Skip to main content

Goal-Oriented, Inverse Design Method—The Horizontal Integration of a Multistage Hot Rod Rolling System

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Architecting Robust Co-Design of Materials, Products, and Manufacturing Processes

Abstract

Steel mills are involved in the production of semi-products such as sheets or rods with certain grades of steel. Process designers are very much aware of the operating constraints and process requirements for each of the operations as they are involved in the whole process day-in and day-out.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Handshake, the flow of information between passes as the output of one pass is the input to the next. Thus, the passes are linked by the relationships that exist when material flows between them.

References

  • Allen, J. K., Seepersad, C. C., Mistree, F., & Savannah, G. (2006). A survey of robust design with applications to multidisciplinary and multiscale systems. Journal of Mechanical Design, 128(4), 832–843.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bras, B., & Mistree, F. (1993). Robust design using compromise decision support problems. Engineering Optimization, 21(3), 213–239.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ebro, M., & Howard, T. J. (2016). Robust design principles for reducing variation in functional performance. Journal of Engineering Design, 27(1–3), 75–92.

    Google Scholar 

  • Galantucci, L., & Tricarico, L. (1999). Thermo-mechanical simulation of a rolling process with an FEM approach. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 92, 494–501.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goh, C.-H., Ahmed, S., Dachowicz, A. P., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2014). Integrated multiscale robust design considering microstructure evolution and material properties in the hot rolling process. ASME Design Automation Conference, Paper Number: DETC2014-34157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jupp, S. P. (2001). Mathematical modelling of the microstructural evolution during the hot rolling of AA5083 aluminum Alloys. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Metals and Materials Engineering, University of British Columbia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapovok, R., & Thompson, P. (1994). The mathematical basis of optimal roll pass design, engineering mathematics: the role of mathematics in modern engineering. In Biennial Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lapovok, R., & Thomson, P. (1997). An approach to the optimal design of rolling passes. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 37(8), 1143–1154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., Choi, S., & Hodgson, P. (2002). Analytical model of pass-by-pass strain in rod (or bar) rolling and its applications to prediction of austenite grain size. Materials Science and Engineering A, 336(1), 177–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y., Choi, S., & Kim, Y. (2000). Mathematical model and experimental validation of surface profile of a workpiece in round–oval–round pass sequence. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 108(1), 87–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDowell, D. L., Panchal, J., Choi, H.-J., Seepersad, C., Allen, J., & Mistree, F. (2009). Integrated design of multiscale, multifunctional materials and products, Butterworth-Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michalewicz, Z. (1995). A survey of constraint handling techniques in evolutionary computation methods. Evolutionary Programming, 4, 135–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mistree, F., Hughes, O. F., & Bras, B. (1993). Compromise decision support problem and the adaptive linear programming algorithm. Progress in Astronautics and Aeronautics, 150, 251.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, D. C. (2008). Design and analysis of experiments, Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, D. C., & Myers, R. H. (1995). Response surface methodology: process and product optimization using designed experiments. Raymond H: Meyers and Douglas C. Montgomery. A Wiley-Interscience Publications.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Song, K. N., Goh, C.-H., Zagade, P., Gautham, B., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2016). A goal oriented, sequential process design of a multi-stage hot rod rolling system. ASME Design Automation Conference, Paper Number: DETC2016-59402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., De, P. S., Gupta, A., Goyal, S., & Singh, A. K. (2017a). Hot rolling of a non-heat treatable aluminum alloy: thermo-mechanical and microstructure evolution model. Transactions of the Indian Institute of Metals, 70(5), 1387–1398.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Rangaraj, V., Allen, J. K., Mistree, F., Gautham, B., & Singh, A. K. (2017b). A decision-based design method to explore the solution space for microstructure after cooling stage to realize the end mechanical properties of hot rolled product. In Proceedings of the 4th World Congress on Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME 2017), Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Rangaraj, V., Gautham, B., Singh, A. K., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2017c). A goal-oriented, inverse decision-based design method to achieve the vertical and horizontal integration of models in a hot rod rolling process chain. ASME Design Automation Conference, Paper Number: DETC2017‐67570.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Song, K. N., Goh, C.-H., Zagade, P., Gautham, B., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2017d). A goal-oriented, sequential, inverse design method for the horizontal integration of a multistage hot rod rolling system. Journal of Mechanical Design, 139(3), 031403.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Mohan, P., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2018a). Robust concept exploration of materials, products and associated manufacturing processes. ASME Design Automation Conference, Paper Number: DETC2018-85913.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Rangaraj, V., Gautham, B., Singh, A. K., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2018b). An inverse, decision-based design method for integrated design exploration of materials, products, and manufacturing processes. Journal of Mechanical Design, 140(11), 111403-111403-17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Mohan, P., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2019). Inverse thermo-mechanical processing (ITMP) design of a steel rod during hot rolling process. ASME Design Automation Conference 2019, Paper Number: IDETC2019-97390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nellippallil, A. B., Mohan, P., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2020). An inverse, decision-based design method for robust concept exploration. Journal of Mechanical Design, https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4045877.

  • Oduguwa, V., & Roy, R. (2001). Qualitative and quantitative knowledge in engineering system design. In 17th National Conference on Manufacturing Research, Cardiff University, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oduguwa, V., & Roy, R. (2002a). Bi-level optimisation using genetic algorithm. In 2002 IEEE International Conference on Artificial Intelligence Systems (ICAIS 2002), IEEE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oduguwa, V., & Roy, R. (2002b). Multi-objective optimisation of rolling rod product design using meta-modelling approach. GECCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oduguwa, V., & Roy, R. (2006). A review of rolling system design optimisation. International Journal of Machine Tools and Manufacture, 46(7), 912–928.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oduguwa, V., Tiwari, A., & Roy, R. (2004). Sequential process optimisation using genetic algorithms. Parallel Problem Solving from Nature-PPSN VIII: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phaniraj, M. P., Behera, B. B., & Lahiri, A. K. (2005). Thermo-mechanical modeling of two phase rolling and microstructure evolution in the hot strip mill: Part I. Prediction of rolling loads and finish rolling temperature. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 170(1), 323–335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pietrzyk, M., Cser, L., & Lenard, J. (1999). Mathematical and physical simulation of the properties of hot rolled products, Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reddy, R., Smith, W., Mistree, F., Bras, B., Chen, W., Malhotra, A., Badhrinath, K., Lautenschlager, U., Pakala, R., & Vadde, S. (1992). DSIDES user manual. In Systems design laboratory, department of mechanical engineering, University of Houston, Houston, Texas.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, W. L. (1983). Hot rolling of steel, CRC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, R., Tiwari, A., Munaux, O., & Jared, G. (2000). Real-life engineering design optimisation: Features and techniques. In CDROM Proceedings of the Fifth Online World Conference on Soft Computing in Industrial Applications (WSC-5). Finland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabeghi, M., Smith, W., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2015). Solution space exploration in model-based realization of engineered systems. ASME Design Automation Conference, Paper Number: DETC2015-46457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Said, A., Lenard, J., Ragab, A., & Elkhier, M. A. (1999). The temperature, roll force and roll torque during hot bar rolling. Journal of Materials Processing Technology, 88(1), 147–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shin, W. (1995). Development of techniques for pass design and optimization in the rolling of shapes. Ph.D. Dissertation, The Ohio State University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shinokura, T., & Takai, K. (1982). A new method for calculating spread in rod rolling. Journal of Applied Metalworking, 2(2), 94–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shukla, R., Goyal, S., Singh, A. K., Panchal, J. H., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2014). An approach to robust process design for continuous casting of slab. ASME Design Automation Conference, Paper Number: DETC2014-34208.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shukla, R., Goyal, S., Singh, A. K., Panchal, J. H., Allen, J. K., & Mistree, F. (2015). Design exploration for determining the set points of continuous casting operation: An industrial application. Journal of Manufacturing Science and Engineering, 137(3), 034503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, T. W., Poplinski, J., Koch, P. N., & Allen, J. K. (2001). Metamodels for computer-based engineering design: survey and recommendations. Engineering with Computers, 17(2), 129–150.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Sims, R. (1954). The calculation of roll force and torque in hot rolling mills. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, 168(1), 191–200.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taguchi, G. (1986). Introduction to quality engineering, asian productivity organization, American Supplier Institute, Inc., Dearborn, MI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tennyson, G., Shukla, R., Mangal, S., Sachi, S., & Singh, A. K. (2015). ICME for process scale-up: Importance of vertical and horizontal integration of models. In Proceedings of the 3rd World Congress on Integrated Computational Materials Engineering (ICME 2015), Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tiwari, A., Oduguwa, V., & Roy, R. (2008). Rolling system design using evolutionary sequential process optimization. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 12(2), 196–202.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wusatowski, Z. (2013). Fundamentals of rolling, Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anand Balu Nellippallil .

Appendices

Appendix 1: cDSP Formulation for Pass 2 in This Chapter

In this section we describe the mathematical formulation of the compromise decision support problem (cDSP ) for Pass 2 of rod rolling. The cDSP for Pass 2 incorporates the design information passed from Pass 3 to Pass 4. The cDSP reads as follows:

Given:

  1. (1)

    Design information passed from Pass 3 to Pass 4

  2. (2)

    Requirements at Pass 2

    • Achieve target throughput (results obtained from Pass 4 design)

    • Achieve target rolling load

    • Target value for throughput , \( T_{{p4,{\text{Target}}}} = 0.0006\,{\text{m}}^{ 3} / {\text{s}} \)

    • Target value for rolling load , \( P_{\text{Target}} = 40\,{\text{t}} \)

    • Minimum value of rolling load , \( P_{ \text{min} } = 35\,{\text{t}} \)

    • Maximum value of rolling load , \( P_{ \text{max} } = 45\,{\text{t}} \)

    • Minimum value of throughput , \( T_{\text{pmin}} = 0.0001\,{\text{m}}^{ 3} / {\text{s}} \)

    • Maximum value of throughput , \( T_{\text{pmax}} = 0.0008\,{\text{m}}^{ 3} / {\text{s}} \)

  3. (3)

    Initial billet size = 42 × 42 mm

  4. (4)

    Other parameter values for passes

  5. (5)

    The regression equations and well-established empirical and theoretical correlations for the oval to round pass for Pass 2

  6. (6)

    Variability in system variables

The ranges identified for the system variables are provided in Table 5.8.

Table 5.8 System variables and ranges for Pass 2 cDSP

Find:

System Variables

\( X_{1} \) :

diameter of rod after Pass 2 \( \left( {h_{2} } \right) \)

\( X_{2} \) :

the coefficient of elongation for Pass 2 \( (\lambda_{2} ) \)

\( X_{3} \) :

the spread occurring in Pass 2 \( (\beta_{2} ) \)

\( X_{4} \) :

the exit velocity for Pass 2 \( (w_{2} ) \)

\( X_{5} \) :

the maximum radius of roll in Pass 2 \( (R_{{{ \text{max} },2}} ) \)

\( X_{6} \) :

the roll gap \( (G_{2} ) \)

\( X_{7} \) :

the coefficient of friction \( (\mu_{2} ) \)

Deviation Variables

$$ d_{i}^{ - } , d_{i}^{ + } ,i = 1,2 $$

Satisfy:

System Constraints

  • Minimum coefficient of elongation constraint: \( \lambda_{2} \left( {X_{2} } \right) - 1.2 \ge 0 \)

  • Maximum coefficient of elongation constraint: \( 2 - \lambda_{2} \left( {X_{2} } \right) \ge 0 \)

  • Minimum spread constraint: \( \beta_{2} \left( {X_{3} } \right) - 1.1 \ge 0 \)

  • Maximum spread constraint: \( 1.7 - \beta_{2} \left( {X_{3} } \right) \ge 0 \)

  • Exit speed constraint: \( w_{2} - v_{r} \left( {X_{i} } \right) \ge 0 \)

  • Minimum load constraint: \( P\left( {X_{i} } \right) - P_{ \text{min} } \ge 0 \)

  • Maximum load constraint: \( P_{ \text{max} } - P\left( {X_{i} } \right) \ge 0 \)

  • Maximum wear constraint: \( 0.0001 - \Delta R\left( {X_{i} } \right) \ge 0 \)

System Goals

Goal 1:

  • Maximize Throughput:

    $$ \frac{{T_{p} \left( {X_{i} } \right)}}{{T_{{p,{\text{Target}}}} }} + d_{1}^{ - } - d_{1}^{ + } = 1 $$

Goal 2:

  • Minimize Rolling Load:

    $$ \frac{{P_{\text{Target}} }}{{P\left( {X_{i} } \right)}} - d_{2}^{ - } + d_{2}^{ + } = 1 $$

Variable Bounds

Defined in Table 5.8

Bounds on deviation variables

$$ d_{i}^{ - } ,d_{i}^{ + } \ge 0{\text{ and }}d_{i}^{ - } *d_{i}^{ + } = 0,\;{\text{i}} = 1,2 $$

Minimize:

Minimize the deviation function

$$ Z = \mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{2} W_{i} \left( {d_{i}^{ - } + d_{i}^{ + } } \right);\mathop \sum \limits_{i = 1}^{2} W_{i} = 1 $$

Appendix 2: Design Calculations (Refer to Fig. 5.2)

In this section, we describe the design calculations carried out for each pass based on the cDSP results obtained that are showcased in Tables 5.4 and 5.5. The design process is carried out following the sequential relationships that exist between passes ensuring the flow of information pattern shown in Fig. 5.3.

Step 1: Formulation of cDSP for roll Pass 4 using the information from the end product to be realized and the sequential relationship existing between roll Pass 3 and 4

The cDSP for Pass 4 is formulated in terms of the end requirements of minimizing ovality, maximizing throughput , and minimizing rolling load within the system constraints and bounds defined. The cDSP is exercised for different scenarios and ternary plots are used to identify the best region and the results are summarized in Table 5.4.

Step 2: Design of Passes 4 and 3 using the design and operating setpoints identified and the information available from end product requirements

We calculate the area of the round rod using the height value obtained for rod from cDSP results. The cross-sectional area of material after Pass 4:

$$ F_{4} = \frac{{\pi h_{4}^{2} }}{4} = 532.26\,{\text{mm}}^{2} $$

Entry speed of material for roll Pass 4:

$$ v_{4} = \frac{{w_{4} }}{{\lambda_{4} }} = 0.8671\,{\text{m/s}} $$

Throughput achieved in Pass 4:

$$ T_{p4} = F_{4} \times w_{4} = 0.0005999\,{\text{m}}^{ 3} / {\text{s}} $$

We carry out the design calculations for Pass 3 based on the cross-sectional area of rod and elongation coefficient ( cDSP result) obtained after Pass 4. We also define some requirements for Pass 3 such as meeting the throughput same as that of Pass 4.

Cross-sectional area of material after Pass 3:

$$ F_{3} = F_{4} \times \lambda_{4} = 691.93\,{\text{mm}}^{2} $$

Theoretical width of oval pass after Pass 3:

$$ b_{3w} = \sqrt {4.35 \times F_{3} } = 54.86\,{\text{mm}} $$

Height of material after Pass 3 (assuming \( b/h \) ratio = 3):

$$ h_{3} = \frac{{b_{3w} }}{{\left( {b/h} \right)}} = 18.28\,{\text{mm}} $$

Radius of curvature of oval Pass 3:

$$ R_{3}^{*} = \frac{{b_{3w}^{2} + h_{3}^{2} }}{{4h_{3} }} = 45.72\,{\text{mm}} $$

Exit speed of material for roll Pass 3:

$$ w_{3} = v_{4} = 0.8671\,{\text{m/s}} $$

Throughput to be maintained in Pass 3 (Given):

$$ T_{p3} = T_{p4} = 0.0005999\,{\text{m}}^{ 3} / {\text{s}} $$

We carry out design calculations for Pass 4 now with the new information generated for Pass 3.

Width of round profile (approximated rectangle) after Pass 4:

$$ b_{4} = \beta_{4} \times h_{3} = 21.03\,{\text{mm}} $$

Mean height after Pass 4:

$$ h_{4m} = \frac{{F_{4} }}{{b_{4} }} = 25.31\,{\text{mm}} $$

Theoretical diameter of roll for Pass 4:

$$ D_{t4} = 2\left( {R_{{{ \text{max} },4}} + \frac{{G_{4} }}{2}} \right) = 314\,{\text{mm}} $$

Effective diameter of roll for Pass 4:

$$ D_{w4} = D_{t4} - h_{4m} = 288.7\,{\text{mm}} $$

Step 3: Formulation of cDSP for roll Pass 2 using the design information generated for Passes 3 and 4; and the sequential information existing between Passes 1 and 2; along with information on input material (billet)

The designer formulates the cDSP for Pass 2 after finding the results from Passes 3 to 4. For example, the range of the height of rod for Pass 2 is identified based on the dimensions achieved in Passes 3 and 4. Another example is the rolling load target value. Since there is a chance of having a higher rolling load during Pass 2 due to larger stock that is being rolled than Pass 4, the target, minimum and maximum values for Pass 2 are fixed after looking at the rolling load value obtained in Pass 4. The designer also fixes the target throughput value for Pass 2 after analyzing the throughput achieved in Passes 3 and 4. Thus the designer makes judgments based on the information obtained from the information as it develops.

Step 4: Design of roll Passes 2 and 1 using the design and operating setpoints identified; the information available from input material and the information from Passes 3 to 4

The cDSP results for Pass 2 presented in Table 5.5 are used to design Pass 2.

Cross-sectional area of material after Pass 2:

$$ F_{2} = \frac{{\pi h_{2}^{2} }}{4} = 755.07\,{\text{mm}}^{2} $$

Entry speed of material for roll Pass 2:

$$ v_{2} = \frac{{w_{2} }}{{\lambda_{2} }} = 0.611\,{\text{m/s}} $$

Throughput achieved in Pass 2:

$$ T_{p2} = F_{2} \times w_{2} = 0.0005997\,{\text{m}}^{ 3} / {\text{s}} $$

Next, the design calculations for Pass 1 is carried out using Pass 2 design results and initial billet information from caster.

Cross-sectional area of material after Pass 1:

$$ F_{1} = F_{2} \times \lambda_{2} = 981.59\,{\text{mm}}^{2} $$

Theoretical width of oval pass after Pass 1:

$$ b_{1w} = \sqrt {4.35 \times F_{1} } = 65.345\,{\text{mm}} $$

Height of material after Pass 1 (assuming \( b/h \) = 3):

$$ h_{1} = \frac{{b_{1w} }}{{\left( {b/h} \right)}} = 21.78\,{\text{mm}} $$

Radius of curvature of oval Pass 1:

$$ R_{1}^{*} = \frac{{b_{1w}^{2} + h_{1}^{2} }}{{4h_{1} }} = 54.45\,{\text{mm}} $$

Exit speed of material for roll Pass 1:

$$ w_{1} = v_{2} = 0.611\,{\text{m/s}} $$

Given initial billet size from caster:

$$ h_{0} \times b_{0} = 42 \times 42\;\left( {\text{mm}} \right) $$

Cross-sectional area of initial billet:

$$ F_{0} = 42 \times 42 = 1764\,{\text{mm}}^{2} $$

Coefficient of elongation for Pass 1:

$$ \lambda_{1} = \frac{{F_{0} }}{{F_{1} }} = 1.797 $$

Width of oval profile (approximated rectangle) after Pass 1 (assuming \( \beta_{1} = 1.4 \)):

$$ b_{1} = \beta_{1} \times b_{0} = 58.8\,{\text{mm}} $$

Mean height of material after Pass 1:

$$ h_{1m} = \frac{{F_{1} }}{{b_{1} }} = 16.69\,{\text{mm}} $$

Effective diameter of roll for Pass 1 (assuming a theoretical diameter for rolls in Pass 1, \( D_{t1} = 350\,{\text{mm}} \)):

$$ D_{w1} = D_{t1} - h_{1m} = 333.3\,{\text{mm}} $$

Entry speed of material for roll Pass 1:

$$ v_{1} = \frac{{w_{1} }}{{\lambda_{1} }} = 0.3401\,{\text{m/s}} $$

Throughput to be maintained in Pass 1:

$$ T_{p1} = T_{p2} = 0.0005997\,{\text{m}}^{ 3} / {\text{s}} $$

The design calculations for Pass 2 are carried out next using Pass 1 information generated followed by collecting all the results for Passes 1 and 2.

Width of round profile (approximated rectangle) after Pass 2:

$$ b_{2} = \beta_{2} \times h_{1} = 26.14\,{\text{mm}} $$

Mean height after Pass 2:

$$ h_{2m} = \frac{{F_{2} }}{{b_{2} }} = 28.88\,{\text{mm}} $$

Theoretical diameter of roll for Pass 2:

$$ D_{t2} = 2\left( {R_{{{ \text{max} },2}} + \frac{{G_{2} }}{2}} \right) = 314\,{\text{mm}} $$

Effective diameter of roll for Pass 4:

$$ D_{w2} = D_{t2} - h_{2m} = 285.1\,{\text{mm}} $$

With the information generated for Passes 1 and 2, the design calculations for Passes 3 and 4 are carried out completing design results for Passes 1, 2, 3, and 4.

Coefficient of elongation for Pass 3:

$$ \lambda_{3} = \frac{{F_{2} }}{{F_{3} }} = 1.091 $$

Width of oval profile (approximated rectangle) after Pass 3 (assuming \( \beta_{3} = 1.5 \)):

$$ b_{3} = \beta_{3} \times b_{2} = 39.2\,{\text{mm}} $$

Mean height of material after Pass 3:

$$ h_{3m} = \frac{{F_{3} }}{{b_{3} }} = 17.65\,{\text{mm}} $$

Effective diameter of roll for Pass 3 (assuming a theoretical diameter for rolls in Pass 1, \( D_{t3} = 314\,{\text{mm}} \)):

$$ D_{w3} = D_{t3} - h_{3m} = 296.35\,{\text{mm}} $$

Entry speed of material for roll Pass 3:

$$ v_{3} = w_{2} = 0.7943\,{\text{m/s}} $$

Exit speed of material for roll Pass 3:

$$ w_{3} = v_{3} \times \lambda_{3} = 0.867\,{\text{m/s}} $$

This completes the design of the rolling passes with the determination of all the key dimensions presented in Figs. 5.4a, b.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Nellippallil, A.B., Allen, J.K., Gautham, B.P., Singh, A.K., Mistree, F. (2020). Goal-Oriented, Inverse Design Method—The Horizontal Integration of a Multistage Hot Rod Rolling System. In: Architecting Robust Co-Design of Materials, Products, and Manufacturing Processes. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45324-4_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-45324-4_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-45323-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-45324-4

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics