metals

Article
Effect of Crown Shape of Rolls on the Distribution of
Stress and Elastic Deformation for Rolling Processes
Rumualdo Servin 1, *, Sixtos A. Arreola 1 , Ismael Calderón 1 , Alejandro Perez 1 and
Sandra M. San Miguel 2
1 Facultad de Ingeniería Mecánica y Eléctrica, Barranquilla S/N Col. Guadalupe, Monclova 25280, Mexico;
sxtsaav@gmail.com (S.A.A.); ing.ismael.calderon@gmail.com (I.C.); aperezal22@gmail.com (A.P.)
2 Universidad Tecnológica de la Región Centro de Coahuila, Maintenance and Technology, Carretera 57 Km
14.5, Monclova 25710, Mexico; sandryiza_16@hotmail.com
* Correspondence: rumualdo.servin@uadec.edu.mx; Tel.: +52 1 8666435757




Received: 16 October 2019; Accepted: 10 November 2019; Published: 14 November 2019


Abstract: The present work analyzes the influence of crown shape on the distribution of stresses
and deformation for rolling processes. This study consists of a Finite Element Analysis considering
combinations of crown shape for Back Up Roll and Work Roll, rolling forces, properties of materials
and dimensions of rolls and strip. An analysis of the rolls based on a double cantilever model with
the fulcrum of the beams in a centerline mill was carried out. The results show that maximum
stress concentrations for all combinations of crown shape analyzed appear on both sides 787.4 mm
from the mill centerline, exactly on the sides of the strip. In this area, the maximum stress for the
best combination of crown shape is larger than in the centerline mill, increasing from 34.2 MPa to
163.0 MPa. This is proportional according to Hooke’s law for which strain of rolls increases from
3.4067 × 10−4 to 4.8368 × 10−4 . The worst combinations of crown shapes were obtained when the
shapes of the barrel are the same for the BUR and WR; for example: Combination 1 (BUR Positive–WR
Positive), Combination 5 (BUR Flat–WR Flat), and Combination 9 (BUR Negative–WR Negative).

Keywords: back up roll (BUR); work roll (WR); rolling process; stress distribution; finite element
analysis (FEA); strain; deformation; distribution of pressure

1. Introduction
One of the most important problems in rolling processes is the control of pressure on the strip.
This phenomenon has great influence on the quality of the strip, and the control of this process requires
extensive study of each variable, such as wear, crown control, and stress distribution.
Strip flatness and crown control are the basis of strip shape quality. There have been many studies
focusing on this issue using mathematical models and the Finite Element Method (FEM). Yang et al. [1]
studied the backup roll (BUR) contour in smart crown tandem cold mills. Li et al. [2] conducted the
same study for a hot rolling mill. Wang et al. [3] used a negative crown in work rolls (WR). Wang et al.
and Cao et al. [4,5] carried out the same study for a hot rolling mill using a Continuous Variable Crown
(CVC) in the backup rolls and the work rolls. Liu et al. [6] complemented these studies by considering
axial forces in the analysis; and all of them concluded that the contact pressure concentration that exists
between work and backup rolls have direct influence on the shape and quality of the strip. The thermal
crown is another factor that influences the control of flatness and occurs in cold rolling mills. However,
it is more critical in hot rolling mills applications. Chang, Galantucci and Tricarico, Hacquin et al.
and Zhao et al. [7–10] concluded that the thermal crown is generated with its maximum point in
the center of the rolls, and it is more severe in work rolls due to direct contact with the strip, so an

Metals 2019, 9, 1222; doi:10.3390/met9111222 www.mdpi.com/journal/metals

Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2 of 17
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 2 of 16
to direct contact with the strip, so an adequate cooling system must be used to avoid excessive wear.
Li et al. [11] states that the Bending Force compensates for the effects of the thermal crown and wear.
adequate cooling
The wear on system
the work must
rollsbeisused to avoid
a topic widelyexcessive
studied by wear. Li et al.
S. Spuzic [11]
and states that
Strafford, theet
Turk Bending
al. and
Force compensates for the effects of the thermal crown and wear.
Li et al. [12–14], and their studies specify that wear increases as the rolling campaign progresses.
The wear
Rumualdo et al.on[15]
thestates
workthatrollswear
is a topic
becomes widely
more studied
criticalby
in S.
BURSpuzic and the
because Strafford,
rolling Turk et al. and
campaigns are
Li et al. [12–14], and their studies specify that wear increases as the
longer than in the WR. Also, the WRs remain for several hours in each campaign, while the BURs rolling campaign progresses.
Rumualdo
have laminationet al. [15] states that
campaigns wear
of at leastbecomes
fourteenmoredays.critical in BUR because the rolling campaigns are
longer than
Liu in the
et al. [16]WR. Also, thean
conducted WRs remainoffor
analysis several
rolling hours inalong
pressure each campaign, while in
the strip width thecold
BURs have
rolling
lamination campaigns of at least fourteen days.
process, and Zhang et al. [17] did the same analysis for a hot rolling strip; both studies concluded that
Liu et
the peak of al. [16] conducted
maximum pressure anconcentration
analysis of rolling pressure at
was generated along the strip
the end of thewidth
body in in cold rolling
the backup
process,
rolls. Kong et al. and Cao et.al. [18,19] complemented this study by analyzing different widths ofthat
and Zhang et al. [17] did the same analysis for a hot rolling strip; both studies concluded the
the peak of maximum pressure concentration was generated at the end of the
strip, and as a preventive measure to reduce the concentration of stress, they analyzed different types body in the backup rolls.
Kong et al. and
of chamfers at theCao et al.
ends of[18,19]
the body complemented
for the backup this study by analyzing different widths of the strip,
rolls.
and as a preventive measure to reduce the concentration
Liu et al. [6] analyzed the rolls using a double cantilever of stress,
modeltheywithanalyzed different
the fulcrum of thetypes
beams of
chamfers at the ends of the body for the backup rolls.
in a centerline mill for their study of four-high CVC, and Jiang et al. [20] used the same mathematical
model Liu
inetorder
al. [6]toanalyzed the rolls
theoretically using
analyze thea double cantilever
cold rolling model
process using with the fulcrum
an ultra-thin of the
strip with beams in a
roll edge
centerline
kiss. mill for their study of four-high CVC, and Jiang et al. [20] used the same mathematical model
in order
When to theoretically analyze the is
the stress concentration cold
notrolling process
controlled, using an
excessive ultra-thin
wear can bestrip with roll
generated, edgeaffects
which kiss.
When the stress concentration is not controlled, excessive wear can
the pressure distribution, and in extreme cases, there are operational accidents with cracks andbe generated, which affects the
pressure distribution, and in extreme cases, there are operational accidents
fractures of rolls at the ends of the work barrel as shown in the images of Figure 1a for BUR and with cracks and fractures of
rolls
Figureat 1b
theforendsWR. of the work barrel as shown in the images of Figure 1a for BUR and Figure 1b for WR.

Figure 1. Roll
Figure 1. Rollfailures
failuresproduced
producedforfor
stress concentration:
stress (a) Backup
concentration: Roll spalling;
(a) Backup (b) Work
Roll spalling; (b) Roll
Work cracks.
Roll
cracks.
It is impossible to avoid elastic deformation of the rolls due to the rolling loads, and this could be
critical, in combination with stress concentration and crown shape. There is always a latent risk of an
It is impossible to avoid elastic deformation of the rolls due to the rolling loads, and this could
operational accident, yet such risk can be reduced with a more complete understanding of the rolling
be critical, in combination with stress concentration and crown shape. There is always a latent risk of
process. Useful predictive data can be collected by FEM of rolls as a double cantilever model with the
an operational accident, yet such risk can be reduced with a more complete understanding of the
fulcrum of beams in a centerline mill.
rolling process. Useful predictive data can be collected by FEM of rolls as a double cantilever model
According to previous studies, CVC is the best geometry for pressure distribution control in
with the fulcrum of beams in a centerline mill.
BURs [4,5]. However, this geometry requires grinding machines with controls and many mills do
According to previous studies, CVC is the best geometry for pressure distribution control in
not have access to them. Thus, it is essential to carry out this study considering traditional positive,
BURs [4,5]. However, this geometry requires grinding machines with controls and many mills do not
negative and flat-shaped crowns. In addition, the fact that the thermal crown resembles a positive
have access to them. Thus, it is essential to carry out this study considering traditional positive,
crown, and the wear on the rolls of a negative crown must be taken into account.
negative and flat-shaped crowns. In addition, the fact that the thermal crown resembles a positive
crown, and the wear on the rolls of a negative crown must be taken into account.
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 3 of 16

Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 17

2. Materials andand
2. Materials Methods
Methods
The deformation of the
The deformation rolls
of the is is
rolls directly
directlyrelated
related to
to the dimensionsofof
the dimensions thethe rolls,
rolls, thethe support
support points
points
and the
andapplication of rolling
the application loads,
of rolling loads,asasshown
shownininthe
the schematic ofFigure
schematic of Figure2.2.

Figure
Figure 2. Schematic
2. Schematic of of
thethemain
maindimensional
dimensional variables
variablesfor
forfour high
four rolling
high mill.
rolling mill.

The forces
The forces causing
causing thethe work
work roll
roll deformation include
deformation include rolling
rollingforce, inter-roll
force, force,
inter-roll andand
force, workwork
roll roll
bending force. Work roll deflection at element 𝑖 is described by Jiang et al. and Wang [20,21]
bending force. Work roll deflection at element i is described by Jiang et al. and Wang [20,21] and can and can
be expressed as:
be expressed as:
n
𝑦 𝑖X = 𝑔 𝑖, 𝑗 𝑞 𝑗 − 𝑝 𝑗 − 𝑔 𝑖 𝐹 , (1)
yW (i) = gW (i, j)(q( j) − p( j)) − gFW (i)FW , (1)
j=1
where yW (i) is the vertical deformation of the work roll at element 𝑖, gW (𝑖, 𝑗) is the work roll deflection
yW (i) isfunction
whereinfluence the vertical due deformation
to the combined of bending
the workand
rollshear
at element i, gW (i, j)by
forces generated is rolling
the workandroll deflection
inter-roll
influence
forcefunction
at element duej; 𝑝to
𝑖 isthe
thecombined bending
rolling force and𝑖.shear
at element 𝑞𝑗 is the
forces generated
contact by rolling
force between workandrollinter-roll
and
force backup
at element pi is the𝑗. rolling
roll atj; element 𝐹W is theforce
workatroll
element qj is 𝑔the
bendingi.force, FW (𝑖) is the work
contact forceroll bendingwork
between influence
roll and
backupfunction
roll atdue to the j.
element work
FW roll bending
is the work force.
roll bending force, gFW (i) is the work roll bending influence
function dueThe to
backup
the work roll deflection
roll bending is caused
force. only by the inter-roll force, so backup roll deflection at
element 𝑖 can be expressed as [20,21]:
The backup roll deflection is caused only by the inter-roll force, so backup roll deflection at element
i can be expressed as [20,21]: 𝑦 𝑖 = 𝑔 𝑖, 𝑗 𝑞 𝑗 , (2)
n
X
yB (i) = gB (i, j)q( j), (2)
where yB (i) is the vertical deformation of the backup roll at element 𝑖, 𝑔B (𝑖, 𝑗) is the backup roll
j=1
deflection influence function due to the combined bending and shear forces generated by inter-roll
yB (i)
whereforce 𝑗.
is the vertical
at element deformation of the backup roll at element i, gB (i, j) is the backup roll
deflectionTheinfluence function
force causing due to
flattening the combined
between the work bending and
roll and the shear
strip is theforces
rollinggenerated by force
force, and the inter-roll
force causing
at elementthe j.
flattening between the work roll and backup roll is the inter-roll force. Therefore, the
flattening
The force atcausing 𝑖 can be expressed
elementflattening between as the
[20,21]:
work roll and the strip is the rolling force, and the
force causing the flattening between the𝑦 work
𝑖 =roll 𝑔and 𝑖,backup
𝑗 𝑝 𝑗 roll is the inter-roll force. Therefore,
(3)
the flattening at element i can be expressed as [20,21]:
𝑦 𝑖 =X
nR 𝑔 𝑖, 𝑗 𝑝 𝑗 , (4)
WSy (i) = WS g (i, j)p( j) (3)
where 𝑔WS (𝑖, 𝑗) is the flattening influence function of work roll and strip due to the rolling force at
j = nL
element 𝑗; 𝑛L and 𝑛R are the element numbers at the left and right edges of the strip according to the
2n
X
yWB (i) = gWB (i, j)p( j), (4)
j=1
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 4 of 16

where gWS (i, j) is the flattening influence function of work roll and strip due to the rolling force at
element j; nL and nR are the element numbers at the left and right edges of the strip according to the
second numbering rule; gWB (i, j) is the flattening influence function of the work roll and the backup
roll due to the inter-roll force at element j.
The analyses of the distribution of stress and the deformation of rolls for the rolling process are
based on an FEM employing ANSYS Mechanical Static Structural, considering the main variables
and conditions in the process of rolling and described by the parameters in Table 1. The rolling and
bending forces are uniformly distributed, and are applied in the bearing areas. The rolls and strip
are considered to behave flexibly, with general joints in the lateral face, which only allow for vertical
movement in the direction of force application and roll deformation. The mesh for all the simulations
had 461,800 nodes and 240,076 elements, with two zones of hexahedral elements with 20 nodes and
tetrahedral elements with 10 nodes. The contact region mesh is refined using 20 layers with a growth
rate of 1.1. Moreover, there are two contact zones, one of them between BUR and WR and the other
one between WR and Strip. To avoid slipping of components in the contact zones, a bonded system is
implemented without penetration.

Table 1. Parameter of the three dimensions finite element model of roll stacks.

Model Parameter Value

Work roll diameter Dw 650.875 mm
Work roll barrel length Lw 1897.20 mm
Work roll neck diameter Dnw 384.175 mm
Work roll Bending force length LBf 2747.20 mm
Backup roll diameter Db 1244.60 mm
Backup roll barrel length Lb 1727.20 mm
Backup roll neck diameter Dnb 678.49 mm
Backup roll Rolling force length LRf 2717.80 mm
Strip width W 1574.8 mm
Strip thickness H 2.5 mm
Rolling force Rf 38,000 kN
Bending force Bf 400 kN
Poisson’s ratio work roll 0.3
Poisson’s ratio backup roll 0.3
Young’s modulus work roll 210 GPa
Young’s modulus backup roll 220 GPa
Work Roll Crown 0.1016 mm
Backup Roll Crown 0.0762 mm
Young’s modulus strip 210 MPa
Maximum Thermal crown WR 0.150 mm
Maximum Thermal crown BUR 0.100 mm
Maximum wear WR 0.200 mm
Maximum wear BUR 0.525 mm

The data considered for the analysis are those established for stand M-5 of a hot rolling mill, in
which the materials of the rolls are 5% Cr-forged steel for the backup roll and nodular iron Indefinite
Chilled Double Pour (ICDP) for the work roll, rolling a structural steel.
According to previous studies by Wang et al. and Cao et al. [4,5], the best pressure distribution is
obtained by CVC crown; therefore, it is considered the worst case, and analysis of such combinations
are used for positive, negative and flat crowns. When considering a thermal crown, the heat generated
in the roll expands the material forming a positive crown according to Chang, Galantucci and Tricarico,
Hacquin et al. and Zhao et al. [7–10]. Thus, we considered a thermal crown of 0.100 mm for the backup
rolls and 0.150 mm for the work rolls.
According to the calculations made by Liu et al. and Rumualdo et al. [6,15], it has been established
that the greatest wear occurs in the center of the rolls based on the wear parameters. According to the
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 5 of 16

periods of the rolling campaigns, these are much longer for the backup rolls, with at least fourteen
days of continuous operation. The values considered critical are 0.200 mm and 0.525 mm for the work
Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 5 of 17
and backup rolls, respectively, and negative crowns with these values will be used to simulate wear.
Finally,
mm theforuse
theof flat and
work geometries is applied
backup rolls, to get an
respectively, andidea of thecrowns
negative behaviorwithwhen
thesecrowns are be
values will notused
used, or
whentothe thermal crown compensates for the wear generated.
simulate wear. Finally, the use of flat geometries is applied to get an idea of the behavior when
The
crowns analysis
are notofused,
the distribution
or when the of stresscrown
thermal and deformation
compensatesof forrolls
the for
wearthe rolling process is based on
generated.
The analysis
a FEM considering allof thepossible
the distribution of stress and
combinations of deformation
crown shapeof(positive,
rolls for the rolling process
negative, is based
and flat), as shown
on a
in Table 2. FEM considering all the possible combinations of crown shape (positive, negative, and flat), as
shown in Table 2.
Table 2. Combinations of crown shape analyzed.
Table 2. Combinations of crown shape analyzed.
Combination Configuration
Combination Configuration
1 1 BURBUR Positive–WR
Positive–WR Positive
Positive
2 BUR Positive–WR Flat
2 BUR Positive–WR Flat
3 BUR Positive–WR Negative
3 BUR Positive–WR Negative
4 BUR Flat–WR Positive
5 4 BUR Flat–WR Positive
BUR Flat–WR Flat
6 5 BUR
BURFlat–WR
Flat–WRFlat
Negative
7 6 BUR Flat–WR
BUR Negative
Negative–WR Positive
8 7 BUR Negative–WR Positive
BUR Negative–WR Flat
9 8 BUR
BURNegative–WR
Negative–WRFlatNegative
9 BUR Negative–WR Negative
3. Results
3. Results
The distribution of stress
The distribution and
of stress andthe
thetotal
totaldeflection alongthe
deflection along thebarrel
barrel length
length were
were obtained
obtained for the
for the
workwork
and backup
and backup rolls from simulation results of the rolling process with the parameters shown in in
rolls from simulation results of the rolling process with the parameters shown
TableTable
1. The simulations
1. The simulations considered
consideredthethemost
most important configuration,
important configuration, thethe different
different types
types of crown
of crown
shapeshape
on roll
on barrel (three
roll barrel levels:
(three levels:Positive,
Positive, Flat
Flat and Negative)and
and Negative) and a strip
a strip with
with a constant
a constant width width
of of
1574.81574.8
mm.mm.

3.1. Characteristics
3.1. Characteristics of Rolling
of Rolling Stress
Stress alongBarrel
along BarrelLength
Length of
of Work
Workand
andBackup
BackupRolls
Rolls
Figures
Figure 3a–c show
3a–c show the results
the results of distribution
of stress stress distribution for a backup
for a backup rollpositive
roll with with positive
crown,crown,
combining
combining the mechanical contact with a work roll using a positive, flat and negative crown,
the mechanical contact with a work roll using a positive, flat and negative crown, respectively.
respectively.

Figure 3. Cont.
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 6 of 16

Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 17

Figure 3. Stress
Figure distribution
3. Stress forforcombinations
distribution combinations of crowns:(a)
of crowns: (a)combination
combination 1, (b)
1, (b) combination
combination 2, and2,(c)
and (c)
combination 3.
combination 3.

In allInthree cases
all three shown
cases shown ininFigure
Figure3,3,stress
stress concentration
concentration isis observed
observed at both
at both endsends at 787.4
at 787.4 mm mm
fromfrom
the center of the
the center of themill,
mill,coincident with the
coincident with thesides
sidesofof
thethe strip.
strip. For work
For work rolls,
rolls, the the
area area
that that is
is in
directcontact
in direct contact with
withthethestrip is the
strip mostmost
is the critical, reaching
critical, values of
reaching 200 MPa
values of for
200combination 1 (Figure
MPa for combination 1
3a)3a)
(Figure andand3 (Figure 3c); 3c);
3 (Figure and and
for the
forbackup rolls stress
the backup concentration
rolls stress is observed
concentration at the same
is observed at thepoint
same at point
787.4 mm and in the main radius due to the change of section, the maximum stress is very similar
at 787.4 mm and in the main radius due to the change of section, the maximum stress is very similar
due to the appearance of the figures. However, for combination 3 (Figure 3c), the stress is slightly
due to the appearance of the figures. However, for combination 3 (Figure 3c), the stress is slightly less,
less, at 252.0 MPa. In this case, the best option for work rolls is combination 2 (Figure 3b), at 171.0
at 252.0 MPa. In this case, the best option for work rolls is combination 2 (Figure 3b), at 171.0 MPa,
MPa, and for backup rolls, combination 3 (Figure 3c) is the best option, at 252.0 MPa.
and for backup
Figuresrolls,
4a–c combination
show the results 3 (Figure 3c)distribution
of stress is the best for
option, at 252.0
a backup roll MPa.
without a crown (flat),
combining the mechanical contact with a work roll that uses positive crown,roll
Figure 4a–c show the results of stress distribution for a backup without
flat and a crown
negative crown, (flat),
combining the mechanical contact with a work roll that uses positive crown, flat and negative
respectively.
crown, respectively.
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 7 of 16
Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 17

Figure 4. Stress distribution for combinations of crown: (a) combination 4, (b) combination 5, and (c)
combination 6.
MetalsMetals
2019, 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
9, 1222 8 of 17
8 of 16

Figure 4. Stress distribution for combinations of crown: (a) combination 4, (b) combination 5, and (c)
combination 6.
The behavior of these three combinations in Figure 4 shows a phenomenon very similar to the one
describedThe above. Yet, in these three combinations the values are slightly lower, and for combination
behavior of these three combinations in Figure 4 shows a phenomenon very similar to the
4 (Figure 4a) the maximum
one described above. Yet,stress for the
in these BUR
three is only manifested
combinations in the
the values are main radius,
slightly lower,andandnot
forin the
contact
combination 4 (Figure 4a) the maximum stress for the BUR is only manifested in the main radius, and the
area with the work roll, and its maximum value is 163.0 MPa. In the case of the work roll,
minimum
not in stress found
the contact is with
area for combination
the work roll,4and(Figure 4a), which
its maximum hasis 121.0
value MPa.InFor
163.0 MPa. thecombinations
case of the 5
work
(Figure 4b)roll,
andthe minimum
6 (Figure 4c), stress
stressfound is for combination
concentration is observed4 (Figure
at both4a),
endswhich
787.4has
mm121.0
fromMPa. For
the center of
combinations
the mill, on the sides5 (Figure
of the4b) andIn
strip. 6 (Figure 4c),the
this case, stress
bestconcentration is observed
option for work at bothrolls
and backup endsis787.4 mm
combination
from 4a).
4 (Figure the center of the mill, on the sides of the strip. In this case, the best option for work and backup
rolls is combination 4 (Figure 4a).
Figure 5a–c show the results of stress distribution for negative crown BUR, combining the
Figures 5a–c show the results of stress distribution for negative crown BUR, combining the
mechanical contact with a WR using positive crown, flat, and negative crown, respectively.
mechanical contact with a WR using positive crown, flat, and negative crown, respectively.

Figure 5. Cont.
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 9 of 16
Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 17

Figure 5. Stress
Figure distribution
5. Stress forfor
distribution combinations
combinations of crown:(a)
of crown: (a)combination
combination 7, (b)
7, (b) combination
combination 8 and8(c)
and (c)
combination 9.
combination 9.

In allInthree cases
all three casesin Figure
in Figure 5, 5,stress
stressconcentration
concentration is isobserved
observedatat both
both endsends at 787.4
at 787.4 mm mm fromfrom
the the
center of the
center of mill, on the
the mill, on theslides ofof
slides the thestrip.
strip.For
For WRs, thearea
WRs, the areathat
thatis is
in in direct
direct contact
contact withwith the strip
the strip is is
the most critical, reaching values of 203.0 MPa for combinations 7 (Figure 5a)
the most critical, reaching values of 203.0 MPa for combinations 7 (Figure 5a) and 9 (Figure 5c), and for and 9 (Figure 5c), and
for the
the BUR, BUR,concentration
stress stress concentration is observed
is observed at theat same
the same point
point at 787.4
at 787.4 mm mmand andininthe
themain
main radius
radius due
due to the change of section. Also, the maximum stress is very similar,
to the change of section. Also, the maximum stress is very similar, as can be observed in the as can be observed in the
figures.
figures. However, for combination 8 (Figure 5b) the stress is slightly less, at 196.0 MPa. In this case,
However, for combination 8 (Figure 5b) the stress is slightly less, at 196.0 MPa. In this case, the best
the best option for work and backup rolls is combination 8 (Figure 5b).
option for work and backup rolls is combination 8 (Figure 5b).
In the nine combinations analyzed, it can be observed that for both work and backup rolls, the
In the ninestress
maximum combinations analyzed,atit787.4
value is concentrated can mmbe observed that for
from the center both
of the work
mill, whichand backup
matches rolls, the
exactly
maximum stress value is concentrated at 787.4 mm from the center of the mill,
with the edges of the strip; and particularly for the WR, the critical area is the one in direct contact which matches exactly
with the
with the strip generating a maximum stress of 258.0 MPa. For BURs, in addition to the maximum with
edges of the strip; and particularly for the WR, the critical area is the one in direct contact
the strip
stressgenerating
generated by a maximum
the contact stress
of the of 258.0
rolls, MPa. For BURs,
a concentration in stress
point of addition to the maximum
is produced in the mainstress
radiusby
generated withthethe same magnitude
contact of the rolls, of the maximum stress
a concentration (271.0
point ofMPa).
stressThe mechanicalin
is produced contact
the maindue toradius
stress is more critical on BURs, because concentration points are generally
with the same magnitude of the maximum stress (271.0 MPa). The mechanical contact due to stress is observed at the end of the
morebarrel
criticaland in the main radius of the neck. This supports the notion that when the yield limits are
on BURs, because concentration points are generally observed at the end of the barrel
exceeded, the BUR suffers spalling while the WR only presents surface cracks.
and in the main radius of the neck. This supports the notion that when the yield limits are exceeded,
As for the combinations of crowns, it can be observed that the worst results are obtained when
the BUR suffers spalling while the WR only presents surface cracks.
the geometries are the same for work and backup rolls, for example combinations 1 (BUR Positive–
As
WRfor the combinations
Positive), 5 (BUR Flat–WR of crowns,
Flat) and it can be observed
9 (BUR Negative–WRthat Negative).
the worst results are obtained when the
geometries are the same for work and backup rolls, for example combinations 1 (BUR Positive–WR
3.2. Characteristics
Positive), 5 (BUR Flat–WR of RollFlat)
Deflection
and along
9 (BUR the Negative–WR
Barrel Length of Work and Backup Rolls
Negative).
Figures 6a–c show the results of roll deflection distribution for a positive crown backup roll,
3.2. Characteristics of Roll Deflection along the Barrel Length of Work and Backup Rolls
combining the mechanical contact with a work roll using positive crown, flat, and negative crown,
respectively.
Figure 6a–c show the results of roll deflection distribution for a positive crown backup roll,
combining the mechanical contact with a work roll using positive crown, flat, and negative
crown, respectively.
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 10 of 16
Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 17

Figure 6. Roll deflection distribution for combinations of crown: (a) combination 1, (b) combination 2,
and (c) combination 3.
 Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 17
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 11 of 16
Figure 6. Roll deflection distribution for combinations of crown: (a) combination 1, (b) combination
2, and (c) combination 3.
For all three cases in Figure 6, the same performance behavior is observed, where the work roll
has minimal Fordeflection because
all three cases on one
in Figure side
6, the it isperformance
same in contact with the isstrip
behavior and on
observed, the other
where endroll
the work it is in
contacthaswith the BUR.
minimal This because
deflection generated deflection
on one side it isisinminimal andthe
contact with irrelevant
strip andfor
on its
the analysis.
other end However,
it is in
contact with
the deflection theBUR
of the BUR.isThis generatedand
considerable deflection
always is maintains
minimal andtheirrelevant for its with
same pattern, analysis. However,
minor deflection
observedthe in
deflection
the areaofofthe BUR with
contact is considerable
the WR and and always maintains
maximum deflection thebeing
samedistributed
pattern, with minor the
towards
deflection observed in the area of contact with the WR and maximum deflection
barrel length ends. For the three cases analyzed, the largest strain is obtained with combination 1 being distributed
(Figuretowards the barrel length ends. For the three cases analyzed, the largest
6a), reaching values of 400 µm, which is equivalent to 6.4276 × 10−4 .strain is obtained with
combination 1 (Figure 6a), reaching values of 400 µm, which is equivalent to 6.4276 × 10−4.
Figure 7a–c show the results of roll deflection distribution for a BUR without a crown
Figures 7a–c show the results of roll deflection distribution for a BUR without a crown (Flat),
(Flat), combining
combiningthethe mechanical contact with a WR that uses positive crown, flat, and negative
mechanical contact with a WR that uses positive crown, flat, and negative crown,
crown,respectively.
respectively.

Figure 7. Cont.
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 12 of 16
Metals 2019,
Metals 2019, 9,
9, xx FOR
FOR PEER
PEER REVIEW
REVIEW 12 of
12 of 17
17

7. Roll7.
FigureFigure
Figure 7.deflection distribution
deflection
Roll deflection
Roll for combinations
distribution
distribution of of
for combinations
for combinations crown:
of crown:(a)
crown: (a)combination
(a) 4, (b)
combination 4,
combination (b)combination
(b) combination 5,
combination
and (c)5,
5,combination
and (c)
and 6.
(c) combination
combination 6.
6.

For
For allFor all cases
three
all three in
three cases
Figure
cases in Figure
in Figure 7, the
the pattern
7, the pattern
7, pattern
in the inin the
work the and
work
work and backup
backup
and backup rolls
rolls isrolls is the
the same
is theas
same
thatas
same as that
described
that
described
above described
for Figure above
6. Only
above for Figure 6. Only
the deflection
for Figure the
6. Only the deflection
values for the
deflection values for
backup
values the backup
rolls
for the change
backup rolls change
rollsslightly: slightly: minor
minor deflection
change slightly: minor
deflection
deflection
is observed is observed
is
in the observed in the
in
contact area thewith
contact
contact area
thearea with
WRwith the
andthe WR and
WR
maximum and maximum
maximum deflection
deflectiondeflection towards
towards towards
the endsthethe ends
ofends of
of
the barrel
the barrel length. For the three cases analyzed, the lowest deflection was obtained with combination
length.the barrel
For length.
the three For the
cases three cases
analyzed, the analyzed, the lowest
lowest deflection wasdeflection
obtained was obtained
with with combination
combination 4 (Figure 7a),
4 (Figure
(Figure 7a),
7a), obtaining
obtaining strain
strain only
only at
at the
the ends
ends of
of the
the barrel
barrel length,
length, with
with aa value
value ofof−44.8369
4.8369 ×× 10
10−4
−4, which
4
obtaining strain only at the ends of the barrel length, with a value of 4.8369 × 10 , which is ,equivalent which
is equivalent
is equivalent to to 301
301 µm.
µm.
to 301 µm. Figure 8a–c, show the results of roll deflection distribution for a BUR with a negative crown,
Figure 8a–c, show the results of roll deflection distribution for a BUR with a negative crown,
Figure 8a–c,the
combining show the results
mechanical of roll
contact deflection
with WR using distribution
using for a BUR
positive crown,
crown, withnegative
flat, and
and a negative crown,
crown,
combining the mechanical contact with WR positive flat, negative crown,
combining the mechanical
respectively.
respectively. contact with WR using positive crown, flat, and negative crown, respectively.

Figure 8. Cont.
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 13 of 16
Metals 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW 13 of 17

8. Roll8.deflection
FigureFigure distribution
Roll deflection for combinations
distribution of of
for combinations crown:
crown:(a)
(a)combination
combination 7, (b) combination
7, (b) combination 8,
and (c)8,combination 9.
and (c) combination 9.

For allFor
three cases cases
all three in Figure 8, the8,pattern
in Figure in the
the pattern work
in the andand
work backup
backuprolls is is
rolls exactly
exactlythe
thesame
sameasasthat
that described
described above forabove for Figures
Figures 6 and 7.6 and
It is7.only
It is possible
only possible to appreciate
to appreciate that
that thesurface
the surface with
with strain
strain of
6.1867 of
× 10 −4 (equivalent
6.1867 × 10−4 (equivalent to 385
to 385 µm) at theµm)
endsat of
thethe
ends of the
barrel barrel
length length more
occupies occupies
areamore area for
for combination
combination
9 (Figure 9 (Figure
8c) than for 8c) than for
combinations combinations
7 (Figure 8a) and 7 (Figure 8a) and
8 (Figure 8b).8 (Figure 8b).
In the nine combinations analyzed (Figures 6–8), it can be observed that the deflection for the
In the nine combinations analyzed (Figures 6–8), it can be observed that the deflection for the WR
WR is negligible because the mechanical contact with the strip and the BUR prevents deflection.
is negligible because the mechanical contact with the strip and the BUR prevents deflection.
For all the combinations of Figure 6–8, roll deflection on BURs is symmetrical; however, for WR
For all the combinations of Figures 6–8, roll deflection on BURs is symmetrical; however, for WR
in Figure 6b,c, Figure 7b,c and Figure 8a–c, there is an unsymmetrical behavior of roll deflection due
in Figure 6b,c,
to the Figure
contact 7b,c used
model and Figure 8a–c, there
for the coupling is an
of the unsymmetrical
drive side. behavior of roll deflection due to
the contact model used for the coupling of the drive side.
4. Discussion
4. Discussion
From the results presented in Figures 3–5, it can be concluded that for all cases, the rolling forces
From the results
also cause a pointpresented in Figures
of concentration 3–5,initthe
of stress can be concluded
main radius of thethat forbetween
union all cases,
thethe rolling
Barrel forces
Length
also cause a point of concentration of stress in the main radius of the union between the Barrel Length
and the Neck, which has the same magnitude of the maximum stress generated at the end of the
Barrel Length.
MetalsMetals
2019, 2019, 9, x FOR PEER REVIEW
9, 1222 14 of 17
14 of 16

and the Neck, which has the same magnitude of the maximum stress generated at the end of the
Barrel
In Length.
Figure 9, all the stress values generated for all nine analyzed combinations are plotted. It can
In Figure
be concluded that9,the
all the stressof
pattern values generated
the graph for all
is the sameninefor
analyzed combinations
the backup are plotted.
rolls, with It canbeing
the stress
be concluded that the pattern of the graph is the same for the backup rolls, with the
concentrated at both ends at 787.4 mm from the center of the mill, on the sides of the strip. The best stress being
concentrated at both ends at 787.4 mm from the center of the mill, on the sides of the strip. The best
result of the options analyzed is for combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR Positive), with a maximum stress of
result of the options analyzed is for combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR Positive), with a maximum stress
163.0 MPa, and the worst case is for combination 1 (BUR Positive–WR Positive), with 271.0 MPa. It can
of 163.0 MPa, and the worst case is for combination 1 (BUR Positive–WR Positive), with 271.0 MPa.
also be concluded
It can that the highest
also be concluded stress concentration
that the highest values
stress concentration are obtained
values when
are obtained whenthethe
geometries
geometriesof the
bodies of both rollers are the same. This takes place in combinations 1 (BUR Positive–WR
of the bodies of both rollers are the same. This takes place in combinations 1 (BUR Positive–WR Positive), 5
(BURPositive),
Flat–WR5 Flat)
(BURand 9 (BUR
Flat–WR Flat)Negative–WR Negative). Negative).
and 9 (BUR Negative–WR

Figure
Figure 9. Graph
9. Graph of of
thethestress
stressdistribution
distribution curves
curvesforfor
allall
mechanical contact
mechanical combinations
contact analyzed
combinations on
analyzed
BUR.
on BUR.

For particular
For the the particular casecase presentedin
presented in this
this study,
study, analyzing
analyzingthethepossible behavior
possible of the
behavior of stress
the stress
distribution on the BUR for a rolling campaign, the expected results would
distribution on the BUR for a rolling campaign, the expected results would be those shown in be those shown in Figure
Figure 10.
10. The best combination of shape would be to start with combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR Positive)
The best combination of shape would be to start with combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR Positive) yielding
yielding a maximum stress of 163.0 MPa, and at the end of the campaign change the crown of the
a maximum stress of 163.0 MPa, and at the end of the campaign change the crown of the work roll
work roll to flat, thus adopting combination 8 (BUR Negative–WR Flat, BUR Negative due to wear)
to flat, thus adopting
yielding a maximum combination 8 (BUR
stress of 196.0 Negative–WR
MPa, as Flat, BUR
shown in the graph Negative
in Figure 10. due to wear) yielding a
maximum Metalsstress
2019, 9, of 196.0
x FOR PEERMPa,
REVIEW as shown in the graph in Figure 10. 15 of 17

10. Expected
Figure Figure stress
10. Expected distribution
stress distribution behavior fordifferent
behavior for different combinations
combinations of contact
of contact geometries
geometries
during during
a rolling campaign of a BUR.
a rolling campaign of a BUR.

In Figure 11, all the values of the deformations generated for the nine combinations analyzed
are plotted. It can be concluded that the pattern of the graph is the same for the backup rolls, with
the maximum deformation being concentrated at both ends at 787.4 mm from the center of the mill,
on the sides of the strip. The best results (with less deformation) are for combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR
Positive), with a maximum strain of 4.8368 × 10−4 (301 µm), and the worst case scenario is for
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 15 of 16
Figure 10. Expected stress distribution behavior for different combinations of contact geometries
during a rolling campaign of a BUR.
In Figure 11, all the values of the deformations generated for the nine combinations analyzed are
plotted. ItIncan
Figure 11, all the values
be concluded of the
that the deformations
pattern generated
of the graph is theforsame
the nine
for combinations analyzed
the backup rolls, with the
are plotted. It can be concluded that the pattern of the graph is the same for the
maximum deformation being concentrated at both ends at 787.4 mm from the center of the mill, on the backup rolls, with
sides the maximum deformation being concentrated at both ends at 787.4 mm from the center of the mill,
of the strip. The best results (with less deformation) are for combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR Positive),
on the sides of the strip. The best results (with less deformation) are for combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR
with a maximum strain of 4.8368 × 10−4 (301 µm), −4and the worst case scenario is for combination 1
Positive), with a maximum strain of 4.8368 × 10 (301 µm), and the worst case scenario is for
(BURcombination
Positive–WR Positive), with a maximum strain of 6.4277 × 10−4 (400 µm). It can also be concluded
1 (BUR Positive–WR Positive), with a maximum strain of 6.4277 × 10−4 (400 µm). It can
that the
alsolargest values of
be concluded deformation
that are obtained
the largest values when the
of deformation aregeometries
obtained when of the
thebodies of both
geometries of rolls
the are
the same,
bodiesthat is, in
of both combinations
rolls are the same,1that
(BUR Positive–WR
is, in combinationsPositive), 5 (BUR Flat–WR
1 (BUR Positive–WR Positive),Flat),
5 (BURand 9 (BUR
Flat–
Negative–WR Negative).
WR Flat), and 9 (BUR Negative–WR Negative).

Figure
Figure 11. Graph
11. Graph of deformation
of deformation distribution
distribution curves
curves for allfor all mechanical
mechanical contactcontact combinations
combinations analyzed.
analyzed.
The profiles of the graphs in Figures 9 and 11 are very similar, indicating a similar behavior of
deformation and stress, confirming the relationship between stress and strain established by the first
Hooke’s law.

5. Conclusions
According to the results, for industrial conditions in this specific analysis, it is recommended to
use combination 4 (BUR Flat–WR positive) at the beginning of the rolling campaign. In addition, at
the end of the campaign of BURs, changes to flat WR crowns are suggested. Under these conditions,
the combinations of crown shape will help on the effect of pressure distribution on BURs.

Author Contributions: R.S. Conceived and designed the simulations, S.A.A. and I.C. performed the simulations
and wrote the paper, A.P. and S.M.S.M. analyzed the data.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Acknowledgments: This work was supported by the Universidad Autónoma de Coahuila.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References
1. Guanghui, Y.; Jianguo, C.; Jie, Z.; Shenghui, J.; Renwei, T. Backup roll contour of a Smart Crown tandem cold
rolling mil. J. Univ. Sci. Technol. Mater. 2008, 15, 357–361.
2. Li, H.; Xu, J.; Wang, G.; Shi, L.; Xiao, Y. Development of Strip Flatness and Crown Control Model for Hot
Strip Mills. J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 2010, 17, 21–27. [CrossRef]
Metals 2019, 9, 1222 16 of 16

3. Wang, X.D.; Li, F.; Li, B.H.; Zhu, G.S.; Li, B.; Zhang, B.H. VCR back-up roll and negative work roll contour
design for solving roll spalling and transfer bar profile problems in hot strip mil. Ironmak. Steelmak. 2010, 37,
633–640. [CrossRef]
4. Wang, X.D.; Li, F.; Li, B.H.; Zhu, G.S.; Li, B. Design and Application of an Optimum Backup Roll Contour
Configured with CVC Work Roll in Hot Strip Mill. ISIJ Int. 2012, 52, 1637–1643. [CrossRef]
5. Cao, J.; Wei, G.; Zhang, J.; Chen, X.; Zhou, Y. VCR and ASR technology for profile and flatness control in hot
strip mills. J. Cent. South. Univ. Technol. 2008, 15, 264–270. [CrossRef]
6. Liu, G.; Li, Y.; Huang, Q.; Yang, X. Axial Force Analysis and Roll Contour Configuration of Four-High CVC
Mill. Math. Probl. Eng. 2018, 2018. [CrossRef]
7. Der-Form, C. Thermal stresses in work rolls during the rolling of metal strip. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1999,
94, 45–51. [CrossRef]
8. Galantucci, L.M.; Tricarico, L. Thermo-mechanical simulation of a rolling process with an FEM approach.
J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1999, 92–93, 494–501. [CrossRef]
9. Hacquin, A.; Montmitonnet, P.; Guillerauit, J.-P. A steady state thermo-elastoviscoplastic finite element
model of rolling with coupled thermo-elastic roll deformation. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 1996, 60, 109–116.
[CrossRef]
10. Zhao, N.; Cao, J.; Zhang, J.; Su, Y.; Yan, T.; Rao, K. Work roll thermal contour prediction model of nonoriented
electrical steel sheets in hot strip mills. J. Univ. Sci. Technol. Beijing Mater. 2008, 15, 352–356. [CrossRef]
11. Li, Y.; Cao, J.; Yang, G.; Dun, W.; Zhou, Y.; Ma, H. ASR Bending Force Mathematical Model for the Same
Width Strip Rolling Campaigns in Hot Rolling. Steel Res. Int. 2014, 86, 567–575. [CrossRef]
12. Spuzic, S.; Strafford, K.N. Wear of hot rolling mill rolls: An overview. Wear 1994, 176, 261–271. [CrossRef]
13. Turk, R.; Fajfar, P.; Robic, R.; Perus, I. Prediction of hot strip mill roll wear. Metalugija 2002, 41, 47–51.
14. Li, C.S.; Liu, X.H.; Wang, G.D.; Yang, G. Experimental investigation on thermal wear of high speed steel rolls
in hot strip Rolling. Mater. Sci. Technol. 2002, 18, 1581–1584. [CrossRef]
15. Rumualdo Servin, A.; Garcia, R.M. Development of Mathematical Model for Control Wear in Backup Roll for
Hot Strip Mill. J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 2014, 21, 46–51. [CrossRef]
16. Liu, X.; Xu, S.; Li, S.; Xu, J.; Wang, G. FEM Analysis of Rolling Pressure Along Strip Width in Cold Rolling
Process. J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 2007, 14, 22–26. [CrossRef]
17. Zhang, G.; Xiao, H.; Wang, C. Three-Dimensional Model for Strip Hot Rolling. J. Iron Steel Res. Int. 2006, 13,
23–26. [CrossRef]
18. Kong, N.; Cao, J.; Wang, Y.; Tieu, A.; Kiet, Y.; Hou, L.; Wang, Z. Development of Smart Contact Backup Rolls
in Ultrawide Stainless Strip Rolling Process. Mater. Manuf. Process. 2014, 29, 129–133. [CrossRef]
19. Cao, J.; Chai, X.; Li, Y.; Kong, N.; Jia, S.; Zeng, W. Integrated design of roll contours for strip edge drop and
crown control in tandem cold rolling mills. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2018, 252, 432–439. [CrossRef]
20. Jiang, Z.Y.; Wei, D.; Tieu, A.K. Analysis of cold rolling of ultra thin strip. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2009, 209,
4584–4589. [CrossRef]
21. Wang, G.D. The Shape Control and Theory; Metallurgical Industry Press: Beijing, China, 1986; pp. 246–249.

© 2019 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).