S.

L Semiatin
Senior Research Scientist,
Metalworking Section
E. W. Collings
Senior Research Scientist,
Physical Metallurgy Section
V. E. Wood
Principal Research Scientist,
Optical Systems and Technology Section
Battelle's Columbus Division,
Columbus, Ohio 43201
T. Altan
Professor,
Industrial Engineering Dept.,
Ohio State University,
Columbus, Ohio 43201
Determination of the Interface
Heat Transfer Coefficient for
Non-isothermal Bulk-Forming
Processes
Experimental and analytical techniques have been developed for the determination
of the interface heat transfer coefficient for nonisothermal bulk-forming processes.
A fixture consisting of two flat IN-lOO alloy dies was instrumented with high-
response thermocouples. With this tooling, heat-transfer experiments were con-
ducted in which (1) the two dies were heated to different temperatures and brought
together under varying pressure levels and (2) the two dies were heated to the same
temperature and were used to upset an aluminum alloy 2024-0 ring specimen heated
to a higher temperature. Data from both sets of tests were analyzed to determine
heat-transfer coefficients by using calibration curves derived from analytical and
finite-difference method solutions. By this means, the effects of interface pressure,
deformation, and deformation rate on the heat-transfer coefficient were established.

Introduction
The phenomenon of heat transfer plays an important role in
a large variety of manufacturing processes. In metal casting,
heat transfer across the mold wall influences the solidification
pattern and thus required design features such as gate and riser
placement. In metal cutting, heat generated by deformation in
the chip is transferred across a coolant/lubricant interface,
causing heating of the cutting tool. Such temperature increases
have a strong effect on tool wear and thus tool life [1, 2]. In
turn, tool wear influences the morphology of the chip and sur-
face finish and part shape tolerances that can be achieved in
such operations.
A third area in which interface heat transfer is of impor-
tance, and the one of interest in the present work, is that of
conventional hot-forming processes such as forging, extru-
sion, and rolling. In these operations, a hot workpiece is
deformed using tooling whose initial temperature is often con-
siderably lower. The workpiece material in contact with the
dies or rolls is "chilled," leading to an increased flow stress
because of the strong temperature dependence of deformation
resistance of most metals in the hot-working regime [3]. The
amount and extent of chilling are a function of the interface
heat-transfer coefficient, the deformation rate, and the initial
temperature difference, among other things. Chilling has a
great influence on the overall metal flow pattern, the working
loads, and the tendency to form metal flow defects such as
laps and flow-through defects [3,4]. With respect to the dies,
heat transfer plays a critical role in failure mechanisms such as
abrasive wear, thermal fatigue, and plastic deformation [5].
Contributed by the Production Engineering Division for publication in the
JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR INDUSTRY. Manuscript received at ASME Head-
quarters, July 14, 1986.
In recent years, analytical tools such as the finite element
method have been developed to predict metal flow patterns,
temperature fields, and die loading conditions [6-8]. Inputs
required to perform process simulations include the workpiece
and die material properties (mechanical and physical) and an
interface model in terms of the heat-transfer coefficient and
friction factor. The ring test is a widely used and well accepted
test for quantifying friction [9, 10]. On the other hand, deter-
mination of the interface heat-transfer coefficient has been in-
vestigated to only a limited extent, probably because of the ex-
perimental difficulties associated with such measurements.
Vigor and Hornaday [11] and Kellow et al. [12,13] designed
high-response thermocouples and measured surface and near-
surface temperatures during nonisothermal upsetting of
medium carbon steel cylinders. They studied the effects of
process parameters such as lubrication, speed, and percent
reduction on die heating but did not attempt to estimate heat-
transfer coefficients from their data. This is primarily because
the influences of deformation heating and heat transport in
the specimen on the one hand and interfacial friction heating
on the other are difficult to quantify. In similar work, Dadras
and Wells [14] measured both billet and die temperatures dur-
ing upsetting of OFHC copper, 1042 steel, and 304 stainless
steel cylinders. With these data, they obtained estimates of
heat-transfer coefficients by using a two-dimensional finite
difference approach for the analysis of heat conduction,
which however neglected the effects of heat generation.
The only other notable work in the area of heat transfer in
forging can be found in the German literature. Much like the
above workers, Beck [15] measured die temperatures during
hot upsetting of steel and aluminum cylinders. Assuming that
the die temperature field could be fit by a truncated Fourier

Journal of Engineering for Industry FEBRUARY 1987, Vol. 109/49

Copyright © 1987 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
 I INSTRUMENTED DIE
COLLAR
SUPPORT
4 FURNACE
5 SUPPORT ADAPTER
G CERAMIC INSULATOR
7 BASE
B OlE SET PLATE

FIXTURE FOR
LUBRICATION ANO
HEAT TRANSFER
STUDIES

Fig. 2 Photograph of one·half of the die stack of the heat·transfer fix-

ture, assembled and unassembled
Fig. 1 Schematic illustration of fixture used to determine the heat·
transfer coefficient of lubricant Interfaces Experimental Design

series, he was able to estimate heat-transfer coefficients under Tooling Design

a variety of conditions. The most important result of these ex-
periments was that the heat-transfer coefficient under
nominally zero load was an order of magnitude less than that
under high pressures. In addition, above a certain threshold
pressure, its value was relatively constant. Klafs [16] did
similar work, but interpreted his temperature measurements
with a one-dimensional heat-transfer model which negleCted
heat transport and heat generation in the workpiece. Ap-
parently, this approach gave rise to heat-transfer coefficient
predictions which were substantially higher than those of Beck
and which also showed a sharp increase with time during the
deformation.
The objectives of this work were threefold. First, heat-
transfer experiments were designed and conducted to obtain
data which could be compared to analyses that contain a
limited number of approximations and assumptions. A second
objective was to develop a straightforward method by which
the heat-transfer coefficient can be extracted from die-
temperature measurements; the method introduced here is
based on the generation of a set of so-called calibration curves
for various values of the heat-transfer coefficient with which
the experimental data can be compared. Last, the effects of in-
terface pressure, deformation, and deformation rate on the
heat-transfer coefficient for several typical forging lubricants
were evaluated to establish the usefulness of the methodology
developed.
The tooling used in the present investigation was similar in
design to that used previously for hot-compression testing
[17], except that the dies were modified so that thermocouples
could be inserted in them. Shown in Figs. 1 and 2, the fixture
consists of a pair of IN-IOO dies, ground to a surface finish of
approximately 0.4 ~m (16 microinch), supported on a die
stack consisting of a.superalloy support, stainless steel support
adapter, ceramic insulating block, and water-cooled, stainless
steel base. Holes were drilled in the IN-lOO dies and supports
to allow insertion of the thermocouples at several near-surface
locations. The ceramic block and stainless steel base cut down
the amount of heat conducted into the die set and test machine
into which the tooling is placed.
Special, high-response chromel-alumel thermocouples
(model number TCS-K-18-48-10364A, made by Medtherm
Corporation in Huntsville, Alabama) were used to measure
temperature transients. These coaxial thermocouples consist
of a 0.81 mm (0.032 in.) outer diameter tube of chromel
through which a fine alumel wire is threaded. The junction is
made by a mild shearing of the end. It is reported that a
suitable junction can even be obtained merely by rubbing a
finger across the end. Because the junction is made by fine
slivers of metal, the response time is estimated to be between 1
and 5 microseconds. In the present work, the thermocouples
were screwed into tight-fitting holes in the dies that had been
machined by an electric-discharge machining process. Upon

- - - - Nomenclature
1,2 subscripts referring to the average velocity of
two dies or to the die and M strain rate sensitivity in- workpiece at interface,
the workpiece dex, (a log fJ/a log ~) I"T mm/s
cross-sectional area, mm 2 Q heat flux (heat flow per x axial coordinate
..JkP(:, mms- l !2 unit area per unit time), <> effective thickness of in-
specific heat, J/gOC J/mm 2 s terface layer, mm
heat transfer coefficient, time, s axial effective strain rate,
kW/m 2 K initial and instantaneous S-I
k thermal conductivity, die temperature, °C (J axial stress, MPa
W/moC initial and instantaneous fJ axial effective stress,
K thermal diffusivity, m 2 /s die (or workpiece) MPa
m friction shear factor temperature, °C p density, g/cm 3

50 I Vol. 109, FEBRUARY 1987 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 s Interface Layer of Thickness 6
£ stainless steel shim stock], 0.03, 0.85, 14, 85, or 150 MPa
i i
time t = 0
Qi = - Q 2 — | ^ Q 2 = h 0 [T,(x = 0 ) - T 2 ( x = - d ) ]
T2 (X =
T, (x = 0]j/l "d)
T10 — I I
time t > 0
Fig. 3 Schematic of "two-die" heat-transfer experiments illustrating:
(a) die and interface geometry, (o) temperature distribution prior to heat
transfer (time f = 0), and (c) temperature at time t > 0. The heat flux in
(c), Q 1 and Q 2 , is indicated by the arrows.
insertion, the thermocouples were screwed slightly beyond the
point at which they seated in order to abrade the end and
break any oxide that might be present, thereby ensuring an in-
terface approaching that of a weld. With this type of insertion
method, the manufacturer estimates the respone time to be no
slower than 1 to 2 milliseconds. Because of the thermal-
expansion coefficients of the thermocouple materials are
slightly greater than that of IN-100, it was also surmised that
the thermocouple tips stayed in intimate contact with the dies
when they were heated.
Thermocouples were placed at several subsurface locations
in the dies. Initial attempts at taking temperature
measurements at the die surface (using a through hole) gave
erratic results, possibly because the tip of the thermocouple
was not mechanically fixed at this position. Subsequent
measurements (and the data reported here) were obtained with
thermocouples located at 0.15 mm (0.006 in.) and 0.91 mm
(0.036 in.) from the die surface. Radially, these thermocouples
were positioned on a 30.5 mm (1.20 in.) diameter circle whose
center coincided with the axis of the dies.
Two different die heating techniques were evaluated. One
used a three-zone radiant furnace, with independent controls
for each zone. This enabled the dies to be heated to the same
or different temperatures. The second method and the one
used for the bulk of the experiments made use of independent-
ly controlled electric-resistance heater bands attached to the
periphery of each die. For the present tests, 400-watt heating
elements manufactured by Chromalox, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pen-
nsylvania, were employed. These elements were capable of
heating the dies to a maximum temperature of approximately
480°C (900°F).
The instrumented and assembled tooling was mounted in a
890 kN (200 kip) servohydraulic testing machine for the trials
to be described next.
Experimental Procedures
Two types of experiments were conducted in order to obtain
temperature-time data from which heat-transfer coefficients
could be inferred. One set served to establish the pressure and
lubrication dependence of the heat-transfer coefficient in the
absence of deformation. These consisted of bringing together
the two IN-100 dies, which had been heated to different
temperatures [195°C and 425 °C (380°F and 800 °F)], under
fixed levels of pressure. The pressures were nominally 0 [ob-
Journal of Engineering for Industry
<*•
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
tained by keeping the dies separated with 0.025 mm (0.001 in.)
(0.005, 0.12, 2, 12, or 22 ksi). Interface conditions were either
dry or lubricated; the lubricants consisted of graphite in water
(Renite S28, diluted in the ratio of one part lubricant to 5 parts
water) or graphite in oil (Wynn 880N, used undiluted). Both
were sprayed for a controlled time (15 s for Renite S28 and 2.5
s for Wynn 880N) using a small air brush.
The other set of trials comprised the upsetting of aluminum
alloy 2024-0 rings under either dry or lubricated conditions to
50 percent reduction in height using a constant ram speed.
This portion of the research program provided insight into the
combined effects of temperature gradients, pressure, and
deformation on the heat-transfer coefficient. The use of the
ring test also permitted a simultaneous determination of the
friction factor m. The initial outer diameter, inner diameter,
and thickness of the rings were 35.6, 17.8, and 11.8 mm (1.4,
0.7, and 0.466 in.), respectively. The outer and inner
diameters of the rings were selected in order that the ther-
mocouples in the dies were located under the ring at the mid-
wall location at the beginning of deformation. In all cases, the
initial ring temperature was 425 °C (800 °F) and that of the dies
was 195°C (380°F). Ram speeds of 1.0 and 56 mm/s (0.04 and
2.2 in./s) were chosen to provide data under conditions in
which most of the heat transfer between the ring and dies oc-
curred either early in the test (slow speed experiments) or
throughout the deformation (high-speed experiments).
In both sets of experiments, high-speed strip-chart recorders
were employed to record the temperature transients as well as
the load and time histories.
Results and Discussion
"Two-Die" Experiments
Analysis, The dies used in the present experiments were
fairly massive. Thus, because temperature transients only near
the interface between the dies are of prime interest, the heat
transfer between two dies at different initial temperatures that
are suddenly brought into contact can be analyzed using a one-
dimensional analysis. The initial temperatures are taken to be
Tl0 and T20 (Fig. 3). When brought into contact, the dies are
separated by an interface layer (of indeterminate thickness 5
and thermal conductivity k0) whose heat transfer properties
are to be characterized using a heat transfer coefficient h0
( = k0/S). The heat flow per unit area per unit time across the
interface, Q, is then given by h0 • [7", (x=0) - T2 (x = —5)]
where 7, (x=0) - T2 (x= - 6) represents the temperature gra-
dient across the interface (Fig. 3). Similarly, within either die,
the heat flow per unit area per unit time is proportional to the
temperature gradient dT/dx, the constant of proportionality
being the thermal conductivity, k^ or k2, depending on which
die is under consideration.
Two solutions for this one-dimensional problem have been
derived, one by Klafs and the other developed independently
by Kellow [12, 13] and by Wood [18]. Klafs based his analysis
on the following assumptions:
9
The interface layer has no heat capacity of its own
8
The temperature drop is linear within the interface layer
9
The temperature of some point within the interface layer
remains fixed during heat transfer.
The first two assumptions are reasonable. The third,
however, was proposed without proof, and a basis for it is not
apparent. Nevertheless, it was used in deriving a solution for
the temperature in die 1 as a function of A: and time /, 7", (x, f),
during the transfer of heat between the two dies. This solution
is:
FEBRUARY 1987, Vol. 109/51
 -1 1 1 1 I I 150
\ I I
— Klafs' Analysis h 0 (kW/m2 K):
— Kellow/Wood's Analysis ~~ 250
— FDM Simulation
h 0 (kW/m2 K): 225
.80
"40
-20 - 200

100 175 100

150

125

100

75

50

25

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
Time (s) Time (s)
(a) (a)
I I I I I I I I I
— Klafs' Analysis
80
100 - -—-• Kellow/Wood's Analysis h 0 (kW/m* K):
_,80 175 Klafs' Analysis
FDM Simulation Kellow/Wood's Analysis
^ 4 0 _ — - — ' " 2 0
— — FDM Simulation
150 60
75 - 5
125
3
—--—"'"" 100 40
50
It / /' >^ _--—"^-^ 2
75
1 20
50
25
__——=r==0.5
25

I i ^ T~~I I I I 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.14 0.16

0.2 0.4
0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.1 Time (s)
Time (s) (b)
(b) Fig. 5 Calibration curves for determination of the heat-transfer coeffi-
Fig. 4 Calibration curves for determination of the heat-transfer coeffi- cient in "two-die" experiments: (a) temperature versus time at x = 0.15
cient in "two-die" experiments: (a) temperature versus time at x = 0.15 mm (0.006 in.) in die 1 and (b) temperature versus time at x = 0.91 mm
mm (0.006 in.) in die 1 and (b) temperature versus time at x = 0.91 mm (0.036 in.) in die 1. Die 1—IN-100, die 2—aluminum alloy 2024-0, T 10 =
(0.036 in.) in die 1. Die material—IN-100, T 10 = 195°C (380°F), T20 = 195°C (380"F), T20 = 425"C (800°F).
425°C (800°F).

! : Zhnx die 1, the relation is identical to Klafs' expression [Equation

l ' 10 [ferfc(-^)]-fexp(. _ (1)] except Z takes the value [1 + (bl/b2)]. It is apparent that
) *l+*2 if the dies are of the same material and if the thermal proper-
7?h 2 ties of this material are independent of temperature, then the
(1) two solutions are identical. Otherwise, the solutions will differ
/l ' - V sZsjKyt bi by an amount which is a function of [1 + (bl/b2)].
Additional symbols in this relation which have not been de- To supplement the two closed form solutions, one-
fined yet are as follows, the subscripts 1 and 2 referring to dies dimensional finite difference simulations for the particular ex-
1 and 2: perimental conditions under study were carried out. The com-
puter program was formulated so that it could be used to
b = ~4kpc
analyze the nonisothermal ring upsetting process as well. For
c = specific heat
the "two-die" problem, use was made of only the heat con-
P = density duction subroutine in the code. The entire program is discuss-
K = thermal diffusivity ( = k/pc) ed in more detail in the section below in which the ring test
Z = 2.0 (for Klafs' analysis) results are described.
In contrast to Klafs' approach, in which the existence of a
fixed intermediate temperature in the interface is assumed, the Calibration Curves. The analytical equations and finite
analyses of Kellow and Wood make no prior assumptions difference method (FDM) were employed to derive calibration
about the time dependence of the interface temperature. Solv- curves. These curves consist of theoretical temperature-versus-
ing the equations of heat flow simultaneously in both dies and time plots at specified locations below the surface of die 1. At
allowing the interface temperature distribution to "float," a given location, a different curve is obtained for each value of
these researchers used the method of Laplace transforms to the interface heat-transfer coefficient, h0. By plotting ex-
yield the time and depth dependences of the temperature. In perimental temperature-versus-time data on this set of curves,

52/ Vol. 109, FEBRUARY 1987 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 o Test 1-57
x Test 1-58 250
h0 (kW/m2 K):
80
40
20 -
100
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Time (s)
(a)
ho (kW/m2 K): 175
20
10
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
Time (s)
(b)
Fig. 6 Comparison of measured temperature-versus-time data in die 1
with calibration curves: (a) x = 0.15 mm (0.006 in.) and (b) x = 0.91 mm
(0.036 in.). Unlubricated interface between two dies brought together
under a pressure of 0.03 MPa (0.005 ksi), die material—IN-100, T 10 =
195°C(380°F), T 20 = 425"C (800°F).
the operative value of h0 for a particular set of conditions
(interface pressure, lubricant) can be ascertained.
Figures 4 and 5 show examples of calibration curves derived
from the two analytical solutions as well as from the finite-
difference method. In both cases, the initial temperatures of
the two dies were set at Tl0 = 195°C (380°F) and T20 =
425°C (800°F). Also, the curves are for thermocouples
mounted in die 1 at locations either 0.15 mm (0.006 in.) or
0.91 mm (0.036 in.) below the die surface.
Figure 4 depicts the curves for the case in which both dies
are made of the same material, IN-100. The thermal properties
of this alloy are only a weak function of temperature [19]. The
required properties for the analyses were taken to be as
follows: pi * p2 = 7.75 g/cm3, c, = 0.42 J/g°C, c2 = 0.46
J/g°C, kr = 11.4 W/m°C, and k2 = 15.2 W/nTC. For this
case, the temperature time curves for a particular location in
the die and value of h0 are very similar for both of the
analytical expressions and the FDM solution. In fact, it is
noticed that the FDM results are almost identical to the
analysis of Kellow and Wood. Klafs' analysis, although
similar, consistently predicts slightly higher values of Tl - Tw.
The source of these differences results most likely from Klafs'
assumption regarding the existence of a fixed temperature in
the interface mentioned above. Thus, the calibration curves
Journal of Engineering for Industry
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2
Time (s)
(a)
150
125
100
75
50
25
1.8 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8
Time (s)
(6)
Fig. 7 Comparison of measured temperature-versus-time data in die 1
with calibration curves: (a) x = 0.15 mm (0.006 in.) and (b) x = 0.91 mm
(0.036 in.). Dies lubricated with Wynn 880N brought together under a
pressure of 150 MPa (22 ksi), die material—IN-100, T 10 = 195°C (380°F),
T 20 = 425°C (800°F).
derived from the Kellow/Wood analysis or the FDM tech-
nique can be concluded to be more accurate and should be us-
ed in reducing data from two-die experiments.
Figure 5 shows selected calibration curves for the
hypothetical case in which die 1 is made of IN-100 and die 2 is
made of aluminum alloy 2024-0. The thermal properties of the
aluminum die were found from handbooks [20] to be p2 = 2.7
g/cm 3 ,c 2 = 1.05 J/g°C, and k2 = 182 W/m°C. In this exam-
ple in which the thermal properties of the two die materials are
greatly different, there is a marked divergence in the calibra-
tion curves obtained from the Klafs analysis and the
Kellow/Wood analysis. However, the FDM solutions show
fairly good agreement with the latter analysis, again confirm-
ing that this is the more accurate of the two.
Application of Calibration Curves. The calibration curves
derived from the Kellow/Wood analysis were used to establish
the heat-transfer coefficient for the experiments in which two
IN-100 dies, at initial temperatures of Tl0 = 195°C (380°F)
and T20 = 425°C (800°F), were brought into contact. Ex-
amples of the application of the curves are shown in Figs. 6
and 7. Data from duplicate tests in which unlubricated dies
were brought into contact under a pressure of 0.03 MPa (0.005
ksi) are plotted on the calibration curves in Fig. 6. Data from
FEBRUARY 1987, Vol. 109/53
 thermocouples located at either of the two locations follow - Interface
temperature-versus-time trends that would apply for ha = Die Workpiece ,
0.75 kW/m2K. Data from duplicate experiments in which dies
lubricated with graphite in oil (Wynn 880N) were brought into '
contact under a pressure of 150 MPa (22 ksi) are plotted on
xr /
£ X 2 *"
\
calibration curves in Fig. 7. In this instance, both thermocou- /
ple histories suggest an h0 value of approximately 7.5
kW/m2K. Qout """" - Qin~ — Q in - *~Qout
As for the above two sets of test conditions, temperature-
versus-time data for the two thermocouples in each of the
other experiments, when plotted on the calibration curves,
gave an equivalent or nearly equivalent heat-transfer coeffi-
cient. This adds credibility to the accuracy of the overall ex-
1
T i i T21 T22 T23

perimental method and the technique used in making the

temperature measurements.
The heat-transfer coefficients obtained with the calibration
curves from all of the two-die experiments are summarized in
Table 1. The important trends observed in the data are as
follows:
• The heat-transfer coefficient increases with pressure for
both lubricated and unlubricated conditions.
• At zero and low-pressure levels, the h0 values for
lubricated conditions are slightly higher than for dry con-
ditions. At high pressures, hB is independent of lubrica-
tion conditions.
• Above a certain pressure, the value of ha remains un-
changed. The critical pressure is between 14 and 85 MPa
(2 and 12 ksi).
• Under light pressures, typical of a workpiece resting free-
ly on a die, the heat-transfer coefficient is an order of
magnitude smaller than under high-pressure conditions.
This trend and the actual magnitudes of the heat-transfer
coefficients are very similar to observations and
measurements by Beck [15], which were deduced from
hot-forging trials.
Ring Tests
Analysis. As for the "two-die" experiments, heat-transfer
coefficients that pertain to conditions involving simultaneous
pressure and deformation were deduced from aluminum alloy
2024-0 ring test data using calibration curves. Again, the
calibration curves consist of theoretical predictions of
temperature versus time at specific locations in the dies for dif-
ferent value of h0. In contrast to the two-die situations,
however, it is not possible to derive an analytical solution for
the curves. This is because of the coupled effects of geometry
change, heat generation due to deformation, heat generation
due to interface friction, and heat transport associated with
material elements in the workpiece, as well as heat conduction
in the dies and workpiece and across the interface.
Because of the complexity of the problem and the need to
generate a large number of calibration curves at low cost, a
relatively simple FDM approach was formulated and carried
out on a digital computer. The simulations were based on a
one-dimensional deformation and heat-transfer analysis in
which the dies and workpiece were divided into a number of
discrete slices, each parallel to the interface. Because only the
temperature field in the dies (and not the workpiece) is
monitored experimentally and then compared to theoretical
predictions, a one-dimensional deformation analysis is
thought to be suitable as long as it includes the appropriate
heat generation, heat transport, and heat conduction terms for
the deforming workpiece.
A one-dimensional heat-transfer analysis is a good approx-
imation for rapid tests and for the initial stages of slow tests.
To be specific, a lower limit on the time tm for which a one-
dimensional approximation is reasonable is obtained from tm
= yc2/K2, where yc is equal to one-half of the wall thickness
Die Tconduction for Workpiece t c o n d u c tion for
Element at Interface
Element at Interface
Qin = h 0 (T11 - T21)
Qm = "o (T21 - T n )
Qout MT12 - Tn)/xr Qout k 2 (T 2 2 - T21)/X2*
Qin - Qout Qin ~ Qout
Tconduction eiCiXi* Tconduction g2C2X2*
Fig. 8 Finite difference formulation of heat conduction term at a lubri-
cant interface
of the ring and K2 is the thermal diffusivity of the ring. At
longer times, heat conduction from regions near and beyond
the outer diameter of the ring to the mid-wall thickness of the
ring (at which location the subsurface thermocouples in the
dies are located) is likely to become nonnegligible. For the
aluminum rings, tm = (8.92 mm2)/(64 mm2/s) = 1.2 s. This
time can be compared to total test times in the experiments of
approximately 6 s for the slower ram speed and 0.10 s for the
higher ram speed. Thus, a one-dimensional formulation can
be considered as an excellent approach for the higher speed
tests and a reasonable one for the first part of the slower speed
tests. As will be discussed in more detail below, the bulk of the
heat transfer in the slower speed tests occurs during the first
0.5 s anyway, making the one-dimensional model appropriate
for the determination of the heat-transfer coefficient in these
experiments also.
The deformation-heat-transfer model makes use of the one-
dimensional force equilibrium and heat-transfer equations. It
has been discussed in detail in reference 21 and therefore will
only be summarized briefly here. The equilibrium equation
that describes the workpiece deformation is of the form
F=o'A= constant (2)
where F is the axial force, a is the average axial stress in the
workpiece, and A is the cross-sectional area, all defined in
material coordinates. Neglecting triaxiality effects due to bulg-
ing, a may be taken equal to the product of the effective flow
stress a and a quantity whose value depends on the friction
factor m in the one-dimensional model. For a thin ring, this
quantity will be the same for each element into which the sam-
ple has been divided. In the temperature and strain rate regime
of interest, a for 2024-0 aluminum is a function only of the
local strain rate e and temperature T2. A reasonable approx-
imation for the flow law was derived from the literature [22]
for the present purposes:
cr(MPa) = B(T)iM (3)
with Iog10 B(T) = 2.81 - 0.0021 r(°C)andAf = 0.12.
The one-dimensional heat-transfer equation expresses the
rate of temperature change in the dies and workpiece in
Eulerian (spatial) coordinates and is of the form
dT k cPT
—-1- = — -^-
2
+ t, (deformation) (4)
w
dt PjCj dx ' '
where / = 1 for the dies and /' = 2 for the ring. The deforma-

54/Vol. 109, FEBRUARY 1987 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Percent Reduction in Height
10 20 30 40 50 60
150 —P p—__, ! p-—p.
F D M Simulation
""" Jdef^O, Tf r i C = 0
— j d e f ^ O . Tfric = 0-4 T d e f at Interface
125 — t d e i ^ O , t f r i c = 2.0 t d e 1 at Interface
• — Tdef = 0 = Tf ric h 0 (kW/m2 K):
20
100
75
50
25
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
T i m e (s)
Fig. 9 Calibration curves for the determination of the heat transfer
coefficient in the nonisothermal ring test: temperature versus time in
the dies at x = 0.15 mm (0.006 in.). Die material—IN-100, ring
material—aluminum alloy 2024-0, initial die temperature T 10 = 195"C
(380° F), Initial ring temperature T20 = 425°C (800° F), initial ring
height—11.88 mm (0.466 in.), ram speed—56 mm/s (2.2 in./s).
tion heat generation term for the dies is of course equal to
zero. For the workpiece, it is described by:
t2 (deformation) = 0.90 ae/p2c2
A different form of equation (4) is required for the die and
workpiece elements located adjacent to the interface.
/J
r l
T frictional heating to the form of the calibration curves for
——• (interface) = 7", (conduction)
+ t, (deformation) + 7", (friction)
The t term for axial heat conduction is derived as shown in
Fig. 8. The t (deformation) term for the workpiece element
adjacent to the interface is given by equation (5). The
temperature change due to friction is more difficult to quan-
tify. It is assumed that all the friction heat is used to heat only
the die and workpiece elements on either side of the interface.
The relation suggested by Lahoti and Altan [23] is then used:
f i (friction)» f 2 (friction)» mava/^pacaYa
In this equation a is the flow stress of the workpiece element at
the interface, va is the average velocity of the workpiece at the
interface, pa and ca are the average density and specific heat of
the workpiece and dies, and Ya is the sum of the thicknesses of
the workpiece and die elements on either side of the interface
into which the friction heat is assumed to flow. For the present
simulations, the initial mesh spacing was taken equal to 0.15
mm (0.006 in.), or the depth of the thermocouple nearest the
surface in the IN-100 die. In this instance, f{ (friction) = f2
(friction) was found to be approximately equal to between 0.4
and 2.0 times the t2 (deformation) for the workpiece element
Journal of Engineering for Industry
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
Percent Reduction in Height
1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
250
225
200
175
150 £
o 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20 0.24 0.28 0.32 0.36 0.40
Time (s)
Fig. 10 Comparison of measured temperature-versus-time data in the
125 |_
dies with calibration curves for the nonisothermal ring test, x = 0.15
mm (0.006 in.). Lubricant—Renite S28, die material—IN-100, ring
material—aluminum alloy 2024-0, initial die temperature T 10 = 195°C
100 (380°F), initial ring temperature T 20 = 425°C (800°F), initial ring
height—11.88 mm (0.466 in.), ram speed—1 mm/s (0.04 in./s).
75
at the interface when the friction factor m varied between 0.2
50 and 1.0.
25 Initial conditions for the simulations consisted of the
specification of T^ and 7*10. Boundary conditions were the
following:
• dT2/dx - 0 at all times at the symmetry plane in the
workpiece. This permitted the simulations to focus on
half the specimen and one die.
• 7", = constant for the die element farthest from the
interface.
• Workpiece is reduced under a constant ram speed. Means
of satisfying this condition in conjunction with the
equilibrium condition are discussed in references 21 and
24.
Methods by which the above equations are discretized and
used in the finite difference procedure are described in detail
elsewhere [21, 24].
(5)
Calibration Curves and Application to Ring Test
Data. Several preliminary FDM simulations were conducted
to determine the contributions of deformation and interface
thermocouples located in the dies at 0.15 mm (0.006 in.) and
0.91 mm (0.036 in.) beneath the surface. These were done for
(6) the ring geometry described above, a ram speed of 56 mm/s
(2.2 in./s), and initial die and ring temperatures of 195"C and
425°C (380° and 800°F), respectively. The results for the 0.15
mm (0.006 in.) thermocouple are shown in Fig. 9. These
simulations show that neglect of the deformation heating has a
small to moderate effect on the predicted die temperature-
versus-time curves. The same is true for the frictional heating
contribution. For values of m around 0.2 (for which t[Acti0Ii »
0-4 tdejormation a t t n e interface), the change in the calibration
(7) curves is very small. For large m values around 1.0 (for which
friction = 2.0 J-deformation at the interface), the effect is
somewhat larger, but still not major.
The determination of heat-transfer coefficients for several
ring tests is illustrated in Figs. 10 and 11 for a "slow" and a
"fast" ring test, respectively. For both experiments, the lubri-
cant was graphite in water (Renite S28). Measurements of the
internal diameter and height reduction at the conclusion of
both experiments enabled the determination of the friction
shear factor using appropriate calibration curves for the
specific ring geometry [9]. In both cases, the m value was
estimated as approximately 0.15. Therefore, the friction con-
FEBRUARY 1987, Vol. 109/55
 Percent Reduction in Height Table 1 Heat transfer coefficients measured in "two-die" experiments
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
150 1 1 1 1 1 1 Pressure , HPa (ksi)
h 0 (kW/m2 K):
x Test 2-4 250
None 0 (0) 0.4
None 0.03 (0.005) 0.75
1 2 5-- 225 None 0.85 (0.12) 1.5
None 14 (2) 4.0
None 85 (12) 7.5
None 150 (22) 7.5
200
Renite S28 0 (0) 0.5
100 - Renite S28 0.03 (0.005) 0.9
175 Renite S28 0.85 (0.12) 4.0
X Renite S28 14 (2) 6.5
X Renite S28 85 (12) 7.5
150 £ Renite S28 150 (22) 7.5

7 5 -- X
^-" 10
o Wynn 880N 0 (0) 0.4
x h^ Wynn 880N 0.03 (0.005) 1.9
/ / Hynn 880N 0.85 (0.12) 4.0
Wynn 880N 14 (2) 7.0
125 l_ 7.5
Hynn 880N 85 (12)
/ / x /• 150 7.5
Wynn 880N (22)
5 0 --
100

75
25-\ 1 50
2
25 time before which most of the heat-transfer has already occur-
red. For this reason, the heat-transfer coefficient is represen-
1 1 1 1 I I tative of that which is obtained in experiments involving
0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
pressure but no deformation, such as the "two-die" ex-
Time (s)
periments described previously. A comparison of the slow ring
(a) test h0 values with those in Table 1 for the higher pressure
Percent Reduction in Height levels (which would apply in the ring test) show very good
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 agreement.
In contrast to the phenomena occurring in the slow ring
tests, the major heat-transfer events in the fast ring tests occur
over the same short time-frame as the large deformation does.
60 This deformation, in addition to the pressure, must therefore
be effective in smoothing asperities at the interface and in
bringing the dies and workpiece into better thermal contact
40 during the period when the thermal transients are greatest. It is
believed that this effect gives rise to improved heat-transfer
characteristics at the interface and hence a larger heat-transfer
coefficient.
20

Summary and Conclusions

0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 0.12
Time (s)
(b)
Fig. 11 Comparison of measured temperature-versus-time data in the
dies with calibration curves for the nonisothermal ring test: (a) x = 0.15
mm (0.006 in.) and (6) x = 0.91 mm (0.036 In.). Lubricant—Renite S28, die
material—IN-100, ring material—aluminum alloy 2024-0, initial die
temperature T 10 = 195°C(380°F), initial ring temperature T 20 = 425°C
(800°F), initial ring height—11.88 mm (0.466 in.), ram speed—56 mm/s
(2.2 in./s).
tribution was neglected in generating the calibration curves in
Figs. 10 and 11.
Upon comparing the measured temperatures to the calibra-
tion curves, heat-transfer coefficients of approximately 7.5
and 17 kW/m2K were deduced for the slow and fast ring tests,
respectively. In the slow ring test, measured (and predicted)
temperature changes for times greater than 0.4 s were small.
As mentioned above, the one-dimensional analysis is valid for
times of the order of 1.0 s. Hence, the h0 derived for this test is
reasonable.
Ring test results for the other lubricants gave similar values
of h0, namely, 7.5 to 10 kW/m2K for slow tests and 15 to 20
kW/m2K for fast tests. A possible explanation for this dif-
ference in h0 for the slow and fast experiments can be offered
as follows. In the slow ring tests, relatively little deformation
occurs during the period when most of the heat-transfer be-
tween the dies and workpiece takes place. As shown in Fig. 10,
the reduction in height is only about 3 percent after 0.4 s, a
A method of determining the interface heat-transfer coeffi-
cient for nonisothermal bulk-forming processes has been in-
troduced. It makes use of calibration curves which describe
the temperature-history at specific points in a thermocoupled
die as a function of the initial conditions and parametric
values of the heat-transfer coefficient. Depending on the
geometry and test conditions, methods of deriving calibration
curves from analytical solutions and a finite difference pro-
cedure were established. Experimental data from heat-transfer
experiments involving two dies at different initial
temperatures and nonisothermal aluminum alloy 2024-0 rings
tests were analyzed using the appropriate calibration curves.
The following conclusions can be drawn for the regime of test
conditions and lubricants employed:
• In the absence of deformation, the heat-transfer coeffi-
cient increases with applied interface pressure. Above a
certain pressure, however, it attains a constant value.
•
The heat-transfer coefficient increases by approximately
an order of magnitude as the pressure level increases from
nominally zero to that typical of bulk-forming processes.
• Under conditions involving both deformation of a
workpiece and heat transfer, the heat transfer increases
with deformation rate. This can be ascribed to the fact
that at high-deformation rates the majority of the heat
transfer occurs concurrently with processes which tend to
smooth interface asperities. At lower rates, the majority
of the heat transfer occurs prior to large deformations
and thus before the processes which tend to bring the dies
and workpiece into better thermal contact.

56/Vol. 109, FEBRUARY 1987 Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms

 Acknowledgments
This work was carried out as part of the United States Air
Force Processing Science Program through Contract
F33615-78-C-5025 with Battelle's Columbus Division. The en-
couragement and support of Dr. H. Gegel and Mr. J. Malas
during the course of this research are gratefully acknowledg-
ed. The assistance of Messrs. N. Frey, W. W. Sunderland, and
L. Taggart in conducting the experiments and technical discus-
sions with Mr. W. T. Wu and Dr. S. I. Oh, all of Battelle's
Columbus Division, are also appreciated.
References
1 Trent, E. M., Metal Cutting, Butterworths and Company, Ltd., London,
1977.
2 Loewen, E. G., and Shaw, M. C , "On the Analysis of Cutting-Tool
Temperatures," Transactions of the ASME, Vol. 76, 1954, pp. 217-231.
3 Semiatin, S. L., "Workability in Forging," Workability Testing Tech-
niques, G. E. Dieter, ed., American Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio,
1984, pp. 197-247.
4 Lake, F. N., and Moracz, D. J., "Comparison of Major Forging
Systems," Technical Report AFML-TR-71-112, TRW, Inc., Cleveland, May
1971.
5 Kannappan, A., "Wear in Forging Dies," Metal Forming, Vol. 36, No.
12, Dec. 1969, pp. 335-343, Vol. 37, No. 1, Jan. 1970, pp. 6-21.
6 Oh, S. I., "Finite Element Analysis of Metal Forming Problems with Ar-
bitrarily Shaped Dies," Inter. J. Mech. Sci., Vol. 24, 1982, pp. 479-493.
7 Semiatin, S. L., and Lahoti, G. D., "The Occurrence of Shear Bands in
Isothermal Hot Forging," Metall. Trans. A, Vol. 13A, 1982, pp. 275-288.
8 Wu, W. T., and Oh, S. I., "ALPIDT: A General Purpose FEM Code for
Simulation of Nonisothermal Forming Processes," Proceedings NAMRC-XIII,
Society of Manufacturing Engineers, Dearborn, Michigan, 1985, pp. 449-455.
9 Altan, T., Metal Forming: Fundamentals and Applications, American
Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio, 1983, Chapter 6.
Journal of Engineering for Industry
^
Downloaded From: http://manufacturingscience.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 04/27/2015 Terms of Use: http://asme.org/terms
10 Schey, J., Tribology in Metalworking: Friction, Lubrication, and Wear,
American Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio, 1983.
11 Vigor, C. W., and Hornaday, J. W., "A Thermocouple for
Measurements of Temperature Transients in Forging Dies," Temperature, Its
Measurement and Control in Science and Industry, Vol. 3, Part 2, Rheinhold,
New York, pp. 625-630.
12 Kellow, M. A., Bramley, A. N., and Bannister, F. K., "The Measurement
of Temperatures in Forging Dies," Inter. J. Mach. ToolDes. Res., Vol. 9, No.
3, 1969, pp. 239-260.
13 Kellow, M. A., "Transient Temperatures in Hot Forging Dies," M.Sc.
Thesis, Birmingham University, 1968.
14 Dadras, P., and Wells, W. R., "Heat Transfer Aspects of Non-Isothermal
Axisymmetric Upset Forging," ASME JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING FOR INDUSTRY,
Series B, Vol. 106, 1984, pp. 187-195.
15 Beck, G., "Thermal Conditions in Tool Steels in Hot Upsetting and Forg-
ing Between Dies," Stahl undEisen, Vol. 78, 1958, pp. 1556-1563. (In German)
16 Klafs, U., " A Contribution to the Determination of the Temperature
Distribution in the Tool and Workpiece in Warm Forging," Doctoral Thesis,
Technical University of Hannover, 1969. (In German)
17 Semiatin, S. L., and Lahoti, G. D., "Deformation and Unstable Flow in
Hot Forging of Ti-6Al-2Sn-4Zr-2Mo-0.1 Si, "Metall. Trans.A,Vo\. 12A, 1981,
pp. 1705-1717.
18 Wood, V. E., Unpublished Research, Battelle's Columbus Laboratories,
Columbus, Ohio, 1981.
19 Anon., "High Temperature, High Strength Nickel-Base Alloys," Interna-
tional Nickel Company, New York, 1977.
20 Lyman, T., Metals Handbook, Vol. I: Properties and Selection of
Materials, American Society for Metals, Metals Park, Ohio, 1961.
21 Semiatin, S. L., Ayres, R. A., and Jonas, J. J., "An Analysis of the Non-
Isothermal Tensile Test," Metall. Trans. A, Vol. 16A, 1985, pp. 2299-2308.
22 Charpentier, P., and Thomas, J. F., Jr., "Characterization and Modeling
of the High Temperature Flow Behavior of Aluminum Alloy 2024," Unpublish-
ed Research, Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio, 1984.
23 Lahoti, G. D., and Altan, T., "Prediction of Temperature Distributions
in Axisymmetric Compression and Torsion," ASME Journal of Engineering
Materials and Technology, Vol. 97, 1975, pp. 113-120.
24 Rauch, E., Canova, G. R., Jonas, J. J., and Semiatin, S. L., "An
Analysis of Flow Localization During Torsion Testing," Acta Metall., Vol. 33,
No. 3, 1985, pp. 465-476.
FEBRUARY 1987, Vol. 109/57