SELECTION OF MATERIALS FOR ROLLER CHAINS FROM THE

PERSPECTIVE OF MANUFACTURING PROCESS

Rahmat Saptono

Departemen Teknik Metalurgi dan Material, Fakultas Teknik, Universitas Indonesia, Depok, Indonesia 16424

E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract

The selection of materials for an engineering component is not only requested by its design function and shape,
but also the sequence through which it is manufactured. The manufacturing operation of roller chains involves
drawing and trimming processes aimed at producing semi-finished chain drives component with a well-
standardized dimension. In addition to final combination of properties required by design constraints, the
ability of materials to be formed into a desired shape and geometry without failure is also critical. The objective
of materials selection should therefore involve additional attributes that are not typically accommodated by the
standard procedure of materials selection. The present paper deals with the selection of materials for roller
chains from the perspective of manufacturing process. Ears and un-uniform wall thickness have been identified
as a key problem in the mass production of component. Provided all process parameters were established, the
anisotropy factor of materials is critical. Simulative test can be reasonably used to obtain material performance
indices that can be added up to the standard procedure of material selection. Of three commercially available
steel grades evaluated with regard to the criteria defined, one grade is more suitable for the present objective.

Keywords: roller chains, materials selection, manufacture, drawing, trimming, ears.

1 Introduction selected based upon the characteristic of forming

process and the availability of the resources.
The selection of materials is a critical stage in
product development and manufacturing of The present paper deals with the selection of
engineering component. Vast materials processes materials for roller chains from the perspective of
available and enormous varieties of design manufacturing process with particular reference to
requirements have been identified as the root of the metal forming operation. Materials performance
problems in materials selection that challenges index and assessment method, which are more
engineer [1]. From the manufacturing perspective, reasonable for the manufacturing process, together
the sequence through which the component is with more systematic and logical weighting,
manufactured is considered more critical than scoring, and ranking are proposed in this paper.
design requirement. Therefore, the selection
process is not only determined by its function and The essential characteristic of chain drives
shape, but also by the manufacturing process [1-3]. comprises a constant ratio, long life, and the ability
to drive a number of shafts from a single source of
In addition to the final properties required by the power [4]. Of important is the angle of articulation
design constraints, the technological properties of that controls the cyclic impact load endured by the
materials, that are the ability of materials to be rollers and hence the wears of the chain joint. It is
formed and shaped into a desired shape and also known that the wear resistance and surface
geometry without failure, is critical. The objective fatigue strength of the roller chains chiefly affect
of materials selection should therefore involve the actual life of a well-selected drive.
additional attributes that have not been
accommodated by the typical procedure of The shape and geometry of roller chains are
materials selection. Moreover, the assessment standardized to maintain their function. The
method should also be carefully designed and standard nomenclature of roller chains are depicted
in Figure 1 [4].
 Figure 2 Example of forming processes in a
progressive dies [5].

The forming process of roller chains might be

Figure 1 Standard nomenclature of roller chains in idealized by assuming that only one type of
a double strand [4]. deformation occurs. It can be analyzed from final
geometry that the process might be categorized as
Typical design of roller chain for particular “a process in which a flat blank is constrained
engineering applications, as reviewed in ref. [4], while the central portion of the sheet is pressed into
had been published in many professional literatures the desired shape without folding the corners” [5].
as well as technical standards and publications. The key problems that might be identified from the
Further discussion about this topic, however, is appearance of drawn products are dimensional in-
beyond the scope of this paper. accuracy, ears formation, and variation of wall-
thickness.
The manufacturing process of roller chains, which
involves metal forming processes, is mainly aimed The schematic of the drawing process and the
at producing semi-finished product with a well- important stress systems working in the flange and
standardized geometry. The subsequent treatments, cup wall are depicted in Fig. 3 [8] and Fig. 4 [6].
which are used to control the fatigue strength and
wear resistance of the final product is not going to
be discussed in this paper. D

Metal forming is typically aimed at producing a

part of desired shape and geometry without failure.
With particular reference to roller chains, the
dimensional accuracy and its consistency are
intently desired. It was revealed in ref. [5] that the
dimensional accuracy may be affected by the
thickness variation of work metal, the variation in
work metals condition (mainly hardness), drawing
technique (particularly the number of operations),
tools accuracy, tools wear rate, and press condition. Figure 3 Schematic diagram of drawing process [8]
Provided the thickness variation is controlled and
all process parameters are well established, the
technological property of work metals is very
critical.

Forming operations of complex component may flange

involve various types of deformation that occurs
simultaneously. The mass production of small
parts with well-standardized geometry and high
dimensional tolerance is usually performed in a wall
progressive dies for some technical and non-
technical reasons [5-7]. Typical sequence of
forming processes of a small ferrule shape in
progressive dies is illustrated in Figure 2 [5].

Figure 4 Schematic diagram of stress systems in a

drawing operation [6].
Required properties for the process can be derived intrinsic or simulative test can be used to reveal the
from the diagram, as reviewed in ref. [9]. The anisotropy of materials. The procedure of
dominant stress system is radial tension combined conventional tension testing is usually time-
with circumferential compression in the drawing consuming and unreasonable, particularly for thin
region, while that in the base and lower cup wall is specimen [6,10-12]. New methods and apparatus
biaxial tension centered at the lower cup wall. This have been developed to overcome these problems
stress is equivalent to a through thickness but not yet applicable [11]. Simulative tests, on the
compression in addition to hydrostatic stress that contrary, are more useful, more relevant, and closer
does not involve the state of yielding. The failure to the production process.
of drawing take places when the central stretch-
forming zone is not strong enough to withstand the A simulative test, which is particularly performed
load required to draw the outer region of the blank in laboratory, can be designed and selected from the
through the die. Hence, the differential levels of various standards of simulative test based upon a
strength in these two regions lead to easier definite purpose. For drawing process, Swift cup
deformation in the drawing region compared to test [5,6,8,10,12] is one of the most appropriate
stretching region would enable greater blank to be standards. The test however, has to be performed
drawn. under prudently controlled condition to minimize
the variability of the result.
It is concluded from the stress elements analysis of
component in flange and wall that the strength of It is known from previous experimental works, as
material in through-thickness direction relative to reviewed in ref. [6,8-10,13], that the ratio of the
the strength in the plane of sheet plays important largest blank that can be completely drawn without
role. The variation in properties between plane and failure, Limiting Draw Ratio (LDR) is a function of
normal directions of sheet or normal isotropy the average value of normal anisotropy index r.
measured by the ratio between the width and The mathematical analysis that relates the LDR to
thickness strain is desired because it reduces wall the average strain ratio, r, which was largely
thinning and drawing load [5,6,8-10]. The performed by Whiteley, was reviewed in ref. [8].
variation of normal anisotropy in the plane
directions or planar anisotropy, however, is It was also revealed in ref. [6] that the height of
unwanted since it produces undesirable ears and ears increases proportionally with the increase of
wall thickness variations that require additional
planar anisotropy as large as 15-20% from the
manufacturing process. height of cup. The mechanical properties variation
in the plane direction has not been reported
The ideal sheet for deep drawing should therefore influencing the ears formation. The effect of
have high normal anisotropy value combined with process parameters has not yet been reported
minimum planar anisotropy value. existed in steel. The tools geometry and drawing
process were only reported to influence the ears
It was revealed in ref. [5] that the dimensional formation in the first draw of aluminum sheet.
accuracy might be achieved through minimizing the
variation of work metal condition. In addition to Based upon these facts, more practical method was
the thickness uniformity, the intrinsic properties of developed to measure planar anisotropy, by
work metals must also be uniform to assure the measuring the ears height on a standard cup and
uniform distribution of strain. Three materials expressing the index as the percentage of the mean
properties are known affecting the distribution of height [6,12]. It may be assumed that the
strain [10]. They are strain hardening coefficient percentage of ears, known as Willis and Blade
(n), the strain rate sensitivity (m), and the plastic index, is directly related to the planar anisotropy of
strain ratio (r). materials. Additional information might also be
acquired from this simulative test.
Grain sizes and surface finish may also influence
drawability, particularly on low carbon sheet steels 2 Experiment
[5,11]. Not only does promote excessive surface
roughness, coarse grain (> ASTM 5) may also
reduce drawability. Dull surface of the sheet is Three grades of steel strips produced by
considered beneficial due to its capacity of holding conventional process were labeled as Material A,
lubricant, improving drawability. Material B, and Material C. Deep drawing
simulative test was performed using the following
conditions: 2 mm blank diameter interval (hand-
It can be learnt from previous analysis that the cut), 40 mm diameter flat bottom cylinder, 42.5 mm
anisotropy of materials is most important in the diameter dies, oiled polyethylene lubrication, 1500
manufacturing process. Either fundamental kg-f blank holder force, and fast punch speed.
Stretching simulative test was carried out using 45 Simulative test, although requires carefully
mm diameter hemispherical dome, oiled controlled condition, is more reasonable to be
polyethylene lubrication, maximum clamping force employed for some reasons. First, the method can
(no material flow), and fast punch speed. be set up to approximate such process parameters
as lubrication and speed. Second, the test is more
Limiting Drawing Ratio, LDR is calculated from efficient in term of time and cost. Last, the result of
the ratio between the blank diameter of successful the test can also be well quantified, providing such
cup, D, and punch diameter, d. important parameters as h-min, the percentage of
ears, LDR, and LDH that are more readily
interpreted.
D
LDR = (1)
d The minimum height of cup, h-min directly
measures that can be actually utilized after the
The minimum height of the wall, h-min, as well as trimming process. The percentage of ears, % ears
the maximum one are readily measured from drawn proposed by Willis and Blade can be directly
specimen and the percentage of ears is quantified related to the planar anisotropy of materials as
using the following formula [6,12]: revealed in the literature review. The Limiting
Draw Ratio, LDR is proportionally related to the

% Ears =
(hmax − hmin ) ×100% (2) normal anisotropy of materials as revealed in the
previous reviews. The Limiting Dome Height,
1
2 (hmax + hmin ) LDH, although is more related to stretching
process, might be required due to the complexity of
the process in which the stretching mode might also
simultaneously contribute.

The materials performance index for manufacturing

may be summarized as follow:

hmin × LDR × LDH

M∝ (3)
% Ears

Where, M is the materials performance index.

It is clear that the materials selection objective is to

maximize the h-min, LDR, and LDH, while
Figure 5 Schematic diagram of deep drawn minimizing the %Ears. This index might be
component with ears due to planar anisotropy [6] combined with the standard materials selection
objective.
Limiting Dome Height, LDH is measured directly
from the stretching test. Direct measurement of The critical task in the selection stage is to decide
both stretched specimen dome height and punch the priority factor of the materials attributes
displacement indicator is performed. acquired from the simulative test that will use to
score and rank the materials. Since the materials
3 Results and Discussion selection procedure should limit the subjectivity in
the decision making process [1], the present
discussion attempts to quantify the materials
Table 1 displays important material attributes that
attributes by considering their relevance and
were obtained from simulative test.
importance.
Table 1 Attributes related to manufacturing process
It is known that the anisotropy planar is the most
obtained from simulative testing.
important materials attributes that can be directly
h-min. Ears LDH related to the formation of ears in the simulative
Materials LDR testing, using the percentage of ears known as
(mm) (%) (mm)
A 29.0 11.56 2.05 2.65 Willis and Blade index. From industrial
viewpoint, however, the minimum height of cup, h-
B 39.1 9.90 2.175 2.95
min, is more readily interpreted since it is a direct
C 35.0 19.35 2.20 3.23 representation of the height of the cup that can be
actually utilized. Those attributes are more
important than the Limiting Draw Ratio, LDR that Provided all process parameters were established,
does not provide any information about the useful plastic anisotropy is critical. Simulative test can be
height of cup. The optional attributes that both less reasonably used to provide material attributes (h-
relevant and important is the Limited Dome Height, minimum, %Ears, LDR, and LDH) that can be
LDH. added up to the standard material selection
procedure.
Weighting factors were also able to be reasonably
determined. The rank of ordering was performed Of three commercially available steel grades
using a digital logic approach whereas the evaluated with regard to the criteria defined, one
weighting factor of each property was determined grade is more suitable for the present objective
proportionally to the number of positive responses,
mi [3]. References
mi [1] Y. Bretchet, D. Basetti, D. Landru, L. Salvo,
wi = (4)
N “Challenges in Materials and Process
Selection”, Progress in Materials Science, 46,
(2000) 407-428.
n(n − 1)
N= (5) [2] Michael F. Ashby, Materials Selection in
2 Mechanical Design, 2nd ed. Butterworth
Heinemann, Oxford, 1999. p.13
Where: n is the number of properties under
consideration [3] George E. Dieter, Engineering Design,
Materials and Processing Approach 2nded.
McGraw-Hill, Inc. 1991. p.273-316, 149-153.
The decision making table of ranking and
weighting was set up. [4] Joseph E. Shigley and Charles R. Mischke,
Mechanical Engineering Design, 6thed.
Simple tabulation was performed to quantify the McGraw-Hill International Edition, Singapore,
materials attributes, scoring and ranking materials 2001. p.1079-1088.
based on defined assumption. The result is [5] “Deep Drawing” in ASM Handbook Vol.14:
summarized in Table 2. Forming and Forging, 9th ed. American Society
for Metals, Ohio, 1985. p.575-590.
Table 2 Rank of Candidate Materials
[6] “Deep Drawing” in Hand Book of Metal
Forming. Edited by Kurt Lange. McGraw-Hill
Materials Score Rank Book Co. New York, 1985. p.20.1-20.69.
A 0.19 2
B 0.24 1 [7] O.D Lascoe, Handbook of Fabrication
Processes. ASM International, Ohio, 1988.
C 0.18 3
p.201.
[8] William F. Hosford and Robert M. Caddel,
Metal Forming: Mechanics and Metallurgy.
4 Conclusion
Prentice Hall, New Jersey, 1983. p.274-
291,263-266.
The manufacturing process has to be involved in
the selection of materials for engineering [9] R.E. Smallman and R.J. Bishop, Metals and
component. The term of materials selection for Materials: Science, Process, and Application,
manufacturing might be used specifically 1st ed. Butter-worth-Heinemann Ltd. London,
comparable to that of DFM or design for 1995. p.244-246.
manufacturing. [10] Brian Taylor, “Formability Testing of Sheet
Metals” in ASM Handbook Vol.14: Forming
The objective of materials selection for roller and Forging, 9th ed. American Society for
chains manufacturing process is to produce well- Metals, Ohio, 1985. p.877-899.
standardized shape and geometry.
[11] K.P Rao and Emani V.R. Mohan, “A Vision
Integrated Tension Test for Use in Sheet Metal
It is known from the analysis that the
Formability”, Journal of Materials Processing
manufacturing process involves drawing and
Technology, 118, (2001) 238-245.
trimming and the formation of ears and un-uniform
wall thickness were identified as key problems.
[12] J.N. Harris, Mechanical Working of Metals:
Theory and Practice, 1st ed. Pergamon Press
Ltd. Oxford, 1983. p.225-240.
[13] G.E. Dieter, Mechanical Metallurgy, 2nd ed.
McGraw-Hill International Book Company,
Singapore, 1981. p.688-697.