -- are to be
considered also. If a functional dependence of the coefficient of friction on
these parameters is necessary - and for predictive modelling this is unavoid-
able - all of the above list cannot, of course, be included. A compromise must
then be found and it will probably suffice to consider the roughness, the
hardness, the yield strength, the strain hardening and the strain-rate harden-
ing coefficients in addition to the roll radius, the reduction, the temperature,
the velocity and, if a lubricant is introduced, its viscosity.
General information of the dependence of the frictional forces on the process
p a r a m e t e r s specifically, the relative speed of the contacting bodies and the
 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction 359

pressure at the interface - may be found in the literature [2, 3]. As well, the
effects of the strength of the material, the surface roughness and hardness on
the coefficient of friction have also been documented, albeit that the data is not
complete, by far [4]. The parameter of which the effect on the magnitude of the
coefficient of friction is probably the least well understood is the temperature.
As Schey [2] writes, the effect of temperature on friction is a function of the
condition of the surface. He also points out t h a t much information, concerning
mostly hot- and warm-rolling of steel, is contradictory. Rabinowicz [1] differen-
tiates the effect of temperature changes, caused by external heating or cooling
or by high-speed sliding, on the coefficient of friction. It is the first case that is
applicable here. In the cases presented in [1] the frictional coefficient appears
to be insensitive to these changes, but there are exceptions to this general
observation, however. The coefficient of friction between stainless steel 304
and nickel, stainless steel and cobalt, and graphite and aluminum, is shown to
be strongly temperature dependent. Evidently, there is a contribution to these
changes by material properties. Specific results on the measurements of fric-
tion during unlubricated, hot- and warm-rolling of aluminum using cold steel
rolls are not easy to find, however. Among the few publications is the work of
Atack and Abbott [5] who concluded that sticking friction does not exist when
hot rolling aluminum alloys. Also, these authors believe that accurate predic-
tions of the roll forces require accurate knowledge of the frictional coefficient.
The ring test was used to evaluate the friction factor by Bugini et al. [6] while
Lang [7] measured frictional forces during the hot extrusion of aluminum.
The objective of the present project may then be defined as an attempt to
develop data on the dependence of the coefficient of friction on the surface
and/or the bulk temperature of the rolled metal. In the first portion, reported in
[8], commercially pure aluminum strips were rolled, without lubrication, at 22,
100 and 300°C temperatures - as measured at the centre of the strips - and the
dependence of the roll separating forces, roll torques and the forward slip on
the reduction and the temperature was presented. The values of the coefficient
of friction were inferred from matching measured and calculated roll-separa-
ting forces. In the present project, the dependence of the interfacial normal and
shearing stresses on the reduction are given and their ratio is presented as the
coefficient of friction. The results are substantiated following several indepen-
dent means.

2. Experimental equipment, material and procedure

Equipment: Since the details of the two-high mill used in the tests, its instru-
mentation and the data acquisition system have been given earlier [4], only
a brief review will be included here. The 249.8 mm diameter, 100 mm long work
rolls of the mill are driven by a 42 kW constant torque, dc motor, The drive
spindles contain the torque transducers while the roll-separating forces are
measured by two force transducers, located under the bearing blocks of the
bottom roll. The upper work-roll has two sets of pin-transducer combinations
360 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of t}'ictiot~

Table 1

The chemical composition of the material (wt%)

Mn Si Zn Cu A1

0.05 1.0 0.1 0.05 Remainder

embedded in it, the purpose of which is to monitor the variations of the roll
pressures and the interfacial shear stresses in the contact zone during the pass.
The roll speed is measured by a shaft encoder, fixed to the top drive spindle.
Material: Commercially pure aluminum strips (l100-H14) are used in the ex-
periments. The material is obtained in the form of 6.28 mm thick plates from
which the nominally 50mm wide and 200mm long strips are cut, in the
direction of prior rolling. The chemical composition is given in Table 1.
Procedure: The roll speed is kept constant at 12 rpm, giving a roll surface
velocity of 157mm/s. The two parameters varied are the temperature
(22-500°C) and the reduction (up to 50%). Seven parameters are measured in
the tests. The exit thickness is measured directly after the pass. The temper-
atures are monitored continuously during the reduction. The roll force is
monitored as is the roll torque; the forward slip is also recorded, with due
allowance made for thermal expansion. During the pass, measurements of the
roll pressure and interfacial shear stress in the deformation zone are made
also, using the embedded pin-transducer apparatus, up to 300°C. While the rest
of the parameters are monitored up to 500°C, measurements of the frictional
resistance at this temperature were completely unsuccessful because the hot
strip adhered to the roll surface, wrapping itself around it. The conclusion was
inescapable: sticking friction was present at least near the exit from the roll
gap, contradicting the results of [5]. In all tests, two type J thermocouples of
1 mm outside diameter, having stainless steel sheaths and exposed junctions,
are embedded in the side of each strip, providing data on the temperature-time
history. One of the thermocouples is placed centrally while the other is
positioned 2.5 mm from the top surface.
The strips were heated in a pre-warmed furnace for approximately 20 min.
When both thermocouples indicated t h a t approximately 50°C above the rolling
temperature was reached, the strip was moved to the mill. Rolling began when
the pre-determined temperature was indicated. It is possible that the strips lost
the prior hardening treatment during this heating period.

3. R e s u l t s a n d d i s c u s s i o n

3.1. Temperatures at the surface

The thermocouples embedded centrally in the sides of the samples measured
the bulk temperature. Since the passes were all conducted using rolls which
 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurernentsof friction 361

were at room temperature and the samples were relatively short, the time
taken per pass was not excessive. Roll heating was probably not pronounced
but cooling of the strip surface may have been quite large.
Traditionally it is expected that the frictional forces at the surface are
affected mostly by surface parameters. This implies that it is the surface
temperature that should be quoted and that the tribological events should be
connected to them. Both surface and central temperatures need to be known to
establish an average value through the thickness: not having measured values
of the surface temperatures, a mathematical model of the thermal field was
used to estimate them. The starting point of the calculations was the measure-
ments yielded by the embedded thermocouples, one of which was located at the
strip's centre while the other was 2.5 mm away from the surface.
The model is based on the finite-element technique and combines the
computations of the thermal and the mechanical events during the rolling
process. The temperature field T is governed by the quasi-linear parabolic
equation:
k ~2T ~2T {~T ~T \
~x2+k~y2+Q-pcp[~xVx+~yVy)=O in V (1)

subject to the initial conditions

T=To on So (2)
and the boundary conditions

k(~lx+~-~ly)+h(T-Ta)=O on S~ (3)

k ~xl~+--~yl, +q+h(T-Ts)=O on S (4)

where V is volume, So is that part of the surface on which the initial temper-
ature To is prescribed, Si is a free surface, S is the roll-strip contact surface,
k is the thermal conductivity of a solid; cp is the specific heat, p is the density,
Q represents the rate of heat generation due to the plastic deformation, q is the
rate of heat input assumed to equal half of the friction power dissipated on the
roll-strip interface, shared equally, h is the heat-transfer coefficient, v~ and
vy are the components of the velocity field, l~ and ly are the direction cosines of
the outward normal to the boundary surface, T~ is the temperature of the
surroundings and Ta is the ambient temperature.
The iterative solution based on the finite-element method, developed by
Pietrzyk and Lenard [11], is implemented here to solve the heat-transfer
problem. Equation (1) is solved iteratively for both the strip and the roll. An
example of the finite-element mesh used in the computations is presented in
Fig. 1. The strip temperature is calculated first with the roll surface temper-
ature taken as that of the surroundings at the interface and the initial temper-
ature To on So taken from the measurements. The rate of heat generation is
362 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction

e s t i m a t e d as suggested by Rebelo and K o b a y a s h i [12]. Next the roll temper-

a t u r e is c o m p u t e d with ~ equal to the strip surface t e m p e r a t u r e at the c o n t a c t
b o u n d a r y and To equal to the a m b i e n t t e m p e r a t u r e . In the case of the roll
t e m p e r a t u r e c o m p u t a t i o n s the r a t e of h e a t g e n e r a t i o n Q = 0 is used.
The m a g n i t u d e of the h e a t - t r a n s f e r coefficient at the r o l l - s t r i p i n t e r f a c e is
assumed to be h = 30 000 W / m : K. The m e c h a n i c a l c o m p o n e n t of the solution is
based on the elastoplastic finite-element scheme, proposed by M a l i n o w s k i and
L e n a r d [13].
T y p i c a l results of the c o m p u t a t i o n s in form of a v e r a g e t e m p e r a t u r e s of the
strip in the d e f o r m a t i o n zone and at the s t r i p - r o l l c o n t a c t surface are pres-
e n t e d in Table 2. F o r an initial strip t e m p e r a t u r e of 100°C the a v e r a g e temper-
a t u r e in the d e f o r m a t i o n zone r e m a i n s p r a c t i c a l l y constant, which indicates
t h a t the h e a t loss due to cooling is equalized by the h e a t g e n e r a t i o n of the
plastic deformation. F o r r e d u c t i o n s g r e a t e r t h a n 20% the strip t e m p e r a t u r e
rises slightly. C o m p u t a t i o n s performed for a nominal strip t e m p e r a t u r e of

25*

°aODoo
20
u a°eaaaaoooooOOoa a o o a ~ o o u aoo~ooa o o aooo

o
o
a c a a a o o a o a

a o ~ o a o

"•15"
........................
o o a o
:oo:°°:a°:°°:°°:°°:
o o ° o o a
10

0"
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

X (ram)

Fig. 1. The finite-element mesh used for thermomechanical modelling of flat rolling.

Table 2

Results of the strip temperature computations

Reduction Average temperature (°C) Reduction Average temperature (°C)

(%) (%)
at deformation at at deformation at
So zone S So zone S

21.02 101 101.5 97.7 37.86 300 273.8 264.2

39.52 102 107.9 104.8 28.46 291 260.1 242.4
 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction 363

300°C s h o w a t e m p e r a t u r e d r o p in the d e f o r m a t i o n zone of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 30°C

a n d of a b o u t 40°C a t t h e r o l l - s t r i p c o n t a c t surface.

3.2. The resistance of the metal to deformation

T h e c a l c u l a t i o n s of t h e stress, strain, r a t e of s t r a i n a n d t e m p e r a t u r e fields
r e q u i r e s the d e s c r i p t i o n of the m e t a l ' s c o n s t i t u t i v e b e h a v i o u r . T h e s e w e r e
e s t a b l i s h e d b y c o n d u c t i n g c o m p r e s s i o n t e s t s on a x i a l l y s y m m e t r i c a l s a m p l e s of
t h e a l u m i n u m . S p e c i m e n s of 5 m m d i a m e t e r a n d 7.5 m m l e n g t h w e r e m a c h i n e d
f r o m the a l u m i n u m plates, in t h e d i r e c t i o n of rolling. T h e c o m p r e s s i o n experi-
m e n t s w e r e c o n d u c t e d on a s e r v o h y d r a u l i c t e s t i n g system, u s i n g a p p r o p r i a t e
v a l u e s of c o n s t a n t t r u e s t r a i n rates, at t e m p e r a t u r e s of 22, 100, 200 a n d 300°C.
T h e s t r e s s - s t r a i n curves, all of w h i c h w e r e c o r r e c t e d to r e m o v e the effects of
friction, a r e s h o w n in Fig. 2, m o d e r a t e s t r a i n h a r d e n i n g b e i n g i n d i c a t e d at all
t e s t i n g t e m p e r a t u r e s . R e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s w a s used to o b t a i n the flow curves:
~p=ao+ag for ~>~0.1 (5)
ap=al(g/O.1) b for g<0.1 (6)
T h e p a r a m e t e r s of the flow c u r v e s a r e g i v e n in T a b l e 3.

200

x
15o-

m
m
~ 100-

0
~ 50-
300 °C
200 °C
o 100 °C
o 22 °C
0
0.0 0.'2 0.~4 0.~6 0.0
Effective strain
Fig. 2. The flow curves of A1 l100-H14.

Table 3
The parameters of flow curves
Temperature (°C) ao (MPa) al (MPa) a b
22 150.38 153.78 34.065 0.256
100 146.23 149.64 34.090 0.195
200 135.90 138.56 26.637 0.175
300 111.29 113.85 25.623 0.363
364 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of /)'iction

3.3. S h e a r stress a n d n o r m a l p r e s s u r e
The distributions of the n o r m a l pressure and the s h e a r stress at the c o n t a c t
zone are shown in Fig. 3 ( 2 2 C ) and in Figs. 5 and 6 (100 and 300=C) for
the 6.28 mm t h i c k strips. The stresses are plotted on the o r d i n a t e s while the
distances along the roll gap are given along the abscissa. In general, the
d i s t r i b u t i o n s a p p e a r as expected. T h e y are r e a s o n a b l y smooth and the loca-
tions of the p r e s s u r e m a x i m a are quite n e a r to the locations of the v a n i s h i n g
s h e a r stresses. F o r g r e a t e r reductions, l a r g e r pressures and l a r g e r s h e a r stres-
ses are observed. The i n t e r f a c i a l stresses d u r i n g rolling at room t e m p e r a t u r e s ,
as given in Fig. 3, m a y be c o m p a r e d to p r e v i o u s l y published d a t a [9] o b t a i n e d
w h e n rolling 3.17 mm thick c o m m e r c i a l l y pure a l u m i n u m strips, r e p r o d u c e d
p a r t i a l l y h e r e as Fig. 4. F o r c o m p a r a b l e r e d u c t i o n s the effect of the shape
f a c t o r - defined as the ratio of the a v e r a g e strip t h i c k n e s s in the pass to the
projected contact length is clearly observable. One m a y also q u e s t i o n
w h e t h e r the samples used in the p r e s e n t set of tests qualify as strips. H a v i n g
6.28 mm t h i c k n e s s and 50 mm width, t h e y should p r o b a b l y be r e f e r r e d to as
slabs. Use of the t h i c k e r samples was unavoidable, however, because of the
need to use two embedded thermocouples. The effect of raising the slab's
t e m p e r a t u r e on the d i s t r i b u t i o n s of the interfacial stresses is not very pro-
nounced. The m a g n i t u d e s of the n o r m a l stresses d e c r e a s e s o m e w h a t but by not
v e r y much. The interfacial s h e a r stresses also a p p e a r not to be affected signifi-
cantly, w h i c h indicates t h a t the coefficient of friction - the r a t i o of the two
stresses - is i n c r e a s i n g with the t e m p e r a t u r e . This is d e m o n s t r a t e d in Fig. 7
w h e r e the d e p e n d e n c e of the a v e r a g e frictional coefficient in the pass on the

300 -

250 -

200 -

150 -

p , 7" p T REDUCTION
100 -

(MPc~) 0 37,10 %
50-
+ • 28.87 %
NOMINAL
0- TEMPERA TURE
22°C
-5{3

-100 1

-150~
0
(~) l

Fig. 3. Roll pressure and shear stress distribution at room temperature (6.28 mm thickness).
 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction 365

300

250-

200-

150
p , "F p 7" REDUCTION
100
(MPa) [] 31.90 %
50 • 21.77 %

NOMINAL
0 TEMPERA TURE
22°C
- 5 0 ~

-I00

-1501
o 5 ib 1~ 2~ 2'~ 3~ 3~ 40
(ram)
Fig. 4. Roll pressure and shear stress distribution at room temperature (3.17 mm thickness).

300

250 -

200 -

150 -

p,q- p "7- REDUCTION

100 -
0 D 39.52 %
(MPa) + • 21.02 %
50-
NOMINAL
0 TEMPERA TURE
! O0°C
-50-

-100-

-150
0 1'o i'5 2'o 2'5 3b 3'5 40
1 (mm)

Fig. 5. Roll pressure and shear stress distribution at 100°C bulk temperature (6.28 mm
thickness).

reduction and on the temperature is illustrated. The behaviour of the frictional

forces with increasing temperature may be explained in terms of the adhesion
theory of friction, indicating that frictional resistance results from having to
break the bonds formed at the contacting surfaces. The metal's resistance to
366 J.G. L e n a r d a n d Z. M a l i n o w s k i / M e a s u r e m e n t s o f friction

300 i

250 ' ." ~'

200i / - - ¢ .... , ,

p , "7- T--'E;;;TiO;1
(MPa) i: \ 0
+
[~
•
37.86 % '
28.46 % I

I NOM1NAL
TEMPERATURE
I 3000C

-150- , ~
0 5 10 115 20 2r5 3'0 315 40
t (~m)

Fig. 6. Roll p r e s s u r e a n d shear stress distribution a t 300°C b u l k t e m p e r a t u r e (6.28 mm

thickness).

0.5

+ 22°C, 3 . 1 7 r n m
0.4 D 220C, 6 . 2 8 m m
o IO0°C, 6 . 2 8 m r n
300°C, 6 . 2 8 m r n

0.3

~ve

0.2

0.1

0.0
o lo 2~o 3'0 4~0 50
REDUCTION (%)

Fig. 7. The effect of the reduction and the temperature on the average coefficient of friction.

d e f o r m a t i o n d e c r e a s e s as t h e t e m p e r a t u r e i n c r e a s e s and, by itself, this p h e n o m -

e n o n w o u l d lead to less effort in s e p a r a t i n g the a d h e r e d surfaces. H o w e v e r , as
the s u r f a c e h a r d n e s s a l s o decreases, t h e e a s e w i t h w h i c h n e w a d h e s i v e bonds
form i n c r e a s e s at a s u b s t a n t i a l l y h i g h e r rate t h a n the d e c r e a s i n g flow strength,
 J.G. Lenard and Z. M a l i n o w s k i / M e a s u r e m e n t s of friction 367

leading to a significantly larger number of contacts and, hence, numerous new

bonds. The results of Fig. 7 confirm this: the coefficient of friction rises as the
temperature of the contact surface increases.
The possible existence of roll-pressure curves containing double or triple
peaks has been considered in several publications, from the experimental and
the analytical points of view: see, for example, A1-Salehi et al. [14], Li and
Kobayashi [15] and Lenard [16]. A double peak is observed in the pressure
distribution of Fig. 5, its existence, however, not answering the question:
under what conditions can one expect more than one pressure maximum? This
phenomenon is to be studied further, since non-smooth roll-pressure distribu-
tions may well contribute to surface defects and non-uniform surface temper-
ature and shear-stress distributions.

3.4. Forward slip

Forward slip is a measure of the elongation of the rolled strip, attributable
directly to frictional forces. The usual formulation allows it to be measured in
terms of the distance between two fine lines scratched on the roll surface (l)
and the distance between their impression on the rolled strip (l~), expressed as
Sf=(ll-l)/1 (7)
The variation of the forward slip during the experiments is illustrated in
Fig. 8. Both the reduction - along the abscissa - and the forward slip are
expressed as percentages. In general, higher reductions - and higher roll
pressures and shear stresses - result in larger forward slip. The effect of

20-

NOMINAL
15- TEMPERATURE
o 22°C
o I00°C
+ 3000C
ss • 500°C ÷

(%) 10-

÷+ oo =

5-

0 r
llO 20 3Lo 4~0 5O
REDUCTION (%)

Fig. 8. T h e e f f e c t o f t e m p e r a t u r e o n t h e f o r w a r d slip.
368 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction

temperature is observable also from the figure: it appears that as it rises, the
forward slip increases at first, a maximum then being reached, followed by
a decrease of significant magnitude.

3.5. R o l l force a n d t o r q u e
The specific roll-separating force and the specific roll torque as a function of
the reduction and the temperature are given in Figs. 9 and 10, respectively. The
variations are as already indicated by the changes of the forward slip: both
force and torque rise as the reduction increases. The temperature sensitivity of
the material's resistance to deformation is not very pronounced below 300°C,
the corresponding forces and torques dropping significantly only in excess of
that temperature, reflecting the competing effects of the increasing frictional
resistance and the decreasing flow strength.

3.6. S u b s t a n t i a t i o n
The validity of the experimentally obtained values of the coefficient of
friction may be substantiated by several independent methods, these including
the following.
(1) The integral of the measured roll-pressure distribution over the contact
surface should be close to the roll-separating forces obtained from the load
cells, placed directly under the bearing blocks of the lower work-roll.
(2) The integral of the product of the roll radius and the interfacial shear
force distribution over the contact length should be close to the torque in-
dicated by the torque transducer located in the top spindle.

5000

4500-

4000- NOMINAL ~
TEMPERATURE ////
3500 o 22°C // /
Ioo'c ///
3000- + 3oo0c ~//
P m 500°C
( N / m m ) 2500-
2000-

1500-

o 1~0 20 3~0 4~0 50

REDUCTION (%)
Fig. 9. T h e effect of t e m p e r a t u r e on t h e r o l l - s e p a r a t i n g forces.
 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction 369

5o

40- NOMINAL
TEMPERATURE //o
o 22°C //
Ioo0c //
T 30- + 300°C //
(g m/mm) " 500°C/ / /

20-
+

lO-' f ~ . . '
•. ~ r ~
o
0 I~0 2'0 3'0 4'0 50
REDUCTION (%)

Fig. 10. T h e effect of t e m p e r a t u r e o n t h e roll torques.

Table 4

S u b s t a n t i a t i o n of t h e embedded p i n r e s u l t s

Reduction F o r c e (N/mm) T o r q u e (N m m / m m ) Sr #ave

(%)
Transducer Pins Transducer Pins

Data obtained using 3.17mmthick strips at room temperatures [9]

31.90 2410 2883 15020 16619 0.0614 0.131
27.44 1983 2318 8330 8715 0.0548 0.130
21.77 1633 1746 7440 7260 0.0441 0.079
3.79 358 281 820 731 0.0053 0.060
Data obtained using ~ 2 8 m m t h i c k strips at room temperatures (* estimated)
37.10 3952 3832 32 000 N/A 0.074 0.16"
28.87 3287 3243 20 070 17 942 0.0528 0.159
Data obtained using 6.28 mm thick strips at 100~C
39.52 3313 3457 34 460 27 623 0.078 0.216
21.02 1998 1912 13 340 13 078 0.047 0.222
Data obtained using 6.28 mm thick strips at 300°C
37.86 3881 4030 35 640 35 463 0.106 0.36
28.46 3041 2980 30 880 26 027 0.077 0.329
370 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction

As Table 4 shows, these numbers agree quite well, indicating that the experi-
mental technique yields reliable results. Note that earlier results [9] are
included also in Table 4. Further, since one of the embedded pins failed in the
22°C, 37.1% reduction test, the value of the coefficient of friction, marked by
the asterisk, has been estimated by matching the measured and calculated roll
forces.

4. Conclusions

Commercially pure aluminum alloy strips of 6.28 mm thickness were rolled

in a two-high laboratory mill. Each of the strips had two thermocouples
embedded, one centrally and the other 2.5 mm from the surface. Experiments
were conducted at 22, 100, 300 and 500°C nominal temperatures, as indicated by
the centrally located thermocouple. Roll-separating forces, roll torques, for-
ward slip and interfacial normal and shearing stresses were monitored for
several reductions. The surface temperatures were estimated using a finite-
element code.
The results confirm that the interfacial frictional forces during the warm
rolling of aluminum strips and slabs depend to a significant degree on the
surface and bulk temperature of the rolled metal. As the temperature of the
strips is increased the coefficient of friction and the forward slip also increase.
The frictional forces also increase with the reduction, confirming earlier
results obtained during the cold rolling of the same alloys. Comparison of the
present data to earlier data indicates that inferring values of the coefficient of
friction by matching calculated and measured separating forces is fraught with
danger: the results are as good as the model used in the computation. Indepen-
dent substantiation of the friction data, presented above, assures the reliability
of the measurements.

Acknowledgements

The financial assistance of the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research

Council of Canada is gratefully acknowledged.

References

[1] E. Rabinowicz, Friction and Wear of Materials, Wiley, New York, 1965.
[2] J.A. Schey, Tribology in Metalworking Friction, Lubrication and Wear, ASM, Metals
Park, OH, 1983.
[3] L.-S. Lim and J.G. Lenard, A S M E , J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 106 (1984) 139.
[4] A.N. Karagiozis and J.G. Lenard, Proc. Eurotrib 85, Lyon, France, 1985, p. 2.13.
[5] P.A. Atack and M.R. Abbott, Proc. Int. Syrup. on the Ptast. and Resistance to Metal
Deformation, Herceg Novi, 1986, p. 334.
[6] A. Bugini, E. Gentili, R. Pacagnella and G. Restelli, Traneiatura Stampaggio, 15 (1978)
103.
[7] G. Lang, Aluminum, 60 (1984) 813.
 J.G. Lenard and Z. Malinowski/Measurements of friction 371

[8] J°G. Lenard, CIRP Ann., 40 (1991) 223.

[9] J.G. Lenard, Proc. Eurotrib 89, Helsinki, Finland, Vol. 2, 1989, p. 210.
[10] A.N. Karagiozis and J.G. Lenard, ASME, J. Eng. Mater. Technol., 110 (1988) 17.
[11] M. Pietrzyk and J.G. Lenard, Int. J. Numer. Meth. Eng., 30 (1990) 1459.
[12] N. Rebelo and S. Kobayashi, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 22 (1980) 707.
[13] Z. Malinowski and J.G. Lenard, Comput. Meth. Appl. Mech. Eng., 104 (1993) 1.
[14] F.A.R. A1-Salehi, T.C. Firbank and P.R. Lancaster, Int. J. Mech. Sci., 15 (1973) 693.
[15] G.-J. Li and S. Kobayashi, ASME, J. Eng. Ind., 104 (1982) 55.
[16] J.G. Lenard, Res Mech. Lett., 1 (1981) 511.