Scripta Materialia 54 (2006) 213217

www.actamat-journals.com

Microstructure and mechanical properties of microalloyed steel

forgings manufactured from cross-wedge-rolled preforms
M.L.N. da Silva, W. Regone, S.T. Button

Department of Materials Engineering, School of Mechanical Engineering, DEMa-FEM-UNICAMP, State University of Campinas,
C.P. 6122, 13083-970 Campinas, SP, Brazil
Received 22 August 2005; received in revised form 9 September 2005; accepted 20 September 2005
Available online 13 October 2005

Abstract
Microscopy showed that cross-rolled and still air-cooled products present microstructures with as-transformed ferrite and pearlite
grains. Internal defects were not detected and did not inuence the nal properties of the forged parts. Microstructures of forgings
showed very rened grains and it was observed that the content of acicular ferrite was inversely related to the plastic strain.

2005 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Cross-wedge rolling; Microalloyed steels; Microstructure; Hot forging

1. Introduction
Cross-wedge rolling (CWR) is a metal forming process
commonly used to manufacture stepped axles. In this process a cylindrical billet is heated and plastically deformed to
an axis-symmetric part by two wedge tools assembled in
rolls or plates [1,2].
The stability of the process, making products without
defects, depends on the right choice of processing parameters and tools dimensions.
Fig. 1 shows a CWR at tool with four forming regions
or zones: (i) kning, (ii) guiding, (iii) forming, and (iv) sizing. The dierent geometry of these zones means that the
forming mechanisms are very distinct for each of the
regions in the wedge tools. The main geometric parameters
are the forming angle a, the stretching angle b, and the
relative reduction d.
The stability of the process is governed by equations
that consider dimensional parameters and dene the safe
work region where the products will not present defects like
slipping between the billet and tooling, surface lapping,
*

Corresponding author. Tel.: +55 19 37883317; fax: +55 19 32893722.

E-mail address: sergio1@fem.unicamp.br (S.T. Button).

necking and central cavities. Pater et al. [2] present a set

of expressions relating the process parameters and dene
the limits to prevent these defects.
There are few results in the literature on the inuence of
factors like process temperature, rolling speed, and the
workpiece material on the formation of these defects. In
this work, it was evident that the geometric parameters of
the process are not sucient to avoid the presence of the
defects.
A microalloyed steel was selected for the forming tests,
since microalloyed steels are important materials in the
automotive industry as substitutes for common alloyed
steels. Microalloyed steels present excellent mechanical
properties when directly cooled from the hot forging temperature with no additional heat treatments [3], while common forging steels reach their best properties after heat
treatment by quenching and temper, with increasing
process times and costs.
Zrnk et al. [4,5] stated that the denition of a specic
chemical composition of microalloyed steels, as well the
manufacturing technology, are based on iterative research
of the relation between microstructure and properties, to
establish the most signicant alloying element and its
inuence on hot deformation.

1359-6462/$ - see front matter
2005 Acta Materialia Inc. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.scriptamat.2005.09.023

214

M.L.N. da Silva et al. / Scripta Materialia 54 (2006) 213217

Fig. 2. Cross-wedge rolling and transverse rolling tooling.

Fig. 1. Flat cross-wedge rolling tool [1].

Microalloyed steels also present an extensive range of

microstructures that can be obtained by the variation of
chemical composition and thermo-mechanical processing,
and dene the specic eects of an individual component
of the microstructuree.g., austenite and ferrite grain sizes,
precipitates, dislocations structure, carbides, inclusions and
textureon the strength and toughness of hot formed microalloyed steels. The mechanisms to improve the mechanical
strength are well known, but for dierent chemical compositions it is necessary to optimize the solubilization within the
austenite, as well as the rolling parameters at the temperatures for recrystallization and non-recrystallization, to
achieve the high strength with a proper hot workability.
On the other hand microalloyed low carbon steels with
bainitic microstructure present a good combination of
strength and impact toughness, with better properties if
compared to ferriticpearlitic microstructures [6].
2. Materials and methods
Table 1 shows the chemical composition of the microalloyed steel used in this work. The microstructure was
formed by ferrite and pearlite with not deformed grains,
and hardness between 225 and 233 HB.
Cylindrical billets of 19 mm in diameter and 72 mm long
were pre-heated to 1250 C for 20 min and rolled at
200 mm/s to form parts of 17 mm in diameter and 90 mm
long. Other billets with these nal dimensions were only
deformed by cross-wedge rolling, to compare these two
dierent processes.

Some billets were machined to a geometry similar to that

obtained with the CWR tooling shown in Fig. 2. These
samples were heated to 1250 C for 20 min, drop forged
and air-cooled.
The CWR tools presented in Fig. 2 were designed with
respect to the stability expressions [2] and present the angle
a equal to 7.5, the angle b equal to 24.5, and the reduction d equal to 1.3 (D = 17, d = 13.2).
After cross-rolling the parts were immediately drop
forged with the tools, and still air-cooled.
The cross-sections of the head and the center of the
forged parts were metallographically analyzed, after polishing and etching with 2% Nital. Samples of these regions
were also evaluated by tensile and hardness tests with four
replicates for each test.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Analysis of defects
All preforms obtained with the complete tool set (transverse and cross-wedge rolling) presented the internal defect
usually observed in the CWR process and described by
Qiang et al. [1]. Some preforms were completely pervaded
by the defect.
Among the preforms obtained only by cross-wedge rolling some presented this defect and others did not, demonstrating the instability of this process. None of the forged
parts presented the defect, which could possibly be closed
by the high pressures and temperatures present during
hot forging.
3.2. Microstructure analysis
Fig. 3 shows the microstructure of the microalloyed steel
as received with pearlite and ferrite phases common to hot
rolled and annealed steel.

Table 1
Microalloyed steelchemical composition (wt.%)
C

Si

Mn

Cr

Mo

Ni

Al

Cu

Ti

0.310

0.687

1.463

0.010

0.056

0.181

0.006

0.089

0.016

0.016

0.016

0.018

0.111

M.L.N. da Silva et al. / Scripta Materialia 54 (2006) 213217

Fig. 3. Microstructure of the microalloyed steel as received (reagent 2%

Nital).

Fig. 4. Microstructure of a cross-rolled and still air-cooled sample, center

region (reagent 2% Nital).

Fig. 4 presents a microstructure typical of the center

region of samples obtained just after cross-rolling and still
air-cooling with as-transformed ferrite and pearlite grains
very rened in comparison to the grains in Fig. 3.
Figs. 5 and 6 present the microstructure of samples
forged with the machined preforms. The microstructure
at the center (Fig. 5) is very complex and formed by pearlite, ferrite and acicular ferrite.
In the head (Fig. 6) the microstructure is similar to the
center, but less rened and with more acicular ferrite in
its composition.
Figs. 7 and 8 show the microstructures of the parts
forged with cross-rolled preforms. In the center (Fig. 7)
there is a very rened microstructure with the pearlite
and ferrite phases.

215

Fig. 5. Microstructure of the workpiece forged with the machined

preform, center region (reagent 2% Nital).

Fig. 6. Microstructure of the workpiece forged with the machined

preform, head region (reagent 2% Nital).

The head (Fig. 8) presents a complex microstructure

formed by pearlite, ferrite and acicular ferrite. The center
of the forged parts presented a higher cooling rate than
the head, which must have aected and dierentiated the
microstructure in these regions, since the center experienced higher plastic strains at temperatures lower than
the recrystallization temperature.
Lee et al. [7], Bhadeshia [8] and Drobnjak and Koprivica
[9] state that acicular ferrite is just bainite that nucleated in
the inclusions present in the grain boundaries.
While bainite is formed by parallel ferrite lamellas, acicular ferrite is more irregular with lamellas in dierent
planes in an array that causes a toughness increase without
any decrease of mechanical strength.

216

M.L.N. da Silva et al. / Scripta Materialia 54 (2006) 213217

Fig. 7. Microstructure of the forged part with a cross-rolled preform,

center region (reagent 2% Nital).

Fig. 9. Microstructure of the forged part with a preform obtained with the
complete tool set, center region (reagent 2% Nital).

Fig. 8. Microstructure of the forged part with a cross-rolled preform,

head region (reagent 2% Nital).

Fig. 10. Microstructure of the forged part with a preform obtained with
the complete tool set, head region (reagent 2% Nital).

Figs. 9 and 10 present microstructures that better represent workpieces hot forged with preforms obtained
with the complete tool set (transverse and cross-wedge rolling). Both regions, center and head, presented a very rened microstructure of pearlite and ferrite, while the
acicular ferrite was not observed. With the complete tool
set both regions experienced similar plastic strains before
hot forging.
Comparing these microstructures it was noticed
that there is a direct relation between the presence of
acicular ferrite and the plastic strain: regions that were
more deformed presented very rened grains that inhibited the formation of acicular ferrite in the grain boundaries, as was also observed by Majta and Zurek [10].
Forgings from machined preforms presented a lower plas-

tic deformation and therefore a high content of acicular

ferrite.
3.3. Tensile tests results
Table 2 presents results of the tensile tests, two for each
condition of preform (machined, complete tool set and
only cross-wedge rolled).
As it can be observed, the results were very similar for
the forgings obtained with cross-rolled preforms. Compared to the forgings from the machined preforms, those
forgings presented high values of yield and ultimate stress
due to the very rened microstructures observed after hot
forging and air-cooling. These high values conrm that
central defects possibly present after cross-rolling were

M.L.N. da Silva et al. / Scripta Materialia 54 (2006) 213217

Table 2
Tensile tests results
Forged workpiece from:

Yield
stress (MPa)

Ultimate
stress (MPa)

Elongation
(%)

Machined preform

1
2

1300
1300

1446
1422

7.5
7.5

Cross-rolled preform

1
2

1100
1100

1819
1885

9
8

Complete tool set

1
2

1150
1100

1644
1820

8
8

Table 3
Hardness test results
Forged workpiece from:

Region

Hardness
(HB)

Mean
(HB)

Machined preform

Center
Head

404
272

451
282

415
278

415
266

421
275

Cross-rolled preform

Center
Head

438
415

426
383

373
363

415
345

413
377

Complete tool set

Center
Head

451
492

438
502

464
507

432
477

446
495

closed by the high pressures in hot forging at high

temperatures.
3.4. Hardness tests results
Table 3 presents the results of four hardness tests for
each preform condition. It can be observed that forgings
from preforms that had only been cross-rolled presented
hardnesses lower than preforms formed with the complete
tool set; both were greater than those of the forgings with
machined preforms. This dierence is caused by two factors: the higher plastic strain associated with a high cooling
rate in the center region that may be forged below the
recrystallization temperature, with a consequent strain
hardening of this region.
4. Conclusions
High plastic strains observed in the preforms obtained
with the complete tool set possibly caused severe central
defects, some of them along all the billets length. These
defects were not observed when the preforms were only
deformed by cross-wedge rolling.

217

Despite CWR tools which were designed in accord with

expressions to avoid the formation of central defects,
some preforms presented these defects, and we can conclude that the stability of the process must be aected by
factors like the workpiece material, process temperature
and speed that shall be carefully considered in such
expressions.
All forged parts presented very rened microstructures.
It was observed that the content of acicular ferrite is
inversely related to the plastic strain: large strains can
completely inhibit the presence of this phase.
Central defects were not observed in forged parts and
possibly they could be closed by high pressures and temperatures present during hot forging.
The high values of yield and ultimate tensile stress are
directly related to very rened complex microstructures.
Variation of hardness in dierent regions of the forged
parts could be directly related to the gradient of plastic
strain and cooling rate in these regions.
Acknowledgements
The authors wish to thank CNPq (Brazilian Council for
Scientic and Technological Development) and FAPESP
(Foundation for Researchers of the State of Sao Paulo)
for their nancial support and ThyssenKrupp Metalurgica
de Campo Limpo Paulista who kindly gave the steel for the
tests.
References
[1] Qiang L, Lovell MR, Slaughter W, Tagavi K. J Mater Process
Technol 2002;125/126:248.
[2] Pater Zb, Weronski W, Kazanecki J, Gontarz A. J Mater Process
Technol 1999;92/93:458.
[3] Engineer S, Huchtemann B. In: Van Tine C, Krauss G, Matlock DK,
editors. Fundamentals and applications of microalloying forging
steels. Warrendale, (PA): TMS; 1996.
[4] Zrnk J, Kvackaj T, Pongpaybul A, Sricharoenchai P, Vilk J,
Vrchovinsky V. Mater Sci Eng A 2001;319/321:321.
[5] Zrnik J, Kvackaj T, Sripinproach D, Sricharoenchai P. J Mater
Process Technol 2003;133:236.
[6] Teoh LL. J Mater Process Technol 1995;48:475.
[7] Lee CH, Bhadeshia HKDH, Lee H-C. Mater Sci Eng A 2003;360:249.
[8] Bhadeshia HKDH. Mater Sci Forum 1998;284286:39.
[9] Drobnjak D, Koprivica A. In: Van Tine C, Krauss G, Matlock DK,
editors. Fundamentals and applications of microalloying forging
steels. Warrendale, (PA): TMS; 1996.
[10] Majta J, Zurek AK. Int J Plast 2003;707730:19.