Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology

DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Materials in Metal Forming

Sridhar Idapalapatia*, Xu Songb, N. Venkata Reddyc, Narasimalu Srikanthd, Farshid Pahlevanie,
Karthic R. Narayananf and Mehrdad Zarinejadb
a
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
b
Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology (SIMTech) A*Star, Singapore, Singapore
c
Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering , Indian Institute of Technology Hyderabad, Hyderabad,
Andhra Pradesh, India
d
Energy Research Institute, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore, Singapore
e
Forming Technology Group, Singapore Institute of Manufacturing Technology (SIMTech) A*Stary, Singapore,
Singapore
f
School of Materials Science and Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore

Abstract
In this chapter, a review of the materials involved in the metal-forming processes and some of the
processing required before forming on the materials are provided. At first the details of the materials
formability definition and applications in different forming processes are discussed. Formability is
one of the most important characteristics of the engineering alloys. Subsequently, information on the
materials used for metal-forming tools and dies and their selection criteria are provided. These tool
and die materials are categorized based on the process details and their limitation is further
discussed. A brief look at the lubricants used in metal forming covers a subsequent topic in the
current work and focuses on the effectiveness, characterization (friction reduction), types, and
general applications as well as additives used in the lubricants. Lastly, a concise summary of the
raw material preparation for forming processes is covered, with main focus on casting and heat
treatment. These are the main preprocessing routes for preparing the preform in the industry. This
chapter serves as a quick reference of forming process material selection for researchers, engineers,
and students in the mechanical and materials engineering field.

Introduction
The transformation of raw ingot to required complex geometry, under large plastic deformation,
using sophisticated tooling, is known as metal forming. For the last century, metal forming has been
one of the most widely employed processes, to mass manufacture engineered products, with little or
no scrap. The technology know-how is one of the oldest and very mature. Metal-forming process can
be classified into bulk and sheet metal forming. The bulk metal forming includes forging, rolling,
extrusion, and wire-drawing processes, while shearing, punching, blanking, bending, and deep
drawing techniques comprise sheet metal-forming processes.
The history of metalworking process date backs to the era of third millennium BC when copper
and gold metallurgy was invented in the Middle East, primarily for making weapons, ornamentation,
and coins as shown in Fig. 1. They were manually swaged using an iron hammer to produce a variety
of products.

*Email: [email protected]

Page 1 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Fig. 1 Antiques of third millennium BC made from copper and gold metals

Around second millennium BC, processes such as smelting, which helps to purify the impurities
in metals from its ore, were explored and understood. This important discovery motivated
a combination of pure metals to form new alloys which satisfied the quest for strength. This was
also very evident during the Bronze Age in 4000 BC, when copper and tin were effectively used.
Mainly, nonferrous metals and its alloys were explored until the Iron Age. This delay was due to the
lack of understanding on high-temperature metalworking and on achieving iron purification.
Similarly, the processes also changed systematically from crude hammering to more mechanized
forging and rolling. During the Industrial Revolution, at the end of the eighteenth century, witnessed
major development in various types of metalworking techniques and materials with special prop-
erties and applications, due to the demands of the manufacturing industry. The need to forge large
steels led to the discovery of higher tonnage metalworking equipments such as mechanical (screw
type) and hydraulic presses. High-speed tandem rolling mills were also used to mass produce
strengthened steels. Due to the increasing need of high-strength materials in the automobile industry,
steels, such as low carbon and advance high strength, largely benefited because of its ductility and
high working temperature. The demands of the aerospace industry turned attention towards mate-
rials with high strength to weight ratios, and focus on forming aluminum- and magnesium-based
alloys was considered relevant. The formability (addressed in the section “Formability in Sheet
Metal Forming”) of materials is an important criteria during material selection without compromis-
ing mechanical properties.
The need for higher-quality products was driving the search for different kinds of materials. With
new production processes and technologies, the quality of the materials, thereby the products, has
improved significantly. With the advent of technological advancements, different metal forming
processes have been keenly studied and are still being explored to improve the productivity.
Moreover, the process gives a distinct advantage in terms of operational cost, over joining and
cutting, while manufacturing near-net shape components. Research in new materials, pertinent to
bulk forming techniques, always has a huge potential, considering the future end products, which
aims at higher quality. The materials used in forming tools (addressed in section “Die and Mold
Materials”) are being designed to withstand adverse environments, which is a challenge. Moreover
from the economic constraints, this plays a crucial role and influences the cost of the product. The
material catastrophe also interrupts the production engineering and machine downtime.
Properties such as high compressive strength, surface hardness, ductility, wear resistance, and
reliability are desired in materials used for forming and have to be altered to meet specialized

Page 2 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

applications. Lubricants in metal forming (section “Lubricants for Metal Forming”) and raw
materials (section “Manufacturing of Raw Materials for Forming”) and state of the art in bulk
metal-forming process have developed considerably. The development of new heat treatment and
surface coating processes to meet the needs of the forming tool and the end product has to be
customized.

Formability of Engineering Alloys

Most of the engineering alloys during a uniaxial tensile test, after some degree of stretching, tend to
become unstable, due to the onset of necking. With further stretching, there is neck growth in the
specimen, and finally a fracture is formed in the neck, so that the specimen breaks into two pieces.
When compression testing was discussed, it was stated that for ductile metals, larger strains can in
general be obtained in this test than in tensile testing, because neck formation is avoided in
compression. But also in the compression test, there are limitations on how much the specimen
can be deformed. This is because various cracking phenomena may occur, especially when
low-ductility materials are tested.
In metal forming, it is a common problem that the material of the workpiece breaks down during
forming, in a manner like that for materials subjected to technological tests. In this chapter, different
phenomena that cause material failure during metal-forming operations will be discussed, with
special emphasis on failure due to necking, tensile stress cracking, and shear cracking.

Formability and Workability

Formability and workability of a material is a measure to which it can be deformed in a specific
manufacturing process without any surface or subsurface defects or breakage. Traditionally, form-
ability has more to do with the sheet metal forming, and workability is associated with the bulk
forming processes such as wire drawing, forging, extrusion, etc. Formability of a material is also
related to materials ductility defined as the maximum tensile elongation (on percentage basis) at
fracture. Different phenomena that cause material failure are necking, tensile cracking, and shear
cracking. Formability of a material also depends up on manufacturing process parameters such as
temperature, loading strain rate, friction between the die and workpiece, reduction ratio, etc. Some of
the factors influencing the formability are explained below:

(a) Yield Strength: Materials with low flow stress are easy to deform and are said to be malleable.
The higher the yield strength of the material, the higher the forces and energy are required to
accomplish the deformation.
(b) Material Work-Hardening: The flow stress of a range of engineering alloys can be expressed
as s ¼ Ken, where K is the strength coefficient in MPa and n is the strain-hardening exponent.
Higher values of n imply the necessity of higher forces with increasing deformation, which can
lead to tool wear and tear. Low values of strain-hardening may lead to localized necking during
the deformation, which results in nonuniform deformation.
(c) Modulus of Elasticity: Having a high elastic modulus leads to the increased elastic recovery
after the deformation forces are removed. For precise dimensions of the part, the spring back
should be compensated.
(d) Operating Temperature: When the forming temperature is greater than 0.3 Tm (where Tm is the
melting point of the material in K), it is said to be hot working, and it is easier to form the material

Page 3 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Fig. 2 Surface cracks in (a) steel, (b) aluminium alloy and (c) metal matrix composite

due to lower stresses. Sometimes failures occur at very low strains during hot working due to hot
shortness, which is due to the presence of liquid phase at the grain boundaries.
(e) Hydrostatic Stress: High hydrostatic pressure suppresses the void growth in engineering alloys,
thereby retarding the fracture. Formability of materials with limited ductility can be improved if
the exit conditions from the die are under hydrostatic pressure. Edge cracks in rolling and central
bursts in extrusion are likely due to the presence of tensile stresses at the exit section rolling press
or extrusion die, respectively.
(f) Grain Size: At low temperatures, it is well known that the strength of engineering alloys is
inversely proportional to grain size: smaller-grain-size materials have larger grain-boundary area
giving rise to the higher resistance to plastic deformation by dislocation flow. If coarse-grain
material is deformed, the plastic deformation leads to “orange peel” type of surface due to the
different texture and directional orientation of the microstructure in various grains.
(g) Chemical Composition: Slag inclusions in the castings, traces of foreign elements, and
nonmetallic compounds in the raw material change the chemical composition and degrade the
further formability by secondary processes such as forging, extrusion, etc. by becoming the
sources for crack initiation. Also, the change in chemical composition alters the surface finish.

Detectable surface or undetectable subsurface defects (e.g., central burst cracks in extruded
components) appear in the formed component whenever the workability or formability of
a material is exceeded. By using either fail-safe design principles or failure analysis diagrams
(FADS) for a given load-bearing situation, a decision on the acceptance of the component is made
during quality check. Further, some of the internal cracks in the load-bearing structures grow during
service, and hence their continuous monitoring using nondestructive methods such as radiography,
ultrasonic testing, magnetic particle testing, or eddy current testing is recommended. Some cases of
plastic deformation where the limit of ability to form has been exceeded until the material has lost its
integrity are shown in Figs. 2 and 3.

Stress Cracking Under Uniaxial Tension and Compression

Ductility of an engineering alloy is the ability to deform plastically without fracture and expressed as
a measure of the strain at fracture in a uniaxial tension test. However, the percentage elongation in
a tensile test is often dominated by the uniform deformation. The end of uniform elongation
coincides with the onset of plastic instability accompanied by void nucleation, their growth and
coalescence, and final fracture by formation of shear lips on the outer surface. Because of the

Page 4 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Fig. 3 Shear stress cracks formed in aluminium alloys under (a) cold and (b) hot compression

nonuniform deformation, Cockcroft and Latham (1968) suggested a criterion based on both stresses
and strains by arguing that the plastic work must be an important factor. The total amount of plastic
work done per unit volume at the fracture point can be formed from

ðe
s0 de ¼ C (1)
0

It appears that the elongation value is too complex to be regarded as a fundamental property of
a material, and it seems reasonable to assume that any criterion of fracture will be based on some
combination of stress and strain rather than on either of these quantities separately. When the
accumulated damage as given by the integral in Eq. 1 reaches a critical value, C, failure will
occur. Most of the commercial finite element programs are able to predict the damage parameter
through the calculation of stress and strain fields, thereby the energy-based damage parameters.
Figure 2 illustrates predominantly three different kinds of surface defects generated due to tensile
stress cracking in the worked steel, aluminum, and a metal matrix composite samples: barrelling
during uniaxial compression loading causes circumferential hoop tensile stresses which may lead to
the cracking. Figure 2a depicts a low-ductility steel sample with several circumferential cracks
across the periphery due to high compressive strain of 95 % in hot compression. An aluminum alloy
sample in Fig. 2b was compressed to 1.5 strain and a defect led to the cracking at its location on the
circumference; elsewhere it has good surface finish. Figure 2c shows severe transverse surface
cracking during the extrusion of a metal matrix composite due to fracture when the stress reached
a critical value.
Another predominant failure in the billet compression of engineering alloys is the formation of
shear cracks due to strain-induced material softening. Figure 3 shows such shear failures in the
compression of aluminum alloys AA 7108 produced through extrusion process. The presence of
friction between the die and workpieces produces nonhomogeneous deformation and barrelling of
the sample leading to a deformation state in which a shear cross forms. The largest deformations will
appear in the shear cross. When the cylinder has been compressed down to a certain stage, the initial
strain-hardening part of the flow curve has been exceeded for the material in the shear layer. With
continued compression, the shear layer will then experience strain-induced softening. Because of
strain softening, this layer will then easily become overstrained, and a shear fracture will form here.
It is also to be noted that barrelling during upset forging causes hoop tensile stresses that may lead to
cracking. Kuhn (1978) plotted the hoop strain (e1) at fracture as a function of the applied uniaxial
compressive strain (e2) as shown in Fig. 4 for 1045 steel. By means of loading punch lubrication with

Page 5 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

0.8

Up Bend

Tensile strain, e 1
set tests
tes
ts
0.4
Ho
mo
gen
eou
sc
om
pre
ssi
on
1045
steel

−0.8 −0.4 0
Compressive strain, e 2

Fig. 4 Forming Limits as defined in the upset forging relating the hoop strain to axial compressive strain

the sample and varying the height to diameter ratio of the test specimens, a number of points are
obtained. The data points fit to a linear line as

e1f ¼ C  ð1=2Þe2f (2)

where C is the value of e1f for plane strain. This line parallels e1 ¼ 0.5 e2 for homogeneous
compression.
In cylinder compression, the shear cross appears three-dimensional, with a complex shape. Even
though the shear fracture is initiated somewhere along the plane of the shear cross, propagation of
the fracture during further growth most commonly follows a plane path, so that a plane fracture
surface is obtained. Upon cracking, a bit of the material may be detached from the rest of the
cylinder.

Formability in Sheet Metal Forming

Sheet metal forming is an important manufacturing process in automotive, shipping, and aerospace
industries. Knowledge of the formability of sheet metal is critical to the success of sheet metal
stamping process. The ability to form sheet metals into desired shapes is often limited by the
occurrence of material instability leading to localized necking. For a stretched sheet metal, the
necking could be either diffused or localized. Diffuse necking of sheet metal involves contraction in
both the lateral and width directions. In sheet specimens, localized necking occurs after diffuse
necking. During local necking, the specimen thins without further width contraction.
The forming limit of a sheet metal is defined to be the state at which a localized thinning of sheet
initiates when it is formed into a product shape in a stamping process. Formability of sheet metals is
at present characterized by the forming limit diagram (FLD) introduced in the 1960s by Keeler and
Backofen (1964). The forming limit is conventionally described as a curve in a plot of major
principal strain vs. minor principal strain. It must cover as much as possible the strain domain which
occurs in industrial sheet metal-forming processes. The curves are established by experiments that
provide pair of the values of the limiting major and minor principal strains obtained for various
loading patterns (equi-biaxial, biaxial, plane strain, and uniaxial). Hecker (1975) developed an
experimental method to determine the forming limit curves. A widely used technique is to print or
etch a grid of small circles of diameters on the sheet before deformation. The principal strains can be

Page 6 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

found by measuring the major and minor diameters after straining. These values at the neck or
fracture give the failure condition, while the strains away from the failure indicate safe condition.
As the experimental measurement of these strains is time consuming and an expensive process, it
would be useful if the forming limit strains can be predicted using theoretical models.
Researchers employed two main strategies to predict forming limits: firstly, a group of models that
represent strain instabilities as a bifurcated state in an initial homogeneous material and, secondly,
models where the strain instability appears in the deformation process due to an imperfection already
present in the material.

Forming Limit Diagram

Hill (1952) developed the theory for localized necking in sheet metals assuming that localization
band develops along the zero extension direction in a sheet metal. This analysis predicted that
localized necking would not occur in a sheet subjected to positive biaxial stretching, for which no
zero extension direction exists. Therefore, Hills criterion is only applicable to left-hand region of
FLD.
Swift (1952) developed a diffuse necking theory for biaxially stretched sheets introducing the
concept of the maximum in-plane force condition in the necking and localization prediction.
According to him, neck initiates when the total differentials of force become zero or negative at
the same instant of deformation. However, the Swift diffusive necking criterion is often too
conservative and it underestimates the experimentally observed forming limit strains. In order to
improve the above model, Hora et al. (1996) considered the experimentally observed fact that the
onset of necking depends significantly on the strain ratio and proposed a model called Modified
Maximum Force Criterion (MMFC). Aretz (2004) addressed an important singularity in Hora’s
MMFC model. It was observed that MMFC fails if the yield locus exhibits straight line segments
often observed in commercial alloys like Al which are properly described by non-quadratic yield
functions. Brunet and Morestin (2001) coupled Hora’s model with Gurson’s (1977) porous plasticity
model and obtained good predictions for forming limits.
Marciniak and Kuczynski (1967) considered sheet metals subjected to in-plane biaxial loading
and proposed a model taking into account that sheet metals are nonhomogeneous from both
geometric and structural points of view. The RHS of the FLD for a material was determined by
introducing a preexisting material imperfection that lies perpendicular to the major stress axis to
explain the development of localized necking during biaxial loading. The imperfection assumed in
M-K model need not be perpendicular to the major axis; here the above model was extended to the
LHS region of FLDs by Hutchinson and Neale (1978) by considering imperfection at an angle to the
major stress axis. The angle selected is the one that minimizes the limit strain.
Storen and Rice (1975) proposed an alternative concept for localized necking, caused by the vertex
developed on the subsequent yield surface. Recognizing that the shape of the yield surface could cause
localization near the vertex, this model predicted a bifurcation corresponding to localized necking
under biaxial tension. This method can predict the localized necking over the entire range of forming
limit curve (FLC). However, it underestimates the limit for localized necking at the LHS of the
FLC. Zhu et al. (2001) considered the moment equilibrium in addition to the force equilibrium adopted
by Storen and Rice (1975) for the prediction of FLC over the entire region (LHS& RHS). They also
found that the discontinuity of shear stress inside and outside of the localized band is zero. The
modified method achieves a good prediction on the LHS of FLCs. Since this method depends on
deformation theory of plasticity, it is valid under the proportional loading condition.
Friedman and Pan (2000) investigated the influence of different yield functions on FLD pre-
dictions using the M-K model. Their results indicate the significance of the yield function used in the

Page 7 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

FLD analysis. Further, they introduced a parameter (angle) to characterize the influence of the yield
locus’ shape on FLD. Yao and Cao (2002) predicted FLCs using M-K model taking into account the
effects of pre-strains and kinematic hardening. The exponent of the yield function used in this work
was assumed to decrease with increasing pre-strain.
One major drawback of FLC models presented above till now is its dependence on strain path, as
the straining path of the FLC in sheet metal stamping is not known with any certainty. However, both
experimental and numerical results have indicated that FLDs are very sensitive to strain path
changes (Ghosh and Laukonis 1976; Graf and Hosford 1993). There is no single curve in strain
space that represents the forming limit. Therefore, finding a single path-independent curve to
characterize forming limits is of considerable interest. Knowing the drawback of the conventional
FLDs, Arrieux et al. (1982) represented formability based on the state of stress rather than the state of
strain. They constructed a Forming Limit Stress Diagram (FLSD) by plotting the calculated
principal stresses at necking.
Stoughton (2000) extended the original idea of Arrieux et al. (1982) and showed that the forming
limit for both proportional and nonproportional loading can be explained from a single criterion
which is based on the state of stress rather than the state of strain by mapping the strain values from
different strain paths into a stress space assuming plane stress condition. But it is quite difficult to
measure the state of stress experimentally as compared to the state of strain. Using FEM it is possible
to estimate the state of stress with good accuracy, but a criterion has to be used to construct the
Forming Limit Stress Curve (FLSC) in stress space. To validate this, experimental FLSC is possible
only with mapping of experimental FLC in strain space to stress space (Fig. 5).
Stoughton (2001) studied the influence of material model on the stress-based forming limit
criterion. Stoughton and Zhu (2004) reviewed the theoretical strain-based models of Swift, Hill,
and Storen and Rice and their relevance to the stress-based FLD using plane stress conditions. Smith
et al. (2003) studied the influence of transverse normal stress on strain space forming limit by
assuming that the stress space forming limit is relatively insensitive to transverse normal stress. This
model predicts an increase in formability in strain space that varies nonlinearly with an increasing
magnitude of compressive transverse normal stress ratio. Smith and Matin (2004) extended their
previous model by assuming that the strain ratio is defined to be constant even with the influence of
transverse normal stress, instead assuming that the stress space forming limit is relatively insensitive
to transverse normal stress. This proposed model is independent of the type of yield function and it is
fundamentally different than their original model. Further, the proposed model is much simpler than
the original model. Stoughton and Yoon (2004) extended the original idea of Arrieux (1995) and
proposed the concept of anisotropic forming limit curve. They proposed that the forming limit is no
longer defined by a curve but requires the definition of a surface in strain or stress space, and
therefore, it is no longer appropriate to view these limits with a convenience of two-dimensional
diagrams. A solution to the challenge of assessing formability for a planar anisotropic material is
proposed by rescaling the stresses by a factor; here the scaled stresses have the same relationship to
a single forming limit curve in a 2D plot in stress space, as the actual stresses have to the true
anisotropic forming limit in 3D space.
Simha et al. (2007) proposed an Extended Stress-Based Limit Curve (XSFLC). The stress-based
limit curve is then transformed into equivalent stress and mean stress space to obtain
XSFLC. However, both FLD and stress-based forming limit diagram (SFLD) are measured and
derived, respectively, for plane stress loading conditions. In some metal-forming processes, such as
hydroforming and stretch flange forming, the onset of necking occurs under loading conditions that
are not plane stress (Fig. 6).

Page 8 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

a 0.4

0.3

c1
0.2

Graf- Hosford 0%
0.1
Graf- Hosford 4%
Graf- Hosford 7%
Graf- Hosford 12%
Graf- Hosford 17%
0
−0.3 −0.2 −0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
c2
b 1

0.8
Major True Stress

0.6

0.4

0.2
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Minor True Stress

Fig. 5 (a) Forming limit curve in strain space after pre-strain (Graf and Hosford 1993). (b) Transformed forming limit
curve in stress space (Stoughton 2000)
Major prin_ strain

Major prin_ stress

Equivalent stress

Uni-axial stress
Plane strain
Bi-axial stress

Minor prin_ strain Minor prin_ stress Mean stress (Tension)

εFLC σFLC XSFLC

Fig. 6 Transformation of FLC to extended SFLC (Simha et al. 2007)

Hagbart et al. (Alsos et al. 2008) proposed a new analytical criterion for predicting FLD and
SFLD known as BWH criterion by combining Hills localized necking theory for LHS of FLD and
Bressan Williams (1983) shear instability criterion for RHS of FLD.

Page 9 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Bai and Wierzbicki (2008) proposed a new concept of “cumulative forming severity” for
predicting neck formation in sheets under nonproportional loading. Fahrettin and Lee 2004;
(Ozturk and Lee 2004) investigated the forming limits of sheet metal using ductile fracture criteria
by performing the finite element simulation of an out-of-plane formability test. The predictions for
LHS of the FLD are good in agreement with experimental results. However, the predictions were not
successful for RHS of FLD. They have concluded that ductile fracture criteria should not be used
directly to calculate forming limits.
Due to advancements in Continuum Damage Mechanics (CDM), Chow and his co-workers
(Chow and Yu 1997; Chow et al. 2002; 2003; Chow and Jie 2004) developed a unified damage
approach for predicting forming limit diagrams. This theory is extended to predict FLD on damage
coupled kinematic–isotropic hardening model under nonproportional loading. Later, the damage
theory is coupled with the modified vertex theory to deduce a generalized localized necking
criterion. Based on this necking criterion, the forming limit strains of sheet metals with material
damage consideration are computed.

Die and Mold Materials

In this section, an overview of the die and mold materials used in the metalworking industry is
presented. Initially, comprehensive lists of ferrous and nonferrous materials are provided. Subse-
quently, the application of these materials based on the forming processes is covered, and the
guidelines for the die and mold material selection for different metal-forming applications are
provided.

Classification and Properties of Tool and Die Steels

Steel used for die and mold applications covers a wide range of ferrous alloys. The most commonly
used forms are wrought tool steels. Other steels used for metalworking applications include powder
metallurgy (P/M) steels, medium-carbon alloy steels, and maraging steels (Davis 1995; 1990).

Wrought Tool Steel

For wrought tool steels, a list of the principal types of tool steels with their properties, processing,
and service characteristics is provided in Table 1.
High-speed steels are tool materials developed largely for high-speed cutting tool applications.
There are two classifications of high-speed steels: molybdenum high-speed steels, also called group
M (see Table 1), and tungsten high-speed steels, called group T. Groups M and T are equivalent in
performance. The main advantage of group M is the lower initial cost. This is due to the lower atomic
weight of molybdenum, which is about half that of Tungsten. Based on the weight percentage, only
about half as much molybdenum as tungsten is required to provide the same atom ratio. Composi-
tionally, group M contains molybdenum, tungsten, chromium, vanadium, cobalt, and carbon as
principal alloying elements, while group T contains tungsten, chromium, vanadium, cobalt, and
carbon.
Hot-work steels are the tool materials developed to withstand combinations of heat, pressure, and
abrasion associated with punching, shearing, or forming metals at high temperatures. They are in
group H and have medium carbon contents (0.35–0.45 wt%) and chromium, tungsten, molybdenum,
and vanadium contents of 6–25 wt%. They can be divided into three subgroups: chromium hot-work
steels (type H10 to H19), tungsten hot-work steels (type H21 to H26), and molybdenum hot-work
steels (types H42 and H43). The chromium hot-work steels are the most commonly used ones for

Page 10 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 1 General properties, processing, and service characteristics of tool steels (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
AISI Working Amount of Resistance to
designation Wear resistancea Toughnessa hardness (HRC) Machinabilitya distortiona crackinga
Molybdenum high-speed steels
M1 7 3 63–65 5 3 5
M2 7 3 63–65 5 3 5
M3 8 3 63–66 5 3 5
M4 8 3 63–66 3 3 5
M7 8 3 63–66 5 3 5
M10 7 3 63–66 5 3 5
M30 7 2 63–65 5 3 5
M33 8 1 63–65 5 3 5
M34 8 1 63–65 5 3 5
M35 7 2 63–65 5 3 5
M36 7 1 63–65 5 3 5
M41 8 1 66–70 5 3 5
M42 8 1 66–70 5 3 5
M43 8 1 66–70 5 3 5
M44 8 1 66–70 5 3 5
M46 8 1 66–70 5 3 5
M47 8 1 66–70 5 3 5
M48 8 1 66–70 1 3 5
M62 8 1 66–70 5 3 5
Tungsten high-speed steel
T1 7 3 63–65 5 3 9
T2 8 3 63–66 5 3 9
T4 7 2 63–65 5 3 5
T5 7 1 63–65 5 3 5
T6 8 1 63–65 3 3 5
T8 8 2 63–65 5 3 5
T15 9 1 64–68 3 3 5
Intermediate high-speed steel
M50 6 3 61–63 5 3 5
M52 6 3 62–64 5 3 5
Chromium hot-work steel
H10 3 9 39–56 7 1 10
H11 3 9 38–55 7 1 10
H12 3 9 38–55 7 1 10
H13 3 9 40–53 7 1 10
H14 4 6 40–54 5 1 10
H19 5 6 40–55 5 3 9
Tungsten hot-work steel
H21 4 6 40–55 5 3 9
H22 5 5 36–54 5 3 9
H23 5 5 38–48 5 5 9
H24 5 5 40–55 5 3 9
H25 4 6 35–45 5 3 9
(continued)

Page 11 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 1 (continued)
AISI Working Amount of Resistance to
designation Wear resistancea Toughnessa hardness (HRC) Machinabilitya distortiona crackinga
H26 6 4 50–58 5 3 9
Molybdenum hot-work steel
H42 6 4 45–62 5 5 5
Air-hardening, medium-alloy, cold-work steel
A2 6 4 57–62 5 5 10
A3 7 3 58–63 5 5 10
A4 5 4 54–62 3 7 10
A6 4 4 54–60 3 7 10
A7 9 5 58–66 1 5 10
A8 4 1 48–57 5 5 10
A9 4 8 40–56 5 5 10
A10 3 3 55–62 7 7 10
D2 8 2 58–64 1 5 10
D3 8 1 58–64 1 5 9
D4 8 1 58–64 1 5 10
D5 8 2 58–63 1 5 10
D7 9 1 58–66 1 5 10
Oil-hardening cold-work steels
O1 4 3 57–62 9 1 9
O2 4 3 57–62 9 1 9
O6 3 3 58–63 10 1 9
O7 5 3 58–64 9 5 9
Shock-resisting steels
S1 4 8 50–58 5 5 9
S2 2 8 50–60 7 7 3
S5 2 8 50–60 7 5 9
S6 2 8 50–56 5 5 9
S7 3 8 58–64 5 1 9
Low-alloy special-purpose steels
L2 1 7 45–62 7 3 7
L6 3 6 45–62 5 1 9
Low-carbon mold steels
P2 1 9 58–64 7 1 9
P3 1 9 58–64 5 1 9
P4 1 9 58–64 3 1 9
P5 1 9 58–64 5 3 9
P6 1 9 58–61 5 3 9
P20 1 8 30–50 7 1 9
P21 1 8 36–39 5 1 10
Water-hardening steels
W1 2–4 3–7 58–65 10 7 5
W2 2–4 3–7 58–65 10 7 5
W5 2–4 3–7 58–65 10 7 5
a
Rating range from 1 (low) to 9 (high)

Page 12 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

their good resistance to heat softening. The tungsten hot-work steels are better in heat resistance but
worse in toughness. Molybdenum hot-work steels are similar to that of tungsten hot-work steels, but
only with lower initial cost.
Cold-work steels are restricted in forming applications that do not involve prolonged or repeated
heating above 205–260  C. There are three categories of cold-work steels: air-hardening steels
(group A); high-carbon, high-chromium steels (group D); and oil-hardening steel (group O).
Group A contains manganese, chromium, and molybdenum alloying elements to enable the steels
to achieve full hardness in sections up to about 100 mm in diameter upon air cooling from the
austenitizing temperature. Typical applications for these steels include shear knifes and forming and
coining dies. The inherent dimensional stability of these steels makes them suitable for gages and
precision measuring tools. Group D steels have from 1.5 to 2.35 wt% C and 12 wt% Cr and
commonly 1 wt% Mo in their compositions. Typical applications for group D includes long-run
dies for blanking, forming, thread rolling, and deep drawing. Group O steels have high carbon
contents, plus sufficient other alloying elements in which full hardness can be obtained in small-to-
moderate sections upon oil quenching from the austenitizing temperature. The most important
service-related property of group O steels is high resistance to wear at normal temperatures,
a result of high carbon content. On the other hand, group O steels have low resistance to softening
at elevated temperatures. Group O steels are extensively used in dies and punches for blanking,
trimming, drawing, flanging, and forming.
In shock-resisting steels (Group S), the principal alloying elements are manganese, silicon,
chromium, tungsten, and molybdenum in various combinations. The carbon content is about
0.5 wt% for all group S steels, which provides a combination of high strength, high toughness,
and low-to-medium wear resistance. Group S steels are used primarily for chisels, rivet sets,
punches, driver bits, and other applications requiring high toughness and resistance to shock
loading.
The low-alloy special-purpose steels (group L) contain small amounts of chromium, vanadium,
nickel, and molybdenum. They are generally used for machine parts, such as arbors, cams, chucks,
and collets, and their special applications require a combination of good strength, good toughness,
and low price.
Mold steels, also called group P steels, contain chromium and nickel as principal alloying
elements. Group P steels are used almost exclusively in low-temperature die-casting dies and in
molds for the injection or compression molding of plastics.
Water-hardening steels, also called group W steels, contain carbon as the principal alloying
element. Small amounts of chromium are added to most of group W steels to increase their
hardenability and wear resistance. Group W steels are very shallow hardening and usually have
a hard case over a tough and resilient core. They are suitable for cold heading, striking, coining, and
embossing tools.

P/M Tool Steels

Recently, powder metallurgy (P/M) becomes a major process for manufacturing high-performance
tool steels products. The P/M process was used primarily for the production of advanced high-speed
tool steels and now also being used in the manufacture of improved cold-work and hot-work tool
steels. Table 2 provides a list of the principal types of P/M tool steels and their compositions.
A number of improved, high-vanadium P/M tool steels designed for high-wear and cold-work
applications are commercially available, which are listed in Table 2. The more uniform microstruc-
ture the P/M cold-work steels have, the better toughness they possess. This is crucial in cold-work
tooling as it allows higher hardness to be achieved with associated improvements in yield strength

Page 13 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 2 List of the principal types of P/M tool steels and their compositions (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Constituent elements, wt%
Trade name C Cr W Mo V Co S Others Hardness HRC
Cold-work tool steels
CPM 9V 1.78 5.25 1.3 9 0.03 53–55
CPM 10V 2.45 5.25 1.3 9.75 0.07 60–62
CPM 15V 3.4 5 1.3 14.5 62–64
CPM 440V 2.15 17.5 0.5 5.75 57–59
Vanadis 4 1.5 8 1.5 4 59–63
Vanadis 10 2.9 8 1.5 9.8 1.0 Sn 0.5 Mn 60–62
Hot-work tool steels
CPM H13 0.4 5 1.3 1.05 42–48
CPM H19 0.4 4.25 4.25 0.4 2.1 4.25 44–52
CPM H19V 0.8 4.25 4.25 0.4 4 4.25 44–56

Table 3 List of the principal types of medium-carbon low-alloy steels and their compositions (Cockroft and
Latham 1968)
Compositions in wt%
Designation or trade name C Mn Si Cr Ni Mo V
4130 0.28–0.33 0.4–0.6 0.2–0.35 0.8–1.1 0.15–0.25
4140 0.38–0.43 0.75–1.0 0.2–0.35 0.8–1.1 0.15–0.25
4340 0.38–0.43 0.6–0.8 0.2–0.35 0.7–0.9 1.65–2.0 0.2–0.3
6150 0.48–0.53 0.7–0.9 0.2–0.35 0.8–1.1 0.15–0.25

and wear resistance. Furthermore, substantial improvements in wear resistance can be realized by
using higher vanadium contents in P/M cold-work tool steels than in conventional cold-work tool
steels.
The no-segregation nature of P/M tool steels makes them very attractive for hot-work tool and die
applications, because a common cause of premature failure of large die-casting dies is thermal
fatigue attributed to segregation. Powder metallurgy processing is an alternative method for
producing segregation-free hot-work tool steels of both standard and improved compositions, and
it offers near-net shape capability. The compositions of the three P/M hot-work tool steels now
commercially available are given in Table 2.

Medium-Carbon Low-Alloy Steel

The medium-carbon low-alloy steels commonly used for metalworking applications include AISI
4130, the higher-strength 4140, and the deeper hardening, higher-strength 4340 and 6150. These
steels are not normally used as dies or other such demanding applications because of their low
hardness values, but they are frequently used for auxiliary tooling, such as containers for
hot-extrusion dies or holder blocks for molds for processing of plastics. Chemical compositions
for these steels are given in Table 3.
AISI 4130 is a water-hardening alloy steel of low-to-intermediate hardenability. It retains good
tensile, fatigue, and impact properties up to about 370  C. AISI 4140 is similar in composition to
4130 except for a higher carbon content. It is used in applications requiring a combination of

Page 14 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 4 Nominal compositions of commercial maraging steels (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Composition in wt%, all grades contain no more than 0.03 % C
Grade Ni Mo Co Ti Al Nb
Standard grades
18Ni (200) 18 3.3 8.5 0.2 0.1
18Ni (250) 18 5 8.5 0.4 0.1
18Ni (300) 18 5 9 0.7 0.1
18Ni (350) 18 4.2 12.5 1.6 0.1
18Ni (Cast) 17 4.6 10 0.3 0.1
12-5-3(180) 12 3 0.2 0.3
Cobalt-free and low-cobalt-bearing grades
Cobalt-free 18Ni (200) 18.5 3 0.7 0.1
Cobalt-free 18Ni (250) 18.5 3 1.4 0.1
Low-cobalt 18Ni (250) 18.5 2.6 2 1.2 0.1 0.1
Cobalt-free 18Ni (300) 18.5 4 1.85 0.1

moderate hardenability and good strength and toughness, but in which service conditions are only
moderately severe. AISI 4340 is considered the standard to which other ultra-high-strength steels are
compared. It combines deep hardenability with high ductility, toughness, and strength. It also has
high fatigue and creep resistance. It is often used where severe service conditions exist and where
high strength in heavy sections is required. It also exhibits good retention of strength. AISI 6150 is
a tough, shock-resisting, shallow-hardening chromium-vanadium steel with high fatigue and impact
resistance in the heat-treated condition.

Maraging Steels
Maraging steels comprise a special class of high-strength steels. These steels differ from conven-
tional steels in that instead of being hardened by a metallurgical reaction involving carbon, they are
strengthened by the precipitation of intermetallic compounds at temperatures of about
480  C. Commercial maraging steels are designed to provide specific level of yield strength from
1,030 to 2,420 MPa. These steels typically have very high nickel, cobalt, and molybdenum contents
and very low carbon contents. Such characters make the maraging steels relatively soft after
annealing. During age hardening, there are only very slight dimensional changes. Therefore, fairly
intricate shapes can be machined in the soft condition and then hardened with a minimum of
distortion and good weldability and fracture toughness. This makes maraging steels unique in
many demanding applications, including aircraft and aerospace components and tooling compo-
nents such as die-casting dies, plastic molds of intricate design, and casings for cold-extrusion tools.
Table 4 lists the chemical compositions of the more common grades of maraging steels.

Nonferrous Tool and Die Materials

This section describes the nonferrous materials used for metalworking and plastic-forming appli-
cations, including cemented carbides (which are the most commonly used nonferrous tool and die
material), steel-bonded carbides, ceramics, graphite, diamond, plastics, and nonferrous alloys.

Cemented Carbides
Cemented carbides are employed in metal-forming applications because of their combination of
high compressive strength, good abrasion resistance, high elastic modulus, good impact and shock

Page 15 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 5 Nominal composition and properties of representative cemented carbides and their applications (Cockroft and
Latham 1968)
Binder content in wt% Grain size Hardness, HRA Typical application
20–30 Medium 85 Heavy blanking punches and dies, cold heading dies
11–25 Medium to 84 Heading dies (severe impact), hot forming dies, swaging
coarse dies
11–15 Medium 88 Back extrusion punches, hot forming punches
10–12 Fine to 89 Back extrusion punches, blanking punches and dies for
medium high shear strength steel
6 Fine 92 Powder compacting dies, Sendzimir rolls, strip flattening
rolls, wire flattening rolls
10–12 Fine to 90 Extrusion dies (low impact), light blanking dies
medium
12–16 Medium 88 Extrusion dies (medium impact), blanking dies, slitters
10 Co with TiC and TaC Medium 91 Deep drawing dies (non-galling), tube sizing mandrels

resistance, and ability to take and retain excellent surface finish. Typical applications in this category
include drawing dies, hot and cold rolling of strips and bards, cold heading dies, forward and back
extrusion punches, swaging hammers and mandrels, and can-body punches and dies. Table 5 lists
nominal composition and properties of representative WC grades and their applications.

Steel-Bonded Carbides
Steel-bonded carbides are powder metallurgy materials that are intermediate in wear resistance
between tool steels and cemented carbides based on WC-Co. They consist of 25–45 vol.% TiC
homogeneously dispersed in a steel matrix. They have the following advantages over the conven-
tional tool steels: (1) machinable in the annealed condition with conventional cutting tools,
(2) hardenable with conventional equipment without decarburization and without experiencing an
undue change in size, and (3) wear well after hardening on tough applications, giving performance
equivalent or superior to that of conventional cemented WC. Common grades of steel-bonded
carbides include C, CM, CM-25, CHW-45, CHW-25, SK, CS-40, PK, and MS-5A.

Ceramics
Similar to cemented carbides, ceramics are used in metalworking applications due to their proper-
ties: combination of temperature resistance, corrosion resistance, hardness, chemical inertness, and
wear resistance. Ceramics offer unique advantages for metalworking applications as they provide
very high stiffness-to-weight ratios over a broad temperature range. The high hardness of structural
ceramics can be used in applications where mechanical abrasion is expected. The ability to maintain
mechanical strength and dimensional tolerances at high temperatures makes them also suitable for
high-temperature use (i.e., for isothermal forging dies). Typical applications for ceramics include
bearings and bushings, close-tolerance fittings, extrusion and forming dies, spindles, metalworking
rolls, can-making tools, wire-drawing machine components, and coordinate-measuring machine
structures. Commonly used monolithic ceramic materials and their properties are given in Table 6.

Page 16 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 6 Representative properties of ceramics used for metalworking applications (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Bulk density, Flexure strength Fracture toughness Elastic modulus Hardness
pffiffiffiffi
Material g/cm3 (MPa) (MPa m) (GPa) (GPa)
90 % Al2O3 3.6 338 3–4 276 10
94 % Al2O3 3.7 352 3–4 296 12
96 % Al2O3 3.72 358 3–4 303 11
99.5 % Al2O3 3.89 379 3–4 372 14
99.9 % Al2O3 3.96 552 3–4 386 15
Sintered SiC 3.1 550 4 400 29
Reaction- 3.1 462 3–4 393 25
bonded SiC
Si3N4 3.31 906 6 311 15
ZTA 4.1–4.3 600–700 5–8 330–360 15–16
Mg-PSZ 5.7–5.8 600–700 11–14 210 12
Y-TZP 6.1 900–1200 8–9 210 12
Al2O3 – SiCw 3.7–3.9 600–700 5–8 330–380 15–16
Si3N4 – SiCw 3.2–3.3 800–1000 6–8 330–380 15–16

Graphite, Diamond, and Plastics

Graphite is the most commonly used material for constructing the die assembly in hot presses for
applying both thermal and mechanical energy to affect the densification of the metal and ceramic
powders. Graphite is easily machined, is relatively inexpensive, has moderate room-temperature
strength properties that increase with temperature, and has good creep resistance up to
2,500  C. Another important metalworking application for graphite is its use as a mold material
during gravity casting.
Both natural and synthetic (polycrystalline and single-crystal) diamonds are widely used in the
wire industry, especially for cold drawing of small-diameter round wire. Both natural and synthetic
diamonds can be used to produce nonferrous, ferrous, and high-temperature alloy wires.
Plastics are used extensively for dies and molds, primarily for forming aluminum alloys,
low-carbon steels, and stainless steels. The most widely used materials are polyesters, epoxies,
and polyurethanes. Plastics are generally used for small-to-moderate production runs of simple or
moderately shaped parts.

Nonferrous Alloys
Beryllium-copper alloys that nominally contain 0.4–2.0 wt% of Be and small amount (<2.0 wt%) of
nickel and/or cobalt are widely used as mold material for injection molding of plastics. They have
also been used for plunger tips during die casting of aluminum alloys.
Aluminum bronzes are used primarily for dies and mold to form materials when scratching,
scoring, or galling cannot be tolerated. These materials are available as sand castings, centrifugal
castings, and extruded shapes.
Aluminum-based alloy of high-strength wrought 7000 series containing nominally 6.0 wt% Zn,
2.4 wt% Mg, and 1.6 wt% Cu is also used as molds for forming plastics.
Zinc-based alloys are used extensively for punches, dies, and molds to form, draw, blank, and trim
steel and aluminum alloy, plastics, and other materials. Applications are in the automotive and
aircraft industries for producing prototypes and limited quantities of large parts. Zinc alloy provides

Page 17 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 7 Typical tool steels for backward extrusion of cups (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Total quantity of parts to be extruded
Material to be extruded 5,000 pcs 50,000 pcs
Punch materials
Aluminum alloys A2 A2, D2, M4
Carbon steels <0.4 wt% C A2 D2, M2, M4
Carburizing grades of alloy steel A2 M2, M4
Die material
Aluminum alloys W1 W1
Carbon steels <0.4 wt% C O1, A2 A2
Carburizing grades of alloy steel O1, A2 A2
KO material
Aluminum alloys A2 D2
Carbon steels <0.4 wt% C A2 A2, D2

Table 8 Typical tool steels for forward extrusion of cups (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Total quantity of parts to be extruded
Material to be extruded 5,000 pcs 50,000 pcs
Punch materials
Aluminum alloys A2 D2, M4
Carbon steels 1010 A2 M2, M4
Carbon steels 1020 and 1040 A2 M2
Die material
Aluminum alloys W1 A2, D2
Carbon steels <0.4 wt% C A2 A2

a low-cost, fast method of making punches, dies, and molds having a dense, smooth working
surface.
High-temperature alloys used for hot-die and isothermal forging applications include wrought and
cast nickel-based superalloys and molybdenum-based alloys such as TZM.

Selection of Material for Bulk Metal-Forming Processes

In the following two subsections, we will focus on the selection of materials for different metal-
working processes from the material lists provided in the previous two sections. Some of the most
common examples are provided here as rough guidelines in sight of that such selection is highly
dependent on the process details and workpiece geometry (Davis 1995; Semiantin 1988).

Selection of Material for Extrusion

For cold extrusion, typical tool steels for backward extrusion and forward extrusion of cups are listed
in Tables 7 and 8.
For hot extrusion, in which the process is carried out at elevated temperatures, the selection of tool
steels is different from that of the cold extrusion. Typical tool materials for hot-extrusion forming are
listed in Table 9.

Page 18 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 9 Typical materials and hardness for tools used in hot extrusion (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Material to be hot extruded
Tooling application Aluminum and magnesium Copper and brass Steel
Dies for shapes and H11, H12, H13 H11, H12, H13, H14, H19, H13, cast H21 insert
tubing H21
Dummy blocks, H11, H12, H13 H11, H12, H13, H14, H19, H11, H12, H13, H14, H19,
bolsters, and die rings Inconel 718 H21, Inconel 718
Mandrels H11, H13 H11, H13 H11, H13
Mandrel tips and inserts T1, M2 Inconel 718 H11, H12, H13, H14, H19,
H21
Liners H11, H13 A-286, V-57 H11, H12, H13
Rams H11, H13 H11, H12, H13 H11, H12, H13
Containers 4140, 4150, 4340 4140, 4150, 4340 H13

Table 10 Recommended thread-rolling die materials (Cockroft and Latham 1968)

Recommended hardness, HRC
Die material Flat die Circular die
For threading aluminum, copper or soft steel blanks
A2 57–60 56–58
D2 60–62 58–60
M2 58–60 58–60
For threading ferritic steel (hardness >95 HRB) or austenitic stainless steel blanks
A2 57–59 56–58
D2 59–61 58–60
M2 59–61 58–60

Selection of Material for Rolling

In shear forming and flow forming, the materials selected for mandrels, based on quantity of
production, are gray iron (10–100 pcs), alloy cast iron (100–250 pcs), 4150/52100 steel (250–750
pcs), and tool steels, such as O6, A2, D2, and D4 (750 pcs above). For the roller, the five most widely
used materials in ascending order of wearability and cost are W2, O6, D2, D4, and cemented carbide.
Material selection for rolling mill rollers is highly dependent on the application. The four primary
classes of material for metalworking rollers are cast irons, cast steels, forged steels, and cemented
carbides.
For thread rolling, the materials for the dies are quite limited. Table 10 lists recommended thread-
rolling die materials and hardness in service.

Selection of Material for Forging (Cold/Hot/Isothermal)

The recommended materials for cold forging dies include tungsten carbide and M2 and M4 high-
speed tool steels. Die inserts are usually fabricated from D2, M2, and M4. For cold heading, shallow-
hardening tool steels such as W1 or W2 are extensively applied for punches, open dies, and the solid
dies made without inserts. Inserts are commonly made from higher-alloy tool steels, such as D2 or
M2, or from tungsten carbide having a relatively high percentage of cobalt. Shock-resistant tool steel

Page 19 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 11 Nominal compositions of the proprietary low-alloy tool steels (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Composition in wt%
Steel designation C Mn Si Cr Ni Mo V
6G 0.55 0.8 0.25 1 0.45 0.1
6F2 0.55 0.75 0.25 1 1 0.3 0.1
6F3 0.55 0.6 0.85 1 1.8 0.75 0.1
6F4 0.2 0.7 0.25 3 3.35
6F5 0.55 1 1 0.5 2.7 0.5 0.1
6F6 0.5 1.5 1.5 0.2
6F7 0.4 0.35 1.5 4.25 0.75
6H1 0.55 4 0.45 0.85
6H2 0.55 0.4 1.1 5 1.5 1.5 1

Table 12 Die steel rating (Cockroft and Latham 1968)

Increasing resistance Resistance to

Wear Thermal softening Catastrophic fracture (toughness)

H26 H26 6 F2, 6 F3, 6 F5, 6 F7
H23 H24
H24, A2 H23 H12
H19, H14 H19 H11
H21 H21 H10, H13, 6 F4
H10, H12, H13 H14 A9, 6H2, 6G
A9, 6H2, A8 H10 H14
H11, 6 F4 6 F4 6H1, A8, H19, A2
6H1, 6 F5, 6H7, 6 F3 H11, H12, H13, A8 H21, H23, A6
6 F2, 6G A9 H24
6 F3, 6 F5, 6 F7, 6H1, 6 F2, 6G H26

such as S1 is also used for the cold heading of tools. For cold ironing and nosing, D3, M3 class 2, and
W2 tool steels are commonly used for die and punch.
There are several variables to be considered when selecting materials for hot-forging process:
load, temperature, number of parts, and workpiece tolerance, just to name a few. Their influence on
the material selection is still empirical and qualitative. For this work, we only provide some of the
proprietary low-alloy tool steels used in hot forging (Table 11) together with die steel properties
ratings (Table 12) and subsequently by matching the die steels with the process details to facilitate
hot-forging die material selection (Table 13).
There is another class of forging worth mentioning before we leave this section: isothermal and
hot-die forging. These are special categories of forging processes in which the die temperature are
significantly higher than those used in conventional hot-forging process. The die materials for

Page 20 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 13 Die steels for forging various alloys (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Material to be forged Hammer forging, die steel/hardness, HRC Press forging die steel/hardness, HRC
Carbon steel 6G, 6 F2/37–46 (die blocks), 6 F3, 6 F3, H12/40–46 (die blocks),
H12/40–48 (inserts) H12/42–46 (inserts)
Alloy and stainless steel 6 F3, 6 F2/37–46, H11, H12, H13/40–47 H11, H12, H13/47–55 (die blocks and
(die blocks), H11, H12, H13, H26/40–47 inserts)
(inserts)
Aluminum alloys 6G, 6 F2/32–40 (die blocks), H11, 6G, 6 F2, 6 F3/37–44, H12/47–50 (die
H12/44–48 (inserts) blocks), H12/46–48 (inserts)
Titanium alloys 6G, 6 F2/37–40 (die blocks), H11, 6G, 6 F2/37–40 (die blocks), H11,
H12/44–52 (inserts) H12/47–55 (inserts)
Heat-resistant alloys, nickel- H11, H12, H13/47–50 (die blocks and H11, H13, H26/50–56, Inconel 713C,
based alloys inserts) Rene 41 (die blocks and inserts)

Table 14 Recommended materials for wire-drawing dies (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Round wire size Recommended die material Recommended die material for
Metal to be drawn (mm) for round wire special shapes
Carbon and alloy steels <0.15 Diamond CPV 10 V, M2, cemented tungsten
>0.15 Cemented tungsten carbide carbide
Stainless steels, titanium, <0.81 Diamond CPV 10 V, M2, cemented tungsten
tungsten, molybdenum, and >0.81 Cemented tungsten carbide carbide
nickel alloys
Copper <1.6 Diamond CPV 10 V, D2, cemented tungsten
>1.6 Cemented tungsten carbide carbide
Copper alloys and aluminum <0.81 Diamond CPV 10 V, D2, cemented tungsten
alloys >0.81 Cemented tungsten carbide carbide
Magnesium alloys <0.57 Diamond
>0.57 Cemented tungsten carbide

isothermal and hot-die forging include (1) superalloys, such as Waspaloy, Udimet 700, Astroloy,
Inconel 718, and Unitemp AF2-1DA, and (2) molybdenum alloys, such as TZM, TZC, and MHC.

Selection of Material for Drawing

In here by drawing process we refer to the drawing of wire, rod, and tubing. In these processes, the
cross-sectional area and/or the shape of a wire, rod, or tube is reduced by pulling it through a die. The
recommended materials for wire drawing dies are in Table 14 and the recommended tool materials
for drawing bars, tubing, and complex shapes are in Table 15.

Selection of Material for Coining and Cold Heading

Coining is a cold closed-die forging process for embossing the contours of a die onto a prepared
metal blank. In coining, the surface of the workpiece copies the surface detail in the dies with
dimensional accuracy that is seldom obtained by any other process. That also posts great restriction
on the selection for the die materials. Tables 16 and 17 list the typical materials for die used to coin
small emblems and coin preformed cup to final size.

Page 21 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 15 Recommended materials for drawing bars, tubing and complex shapes (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Common commercial sizes Maximum
Tube commercial size: dieComplex shapes:
Metal to be drawn Bar and tube dies mandrels and mandrels die and mandrels
Carbon and alloy steels, stainless steels, Tungsten carbide W1 or D2 or CPM 10 V CPM 10 V or
titanium, tungsten, molybdenum, and nickel diamond or carbide carbide
alloys carbide D2 or D2, M2, or CPM 10 V CPM 10 V or
carbide carbide
Copper, aluminum, and magnesium alloys W1 or carbide W1 or D2 or CPM 10 V O1, CPM 10 V,
carbide or carbide

Table 16 Typical materials for dies used to coin small emblems (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Tool material for striking a total quantity of
Type of tool 1000 10,000 100,000
Machined dies for use on drop hammers W1 W1 O1, A2
Machined dies for use on presses O1 O1, A2 O1, A2
Hubbed dies for use on drop hammers W1 W1 W1
Hubbed dies for use on presses O1 O1, A2 A2, D2

Table 17 Typical tool steels for coining a preformed cup to final size on a press (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Die material for total quantity of
Metal to be coined 1,000 10,000 100,000
Aluminum and copper alloys W1 W1 D2
Low-carbon steel W1 O1 D2
Stainless steel, heat-resisting alloys, and alloy steels O1 A2 D2

Table 18 Typical tool steels for coining a preformed cup to final size on a press (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Tool Material
Cutoff quill (die) M4 or cemented carbide insert
Cutoff knife M4 or cemented carbide insert
Upset, cone, or spring punch W1, S1, M1, or cemented carbide insert
Cone-punch knockout pin M2 or CPM 10 V
Backing plug O1
Finish-punch case H13
Finish-punch insert M1, M2, CPM 10 V, or cemented carbide
Die case H13
Die insert M1, D2, M2, CPM 10 V, or cemented carbide
Die knockout pin M2 or CPM 10 V

Page 22 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 19 Recommended materials for wire-drawing dies (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Metal to be sheared 6 mm or less 6–13 mm 13 mm or over
Carbon and low-alloy steels up to 0.35 wt% C D2, A2, CPM 10 V A2, A9 S2, S5, S6, S7
Carbon and low-alloy steels, 0.35 wt% C and over D2, A2, CPM 10 V A5, S5, S7 S2, S5, S6, S7
Stainless steels and heat-resisting alloys D2, A2, CPM 10 V A2, A9, S2 S2, S5, S6, S7
High-silicon electrical steels D2, T15, CPM 10 V, S2, S5, S7 S2, S5, S6, S7
cemented carbide inserts
Copper and aluminum alloys D2, A2 A2 S2, S5, S6, S7
Titanium alloys D2

Table 20 Recommended tool steels for cold shearing of nonmetallic materials (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Material Material thickness Shear blade steel Blade hardness, HRC
Paper All thicknesses A2 56–60
D2 58–62
D6 58–62
Plastic All thicknesses A2 56–60
D2 58–62
O2 56–60
M2 58–64

Table 21 Recommended blade materials for cold rotary shearing of flat metals (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Material Material thickness Shear blade steel Blade hardness, HRC
Carbon, alloy, and stainless steels D2, CPM 10 V D2, A2, A9 A9, S5, S6, S7
High-silicon electrical steels D2, M2, CPM 10 V, D2
cemented carbide insert
Copper and aluminum alloys A2, D2, CPM 10 V A2, D2 A9, S5, S6, S7
Titanium alloys D2, A2, CPM 10 V

Cold heading consists of forcing metal to flow fold into dies to form thicker sections and more
intricate shapes. The materials commonly used in cold heading machines are listed in Table 18.

Selection of Material for Sheet Metal-Forming Processes

Selection of Material for Shearing
Shearing is the method for cutting plates and flat sheets, coiled sheets, strips, and bars. The blade
material is among the most important that needs to be selected from the tool materials list to enable
robust processing. Table 19 presents the recommended blade materials for cold straight-blade

Page 23 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

shearing of flat metals. Table 20 presents the tool steels for shearing the nonmetallic materials.
Table 21 presents the blade materials for cold rotary shearing of flat materials.

Selection of Material for Blanking and Piercing

Blanking and piercing dies are used to blank, pierce, and shape metallic and nonmetallic sheet and
plate in a stamping press. The primary measure of the die materials performance in blanking and
piercing is the number of acceptable parts produced before failure occurs. Therefore, the selection of
the tool materials for blanking and piercing is based on the part geometry and production quantity.
Table 22 lists typical punch and die materials for blanking 1.3 mm sheet based on the part geometry
A and B (Fig. 7). Table 23 provides typical punch and die materials for shaving 1.3 mm sheet.
Table 24 shows typical materials for perforator punches.

Selection of Material for Press Forming

Press forming is a process in which the sheet metal is made to conform to the contours of a die and
punch, largely by bending or moderate stretching, or both, by means of mechanical or hydraulic
presses. In this case, the tool material is selected based on the standard part geometry shown in
Fig. 8. Tables 25 and 26 show typical lower-die materials for forming the standard part in Fig. 8.

Selection of Material for Deep Drawing

Deep drawing of metal sheet is applied to form containers by a process in which a flat blank is
constrained while the central portion of the sheet is pressed into a die opening to draw the metal into

Table 22 Typical punch and die materials for blanking 1.3 mm sheet (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Tool material for production quantity of
Work material 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000
Part A or similar with OD ~75 mm
Aluminum, copper, and magnesium alloys Zn, O1, A2 O1, A2 O1, A2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide
Carbon and alloy steel, up to 0.7 wt% C, O1, A2 O1, A2 O1, A2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide
and ferritic stainless steel
Stainless steel, austenitic, all temper O1, A2 O1, A2 A2, D2 D4, CPM 10 V Carbide
Spring steel, hardened, 52 HRC max A2 A2, D2 D2 D4, CPM 10 V Carbide
Electrical sheet, transformer grade, 0.64 mm A2 A2, D2 A2, D2 D4, CPM 10 V Carbide
Paper, gasket, and similar soft materials W1 W1 W1, A2 W1, A2 D2, CPM
10 V
Plastic sheet, not reinforced O1 O1 O1, A2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide
Plastic sheet, reinforced O1, A2 A2 A2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide
Part A or similar with OD ~305 mm
Aluminum, copper, and magnesium alloys Zn, 4140 4140, A2 A2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
10 V
Carbon and alloy steel, up to 0.7 wt% C, 4140, A2 4140, A2 A2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
and ferritic stainless steel 10 V
Stainless steel, austenitic, all temper A2 A2, D2 D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Spring steel, hardened, 52 HRC max A2 A2, D2 D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Electrical sheet, transformer grade, 0.64 mm A2 A2, D2 A2, D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
(continued)

Page 24 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 22 (continued)
Tool material for production quantity of
Work material 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000
Paper, gasket, and similar soft materials 4140 4140 A2 A2 D2, CPM
10 V
Plastic sheet, not reinforced 4140 4140, A2 A2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide
Plastic sheet, reinforced A2 A2 D2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide
Part B or similar with OD ~75 mm
Aluminum, copper, and magnesium alloys O1, A2 O1, A2 A2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
10 V
Carbon and alloy steel, up to 0.7 wt% C, and O1, A2 O1, A2 A2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
ferritic stainless steel 10 V
Stainless steel, austenitic, all temper A2 A2 D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Spring steel, hardened, 52 HRC max A2 A2 D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Electrical sheet, transformer grade, 0.64 mm A2 A2 A2, D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Paper, gasket, and similar soft materials W1 W1 A2 W1, A2 D2, CPM
10 V
Plastic sheet, not reinforced O1 O1 A2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
10 V
Plastic sheet, reinforced O1 O1 D2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide
Part B or similar with OD ~305 mm
Aluminum, copper, and magnesium alloys A2 A2 A2, D2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
10 V
Carbon and alloy steel, up to 0.7 wt% C, and A2 A2 A2, D2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
ferritic stainless steel 10 V
Stainless steel, austenitic, up to quarter hard A2 A2 A2, D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Stainless steel, austenitic, over quarter hard A2 D2 D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Spring steel, hardened, 52 HRC max A2 A2, D2 D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Electrical sheet, transformer grade, 0.64 mm A2 A2, D2 D2 D2, D4, CPM Carbide
10 V
Paper, gasket, and similar soft materials W1 W1 W1 W1, A2 D2, CPM
10 V
Plastic sheet, not reinforced A2 A2 A2 A2, D2, CPM Carbide
10 V
Plastic sheet, reinforced A2 A2 D2 D2, CPM 10 V Carbide

the desired shape without folding of the corners. The process is designed to form circular shapes,
such as cooking pans, box shapes, or shell-like containers. Typical punch and die materials for
various operations in deep drawing are listed in Tables 27, 28, and 29.

Page 25 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

OD OD

Part B
Part A

Fig. 7 Typical parts of varying severity that are commonly produced by blanking and piercing

Table 23 Typical punch and die materials for shaving 1.3 mm sheet (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Tool material for production quantity of
Work material 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
Aluminum, copper, and magnesium alloys O1 A2 A2 D4, CPM10V
Carbon and alloy steel up to 0.3 wt% C and ferritic stainless steel A2 A2 D2 D4, CPM10V
Carbon and alloy steel 0.3 wt%–0.7 wt% C A2 D2 D2 D4, CPM10V
Stainless steel, austenitic, up to quarter hard A2 D2 D4 D4, CPM10V
Stainless steel, austenitic, over quarter hard and spring steel hardened to A2 D2 D4 M2, CPM10V
52 HRC max

Table 24 Typical materials for perforator punches (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Tool material for production quantity of
Work material 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
Punch diameters up to 6.4 mm
Aluminum, brass, carbon steel, paper, and plastics M2 M2, CPM 10 V M2, CPM 10 V
Spring steel, stainless steel, electrical sheet, and reinforced plastics M2 M2, CPM 10 V M2, CPM 10 V
Punch diameters over 6.4 mm
Aluminum, brass, carbon steel, paper, and plastics W1 W1 D2, CPM 10 V
Spring steel, stainless steel, electrical sheet, and reinforced plastics M2 M2, CPM 10 V M2, CPM 10 V

Lubricants for Metal Forming

Friction and wear are the main challenges of metal-forming processes. Metal-forming operations are
diverse and can range from a heavy duty sheet metal stamping that weighs 1,100 t to fine
microforming in electronics industries that ranges in milligrams. Accordingly, the lubricants are
applied to keep the surface of the forming metal and work piece separated by a film of lubricant. This
reduces the friction force due to shearing of the lubricant and thereby reduces the energy wasted and
enhances the surface finish of the product. Additional challenges for lubrication exist in cooling the

Page 26 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Fig. 8 An example press formed parts with mild severity of draw

increased temperature and providing corrosion resistance. This applies to all metal-forming pro-
cesses such as wire drawing, hydrostatic, extrusion, and deep drawing, specifically the rolling
process.
The provision of an effective lubrication is yet challenging to some specific processes such as cold
forging and hot extrusion of steel until innovative lubrication methods such as phosphate-stearate
lubricant coatings and molten glass film lubricants were devised. Additional contribution was from
development of predictive subroutines of lubrication and friction.
Corrosion protection can assume a good deal of importance, particularly after the metal-forming
application has been completed. Completed parts may need to be kept in storage for up to 6 months.
This means that a fluid may require a corrosion inhibitor to prevent corrosion under a variety of
storage conditions.

Friction Characterization
A number of sophisticated models exist for frictional mechanics; nonetheless it can be expressed as
a simplest mechanical concept based on an average behavior throughout the deformation zone. One
useful concept involves the friction factor “m” which is the ratio of friction shear stress t and the
workpiece shear strength to, under the prevailing conditions of strain rate and temperature. As cold
welding of the workpiece with the forming surface takes place, m exceeds one. However sticking
does not occur over the entire surface and m may range towards 0.5. Another practical factor is the
friction coefficient “m” which is the ratio between shear stress and tool pressure “P.” In practical
examples of metal forming, the average value of P ranges between two and five times of the blank’s
shear strength. The friction coefficient is good to be in boundary lubrication range which varies
between 0.1 and 0.15 range. Since t cannot exceed to, the m may reach a maximum of 0.5, and at
other extreme under thick film lubrication condition, it may be as low as 0.01.

• One of the best methods to characterize is ring compression test for forging and upsetting (Male
and Cockroft 1964), which is a ring of the workpiece material with outside diameter and inside
diameter in the range of 6:3:1. The ring is compressed and the variations in the outside and inside
diameter are measured from which m or m is quantified. For very low friction, both diameters
expand, while for high friction, the inner diameter decreases.
• Maclellan (1952) and Wisterich (1955) described a split die wire and sheet drawing method to
quantify axial and binder force to quantify shear stress and die pressure.
• Another method involves reliable mathematical model of the process that back calculates based
on process geometry and driving force. This method needs accurate measure of flow stress at

Page 27 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 25 Typical lower-die materials for forming standard part in Fig. 2 from 1.3 mm thick sheet with L ~ 75 mm
(Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Metal being Tool material for production quantity of
formed Finish Tolerance (mm) Lubrication 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
AA 1100, None None Yes Epoxy- Polyester- Polyester-glass, O1, 4140 A2, D2
brass, copper metal, metal, mild, and 4140
mild steel mild, and steel
4140 steel
AA 1100, None 0.1 Yes Epoxy- Polyester- Polyester-glass, 4140, O1, A2, D2
brass, copper metal, metal, mild, and 4140 A2, D2
mild, and mild, and steel
4140 4140 steel
steel
AA 1100, Best 0.1 Yes Epoxy- Polyester- Polyester-glass, 4140, O1, A2, D2
brass, copper metal, metal, mild and 4140 A2
mild steel mild and steel
4140 steel
Magnesium Best 0.1 Yes Mild Mild and A2 A2 A2, D2
or titanium steel 4140 steel
Low-carbon None None Yes Mild and Mild and 4140, mild steel A2 D2
steel, to 4140 4140 steel chromium
quarter hard steel plated, D2 mild
and 4140 steel
Type None None Yes Mild and Mild and Mild and 4140 A2,D2 D2
300 stainless, 4140 4140 steel steel
to quarter steel
hard
Low-carbon Best 0.1 Yes Mild and Mild and Mild and 4140 A2, D2, D2,
steel 4140 4140 steel steel nitrided nitrided
steel D2 D2
High-strength Best 0.1 No Mild and Mild and 4140, mild steel chromium D2,
aluminum or 4140 4140 steel chromium plated O1, nitrided
copper alloys steel plated A2 D2
Type None 0.1 Yes Mild and Mild and 4140, mild steel chromium D2
300 stainless, 4140 4140 steel plated O1,
to quarter steel A2
hard
Type Best 0.1 Yes Mild and Mild and mild steel D2, D2,
300 stainless, 4140 4140 steel chromium nitrided nitrided
to quarter steel plated, D2 D2 D2
hard
Heat-resistant Best 0.1 Yes Mild and Mild and mild steel D2, D2,
alloys 4140 4140 steel chromium nitrided nitrided
steel plated, D2 D2 D2
Low-carbon Good 0.1 No Mild and Mild and mild steel D2, D2,
steel 4140 4140 steel chromium nitrided nitrided
steel plated D2 D2

Page 28 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 26 Typical lower-die materials for forming standard part in Fig. 2 from 1.3 mm thick sheet with L ~ 900 mm
(Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Metal being Tolerance Tool material for production quantity of
formed Finish (mm) Lubrication 100 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
AA 1100, None None Yes Epoxy-metal, Polyester- Epoxy or Alloy Cast iron,
Brass, copper polyester- metal, zinc polyester- cast iron A2
metal, zinc alloy glass, zinc
alloy alloy
AA 1100, None 0.1 Yes Epoxy-metal, Polyester- Alloy cast iron Alloy Alloy cast
Brass, copper polyester- metal, zinc cast iron iron
metal, zinc alloy
alloy
AA 1100, Best 0.1 Yes Epoxy-metal, Polyester- Alloy cast iron Alloy Alloy cast
Brass, copper polyester- metal, zinc cast iron iron
metal, zinc alloy
alloy
Magnesium or Best 0.1 Yes Cast iron, zinc Cast iron, zinc Cast iron Alloy Alloy cast
titanium alloy alloy cast iron iron
Low-carbon None None Yes Epoxy-metal, Epoxy-glass, Epoxy or Alloy
steel, to polyester- polyester- polyester- cast iron
quarter hard metal, zinc glass, zinc glass, cast iron
alloy alloy
Type None None Yes Epoxy-metal, Epoxy-glass, Epoxy or A2 D2
300 stainless, Polyester- polyester- polyester-
to quarter hard metal, zinc glass, zinc glass, alloy
alloy alloy cast iron
Low-carbon Best 0.1 Yes Zinc alloy Epoxy-glass, Alloy cast iron D2, Nitrided
steel polyester- nitrided A2
glass, zinc A2
alloy
High-strength Best 0.1 No Zinc alloy Polyester- Alloy cast iron Alloy Nitrided
aluminum or glass, zinc cast iron D2
copper alloys alloy
Type None 0.1 Yes Zinc alloy Zinc alloy Alloy cast iron D2, D2,
300 stainless, nitrided Nitrided
to quarter hard A2 D2
Type Best 0.1 Yes Zinc alloy Zinc alloy Alloy cast iron Nitrided Nitrided
300 stainless, D2 D2
to quarter hard
Heat-resistant Best 0.1 Yes Zinc alloy Zinc alloy Alloy cast iron Nitrided Nitrided
alloys D2 D2
Low-carbon Good 0.1 No Zinc alloy Zinc alloy Alloy cast iron Nitrided Nitrided
steel D2 D2

pertinent strain rate and temperature is important. Generally, under lack of data, plain material
under room temperature at convenient strain rate of the actual workpiece by using published strain
rate sensitivity exponent and temperature factors is used in simulation (Baker and Wright 1992).

Page 29 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 27 Typical materials for punches and blankholders (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Tool material for production quantity of
Die component 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
For round steel cups with diameter ~75 mm
Punch Carburized 4140; W1 W1; carburized S1 A2; D2
Blankholder W1; O1 W1; O1 W1; O1
For square steel cups with edge ~75 mm
Punch Carburized 4140; W1 W1; carburized S1 A2; D2
Blankholder W1; O1 W1; O1 W1; O1
For round steel cups with diameter ~300 mm
Punch Alloy cast iron O1 A2; D2
Blankholder Alloy cast iron Alloy cast iron O1; A2
For square steel cups with edge ~450 mm
Punch Carburized 4140 W1; O1 Nitrided A2; D2
Blankholder Alloy cast iron W1; O1 O1; A2

Table 28 Typical tool steels for punches and dies to iron soft steel sheet at various reductions (Cockroft and Latham
1968)
Tool material for production quantity of
Ironing reduction, % 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
Ironing punches
Up to 25 W1 O1 A2 A2; carburized S1
25–35 W1 A2 A2; carburized S1 D2
35–50 A2 A2; carburized S1 D2 D2
Over 50 D2 D2 D2 D2
Ironing dies
Up to 25 W1 O1 O1 D2
25–35 W1 O1 D2 D2
35–50 O1 D2 D2 D2
Over 50 D2 D2 D2 D2

Table 29 Typical punch and die material for the reverse redrawing of steels (Cockroft and Latham 1968)
Tool material for production quantity of
Die component 1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000
Small thick-wall cups
Die and pressure ring O1 O1 A2 D2
Punch 4140, 6150 O1, A2 D2 D3
Medium and large thin-wall cups
Die and pressure ring 1018, 4140 4140, O1 A2 D2
Punch W1 A2 D2 D2, D3

Page 30 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Fig. 9 Different types of lubrication (i) Boundary Lubrication (ii) Mixed lubrication (iii) Elasto hydrodynamic
lubrication. (a, b) subrate (c) boundary layer (d) lubricant

Fig. 10 Generalized Stribeck diagram for metal forming operation

Lubrication
Under lubricated condition, the lubricant layer may or may not be able to fully separate the two
surfaces. The regime in which the lubricant film is thick beyond the surface roughness is called the
hydrodynamic lubrication (HL) regime, the region in which the entire load is carried by the
interacting surface asperities is called boundary lubrication (BL) regime, and in between regimes
is called the mixed lubrication (ML) regime (Fig. 9).
A Stribeck diagram can demarcate the above regimes as a function of L-parameter that is
defined by
u
L¼
pRa

where  is the dynamic viscosity of the lubricant, u is the velocity in the contact, p is the nominal
contact pressure, and Ra is the roughness. Figure 10 shows a generalized Stribeck diagram for
a metal-forming application.
The EHL regime is important for an effective cold-forming process such as deep drawing process,
because it influences the appearance of the final product and the overall energy consumed due to
friction (Wilson et al. 1995). For example, a deep drawing process typically operates in the BL
regime or in the upper part of the ML regime (Ter Haar 1996). Plastic deformation of the sheet
influences friction due to localized yield at the contacts. This applies true in the other way of sheet
metal forming where controlling friction helps influencing the plastic deformation and thereby
formability of the blank mainly (Seah and Lee 1988) and gives much benefit mainly due to its large
area to thickness ratio without giving rise to galling failure of the tools.

Page 31 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Forming Lubricants
Lubricant in the global sense apart from reducing friction and wear should dissipate heat, protect
surfaces, conduct electricity, keep out foreign particles, and remove wear particles. From friction
point of view, the forming lubricants are to operate at mixed or (Elasto) hydrodynamic lubrication
(EHL) by typical mineral (petroleum) or synthetic origin that are used as the base fluids along with
viscosity regulating additives. Additional additives to form boundary layer help friction and wear
control. However, the thermal stability of the boundary layer depends on the lubricant and the sheet
surface reactivity. The boundary layer behavior depends on the mechanism of formation such as
physical adsorption, chemical adsorption, and chemical reaction. Physical adsorption has clustered,
long-chained hydrocarbons with a polar head. Examples include long-chained alcohols and fatty
acids. Such systems have polar group that forms a high viscosity hydrocarbon layers. Fatty acids
generally adhere to unreactive surfaces such as chromium-coated surfaces. In the presence of
reactive surfaces, the chemisorption occurs which combines physical adsorption with chemical
reaction with the surfaces to form a metal soap. For example, stearic acid (C17H35COOH) will
chemically react with an iron surface to form C17H35COOFe and thereby adheres to the iron
substrate. Thus, friction modifiers are additives that form such chemisorption-based boundary layers
and can resist high temperature and are used to reduce wear and friction under moderate loads.
Typical additives are fatty acids, long-chained fatty amides, and esters. Chemical reaction of
lubricant with the substrate and blank involves complex compounds based on P, S, B, and Cl
which are used to form metal salts, with high-temperature stability. The latter makes these additives
suited for wear protection at severe loading conditions were extreme pressure (EP-additives) causes
high contact temperatures. Especially B and Cl are suspected to harm the environment. For example,
in sheet metal forming, compatibility with the mill and with the coating process is important. Cold-
rolled steel needs corrosive protection during transport and storage, and hence preservation agent is
used on the surface. Secondly, after forming, a corrosion protection agent is used. For both
processes, the sheet surface is cleaned thoroughly and/or chemical reaction layers are avoided
since it demands additional unfriendly solvents to be used. Thus, adsorption is a preferred mecha-
nism for BL formation.
In the complexity of the lubricant, both in terms of costs (selection, purchase, application, and
cleaning) and in terms of eco-toxicity of the waste, the choice of lubricant becomes important in
shop floors. Thus emerge new competing technologies such as dry permanent lubricants and
pre-coated sheet.
Lubricating oils consist of base oil and additives which determine their performance character-
istics. The base oil is responsible for the typical properties of the lubricant. The additives, however,
determine its actual performance by influencing the base oil’s oxidation stability, anticorrosion
properties, wear protection, emergency lubrication properties, wetting behavior, emulsibility,
stick–slip behavior, and viscosity-temperature behavior.
The advantages of lubricating oil as compared to grease are improved heat dissipation from the
friction point and its excellent penetrating and wetting properties. The main disadvantage is that
a complex design is required to keep the oil at the friction point and prevent the danger of leakage.

Additives for Lubricants

Lubricant additives are chemical substances that may be either active or inert to evoke new
properties or performance features to the formulated oil. They reduce deleterious effect such as
oxidation or impart new performance such as viscosity index, pour point, and wear protection.
Chemically active reacts with metal surface to form coating or reactive species can react with oxygen
to counteract reactive species to sustain the lubricant’s activity. The important functionalities of the

Page 32 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Table 30 Tribo-technical testing standards for lubricating oils

Parameters Test Description
ISO-VG DIN 51–519 ISO-VG is the abbreviation of ISO viscosity grade, characterizing the
classification of fluid lubricants in terms of viscosity
Density DIN 51–517 The amount of lubricant required for certain friction point is generally indicated
by volume
Viscosity DIN 51–561 Indicates the resistance of a fluid substance to flowing
Viscosity index (VI) DIN ISO 2909 Nondimensional figure characterizing the change of viscosity as a function of
the temperature
Viscosity- DIN 51–563 Dependence of oil change in viscosity on the change in temperature
temperature relation
Flash point DIN ISO 2592 Lowest temperature which an oil gives off sufficient vapor to form an ignitable
mixture under standard conditions
Pour point DIN ISO 3016 Lowest temperature at which an oil is still flowing when cooled down under
standardized conditions
Air entrainment DIN 51–381 TUV Impinger test. Air entrainment causes excessive wear

Table 31 Friction reduction by solid lubricants (Ref: Robert Bruce)

Solid lubricant Friction coefficient Max continuous temperature ( C)
PTFE 0.05–0.1 250
MoS2 0.1–0.2 300
WS2 0.1–0.6 350
Graphite 0.1–0.5 500

additives are controlling precipitation, oxidation, corrosion, viscosity, pour point to meet application
needs.

Testing Standards for Lubricants

Tribo characteristics of mineral oils depend on the intended process parameters (temperature, load,
speed, etc.) and should be tested for the following test methods (Table 30).

Solid Lubricants
Solid lubricants are to protect surfaces and provide lubrication which ranges in synthetic, metallic,
and mineral powers, such as Teflon (PTFE), copper, graphite, and molybdenum disulfide (MoS2).
These operate under boundary lubrication regime and are more favored when liquid or cohesive
lubrication is not favored (Table 31).

Effect of Coating on Metal-Forming Dies

The application of functional coating on metal-forming surface such as tools and dies are to decrease
the coefficient of friction there by improving the die life, surface finish and reducing the power
consumption for the metal forming operation.

Page 33 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

In general, harder coating has lower friction; however, studies of Hayward, Samandi, and Parker
(Hayward) showed that the CrN-coated samples on draw beads used in deep draw forming had the
lowest hardness and lowest friction.
Coating if improperly adhered may be prone to powdering and flaking (Kato 1993; Wenzloff
et al. 1993; Mei and Morris 1993). Under high tensile strain coatings crack to accommodate the
strain in the system (Wenzloff et al. 1993), and if the coating is not engineered to the substrate, the
frictional force will cause the coating to crack and sometimes flake (Mei and Morris 1993). Such
failures happen in car body panels such as Zn-Fe coating and could be used with the right design of
draw beads in the process.

Manufacturing of Raw Materials for Forming

In this section, manufacturing of raw materials for forming and preforming processes is discussed.
The raw materials for metal-forming processes are produced by metal casting. When the correct
chemical composition of targeted alloy is obtained in the melting furnace, the casting process takes
place. Continuous casting for steels and ingot casting for other alloys are the most common method
for producing raw material for metal-forming processes. Although the manufacturing path from the
melt to the finished shape is direct route, it involves great difficulties. This is due to the need for
simultaneous control of a number of processing steps including melting, alloying, molding, pouring,
solidification, finishing, and so on. Each of these production steps needs to be correctly done to avoid
failure in the acceptance of the final product. After production of the raw materials through casting, it
requires to be homogenized in a high-temperature treatment.

Casting Defects that Affect the Forming Processes

Controlling the casting defects in the raw material for metal-forming process is of high importance as
the casting defects have the direct effects on formability of materials. There is always the erroneous
assumption about plastic deformation to eliminate the casting defects, but usually the strains
involved in most working operations are too low to affect any significant welding of the faults
and defects. Folding-in of a solid film from the surface of the liquid will form a defect which is called
bi-film. Bi-films are in general merely pushed around and growing worse before getting better in
deformation, whereas the segregation causes inhomogeneous material properties and defects in
metal-forming processes.
During the working of cast material, for instance, by rolling, it is expected that the defects are
elongated in the direction of working. The elongation of the defect results in its rotation, aligning the
defect to the rolling direction. This is clearly seen in the elongation of graphite nodules during the
rolling and forging of ductile iron.
In addition, elongation of the workpiece increases the area of its defect. The newly extended
surface in the bi-film will be oxidized by air entrapped in the defect. The entrapped air continues to
oxides the new surfaces within the defect during deformation. Microscopic pores may be formed
between the oxide and the metal crystal as a result of deformation of the defect, which means
generation of more defects. During rolling, the continued oxidation of the expanding surface hinders
the welding of the interface that is newly created and, by this means, assists the defects to grow as
a crack, possibly to many times its initial size.

Page 34 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Composite of liquid

C0
Distance

KC0
Final composition of Solid

Fig. 11 Micro-segregation occurs during solidification at dendrite front

Pasty zone Liquid

Mold

Casting
Movement
of feed center line
liquid
Rejection of
solute
Concentration

Distance from mold wall

Fig. 12 Normal dendritic segregation (usually misleadingly called inverse segregation arising as a result of the
combined action of solute rejection and shrinkage during solidification in a temperature gradient

Segregation During Metal Casting

Segregation may be defined as any departure from uniform distribution of the chemical elements in
the alloy. Segregation in cast metals can cause defects in metal-forming process. In this section
different segregations in metal casting are briefly reviewed. Because of the way in which the solutes
in alloys partition between the solid and the liquid during freezing, some level of segregation of the
alloying element is present in all castings.
The variation in composition that occurs on a microscopic scale between dendritic arms of the
solidified casting is known as micro-segregation. This can usually be significantly reduced by
a homogenizing heat treatment for only minutes or hours as the diffusion distance required which
is usually in the range 10–100 mm to redistribute the alloying elements is sufficiently small. On the
other hand, macro-segregation cannot be removed. It occurs over distances ranging from 1 cm to 1 m
and so cannot be removed by diffusion at high temperatures even in long homogenizing times
(Ramana Rao 2003; Ammen 2000).

Micro-segregation
During solidification of the melt, as the dendrite grows into the melt and the secondary arms spread
from the main dendrite stem, the solute is rejected, effectively being pushed aside to concentrate in
the tiny region enclosed by the secondary dendrite arms. Since this region is smaller than the
diffusion distance, it can be fairly considered as uniform in composition. Figure 11 schematically

Page 35 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Pool of solute-rich
buoyant liquid Rising plumes of
buoyant liquid

Channels dissolved
through columnar
dendrite zone Dendrite fragments
falling like snow from
emerging streams

Heap of heavy
equiaxed crystals

Fig. 13 Development of segregation in a steel ingot during solidification

shows this segregation. The interior of the dendrite has an initial composition close to kC0, while,
towards the end of freezing, the center of the residual inter-dendritic liquid has a composition
corresponding to the peak of the final transient. This graduation of composition from the inside to
the outside of the dendrite is commonly described as “coring” because, on etching a polished
section of such dendrites, the progressive change in composition appear as onion-like layers around
a central core.

Dendritic Segregation
Figure 12 shows how micro-segregation, the sideways displacement of solute as the dendrite
advances, can lead to a form of macro-segregation. As freezing occurs in the dendrite, the general
flow of liquid that is necessary to feed solidification shrinkage in the depths of the pasty zone carries
the progressively concentrating segregate towards the roots of the dendrites (Ammen 2000; Camp-
bell 2011).
In the case of a freely floating dendrite in the center of the ingot that may eventually form an
equiaxed grain, there will be some flow of concentrated melt towards the center of the dendrite if in
fact any solidification is occurring at all. This may occur if the liquid is somewhat undercooled.
However, this effect will be small and individual for each equiaxed grain. Thus, the buildup of long-
range segregation in this situation will be negligible.
For the case of dendritic growth against the wall of the mold, however, the temperature gradient
ensures that all the flow is in the direction towards the wall, concentrating the segregation in this
location. Thus, the presence of a temperature gradient is necessary for significant buildup of
segregation.

Gravity Segregation
In the case of ingot casting, the segregated liquid in the dendrite mesh moves under the influence of
gravity. This melt has a density different from that of the bulk liquid. Thus, the lighter liquid floats,
and the heavier sinks.
In the case of steel, as the residual melt travels towards the roots of the dendrites to feed the
solidification contraction, the density will tend to rise as a result of falling temperature. Simulta-
neously, its density will tend to decrease as a result of concentrating in light elements such as carbon,
sulfur, and phosphorus. The compositional effects outweigh the temperature effect in this case, so

Page 36 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

that the residual liquid will tend to rise. Because of its low melting point, the liquid will tend to
dissolve dendrites in its path as solutes from the stream diffuse into and reduce the melting point of
dendrites. Thus, as the stream progresses, it reinforces its channels, as a flooding river carve
obstructions from its path. This slicing action causes the side of the channel that contains the flow
to be straighter and its opposite side to be somewhat ragged. Figure 13 describes these phenomena
schematically (Ammen 2000; Campbell 2011).

Surface Cleaning
Cleaning the surface of cast metal before the forming process is essential for removal of the oxide
layers to minimize the defects and increase the formability of metals. A treatment for the cleaning of
castings of all types is sand blasting, in which particles of sand are entrained in a powerful blast of air
directed at the casting. The process is now almost universally unused as a result of the concerns
about the generation of harmful silica dust.
Treatment nowadays includes shot blasting in which steel or iron shot is used, centrifuged to high
speed by spinning wheels in the so-called airless blasting. Stainless steel shot is, naturally, signif-
icantly more expensive than conventional carbon steel shot but has the advantage for aluminum
castings that they remain bright and free from rust stains. Other treatments include grit blasting in
which the grit is commonly a silica-free hard mineral such as alumina. Other blast media include
glass beads, plastic particles, walnut shells, etc.
After a blasting treatment, the surface of the casting obtains some degree of uniformity of
appearance. For sand casting, however, not all of the sand particles are removed; a significant
percentage of adhering particles are pounded into the surface and may become even more attached
by the plastic flow of metal around and over them during blasting. This residual adhering sand may
affect the rate of wear of machine cutting tools if extensive machining of surface is required.
Sometimes caustic etching can help in removing these residual sands. However, such chemical
treatments are to be avoided for environmental reasons.

Heat Treatment
In this section the necessary heat treatment process before metal forming is briefly discussed. The
heat treatment of castings is one of costly preforming processes. Heat treatment is a vast subject that
cannot be covered here. However, in what relates to metal forming, it is worth mentioning that
castings are required to be homogenized at high temperature.
The initial thermal operation applied to ingots prior to hot working is referred to as “ingot
preheating” or “homogenizing” and has one or more purposes depending on the alloy, product,
and fabricating process involved. One of the principal objectives is to improve workability. The
microstructure of most alloys in the as-cast condition is quite heterogeneous. This is true for alloys
that form solid solutions under equilibrium conditions and even for relatively dilute alloys. The cast
microstructure is a cored dendritic structure with solute content increasing progressively from center
to edge with an inter-dendritic distribution of second-phase particles or eutectic which was described
in the previous section (Campbell 2011).
Because of the relatively low ductility of the intergranular and inter-dendritic network of these
second-phase particles, as-cast structures generally have inferior workability. The thermal treat-
ments used to homogenize case structure for improved workability were developed mainly by
empirical methods correlated with optical metallographic examination, to determine the time and
temperature required to minimize coring and dissolve particles of the second phase. More recently,
methods have become available to quantitatively determine the degree of micro-segregation present
in cast structure and the rates of solution and homogenization.

Page 37 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

6
Maximum Magnesium content

Magnesium
3

2 Average Cell Size

0.015 mm
1 0.023 mm
0.051 mm

1 2 4 8 16 32
Time at 425°C, h

Fig. 14 Effect of cell size on required time for uniform solute distribution during heating

In rapid solidification, as a far-from-equilibrium condition exists, maximum micro-segregation

across small dendritic walls resulted. However, in typical commercial ingots, large cells are more
segregated than fine cells, and because of longer diffusion distances required, large cells are more
difficult to homogenize. For instance, electron microscopy analyses of unidirectional solidified
casting of an Al-2.5 %Mg alloy indicate that the degree of micro-segregation is greater in the coarser,
more slowly solidified structure and that the approach to uniform solute distribution during heating
at 425  C is faster for the finer structure, as shown in Fig. 14 (Campbell 2011).
The solution of a new phase, rejected inter-dendritically during solidification and influenced by
the homogenizing treatment, is only one step towards providing maximum workability. Since most
of the solute is in solid solution after this heating, further softening and improvement in workability
may be obtained by slow cooling, to re-precipitate the solute in an inter-dendritic distribution of
fairly large particles. Hence, we see that in addition to the constitutional equalization, normally
considered to be the principal aim of the homogenization process, a number of other diffusion-
related processes may be desirable or unavoidable, such as:

• Grain coarsening or recrystallization

• Precipitation of super saturated elements
• Dissolution of unstable phases or precipitates
• Coarsening of stable intermetallic particulates
• Surface oxidation
• Hydrogen degassing
• Pore generation and agglomeration
• Localized melting

For quantification of the homogenization process, diffusion analysis of the materials systems can
be done which is not the subject of this work.

Modified High-Temperature Heat Treatment

There is strong motivation to abandon or significantly modify the high-temperature solution
treatment, and one of the most effective ways to reduce these excessive treatment times is using
10  C rise rule especially in lower melting point alloys (Dossett and Boyer 2006). The reaction rate
will be doubled by increasing the temperature by 10  C. For instance, the treatment of an alloy at

Page 38 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

180  C for 4 h is more or less exactly equivalent to a treatment at 190  C for 2 h or 200  C for 1 h.
Although there is a limit to how far this translation of the treatment can be pushed to higher
temperature and shorter times, for most practical purposes on the shop floor, it is often surprisingly
effective over many conditions.
The use of solution treatment temperature as high as possible, taking advantage of the general rule
that an increase of 10  C will double the rate of reaction, is of course limited by the temperature at
which the alloy melts.
However, well before the casting becomes too hot to melt entirely, it can suffer from overheating,
a phenomenon known as “incipient melting.” Up heating some low-melting-point constituents of the
alloy, which might constitute only 1 or 2 vol.% of the alloy, can melt. On subsequent cooling, these
constituents should resolidify so as to result in no net effect. But the reality is that this phenomenon
compromises the mechanical properties of the material and particularly ductility, which would be
significantly impaired by overheating (Totten 2007).

Summary
In this chapter, authors have presented information and, in some cases, guidelines for the selection of
materials used in the metal-forming processes. The details of preform, tool, and die materials,
lubricants in forming and casting, and heat treatment processes before metal forming are presented.
Preform materials are characterized by their formability, while tools and dies are provided materials
are categorized based on the process details and limitations. The lubricants are briefly covered with
a focus on their effectiveness and general applications. In the end, a concise summary of the raw
material preparation for forming processes is provided, with focus on casting and heat treatment
processes. This chapter is a quick reference to material selection and preparation for forming
processes for researchers, engineers and students in the metal forming area are provided.

References
Ammen CW (2000) Metalcasting. McGraw-Hill, New York
Aretz H (2004) Numerical restrictions of the modified maximum force criterion for prediction of
forming limits in sheet metal forming. Model Simul Mater Sci Eng 12:677–692
Arrieux R (1995) Determination and use of the forming limit stress diagrams in sheet metal forming.
J Mater Process Technol 53:47–56
Arrieux R, Bedrin C, Boivin M (1982) Determination of an intrinsic forming limit stress diagram for
isotropic metal sheets. In: 12th biennial meeting of the international deep drawing research group,
working group meetings, WG I, Santa Margherita Ligure, 24–28 May, pp 61–71
Bai Y, Wierzbicki T (2008) Forming severity concept for predicting sheet necking under complex
loading histories. Int J Mech Sci 50:1012–1022
Baker G, Wright R (1992) Drawing research with a high speed single die block. Wire J Int 25:71–73
Bressan JD, Williams JA (1983) The use of a shear instability criterion to predict local necking in
sheet metal deformation. Int J Mech Sci 25:55–168
Brunet M, Morestin F (2001) Experimental and analytical necking studies of anisotropic sheet-
metals. J Mater Process Technol 112:214–226
Campbell J (2011) Complete casting handbook: metal casting processes, metallurgy, technology and
design. Elsevier, Amsterdam

Page 39 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Chow CL, Jie M (2004) Forming limits of Al 6022 sheets with material damage consideration theory
and experimental validation. Int J Mech Sci 46:99–122
Chow CL, Yu LG (1997) Unified approach to metal fatigue based on the theory of damage
mechanics. ASTM Spec Tech Publ 1315:165–185
Chow CL, Yang XJ, Chu E (2002) Prediction of forming limit diagram based on damage coupled
kinematic-isotropic hardening model under nonproportional loading transactions of the ASME.
J Eng Mater Technol 124:259–265
Chow CL, Jie M, Hu SJ (2003) Forming limit analysis of sheet metals based on a generalized
deformation theory, transactions of the ASME. J Eng Mater Technol 125:260–265
Cockroft MG, Latham DJ (1968) Ductility and the workability of metals. J Inst Metals 96:33–39
Davis JR (1990) Properties and selection: irons, steels, and high-performance alloys, metals
handbook, vol 1, 10th edn. ASM International, Materials Park
Davis JR (1995) Tool materials, ASM Specialty handbook. ASM International, Materials Park
Dossett JL, Boyer HE (2006) Practical heat treating. ASM International, Materials Park
Fahrettin O, Lee D (2004) Analysis of forming limits using ductile fracture criteria. J Mater Process
Technol 197:397–404
Friedman PA, Pan J (2000) Effect of plastic anisotropic and yield criteria on prediction of forming
limit curves. Int J Mech Sci 42:29–48
Ghosh AK, Laukonis JV (1976) The influence of strain path changes on the formability of sheet
steel. In: 9th biennial congress of the IDDRG, sheet metal forming and energy conservation. ASM
Publication
Graf A, Hosford WF (1993) Calculations of forming limit diagrams for changing strain paths. Metall
Mater Trans A 24:2497
Gurson AL (1977) Continuum theory of ductile rupture by void nucleation and growth: Part I. Yield
criteria and flow rules for porous ductile media. ASME J Eng Mater Technol 99:2–15
Hagbart SA, Hopperstad OS, Tornqvist R, Amdahl J (2008) Analytical and numerical analysis of
sheet metal instability using a stress based criterion. Int J Solids Struct 45:2042–2055
Hayward T Surface engineering of sheet metal forming dies. PhD thesis, University of Wollongong
Hecker SS (1975) Simple technique for determining forming limit curves. Sh Metal Ind 52:671–675
Hill R (1952) On discontinuous plastic states, with special reference to localized necking in thin
sheets. J Mech Phys Solids 1:19–30
Hora P, Tong L, Reissner L (1996) A prediction method for ductile sheet metal failure. In: Lee JK,
Kinzel GL, Wagoner RH (eds) Proceedings of the NUMISHEET 1996 conference, Dearborn,
pp 252–256
Hutchinson JW, Neale KW (1978) Sheet necking – II. Time-independent behavior. In: Koistinen DP,
Wang N-M (eds) Mechanics of sheet metal forming. Plenum Publishing Corporation, New York,
pp 127–153
Kato K (1993) Active control of friction using tribo-coating in high-vacuum. J Jpn Soc Tribol
38:685–689
Keeler SP, Backofen WA (1964) Plastic instability and fracture in sheets stretched over rigid
punches. ASM Trans Quart 56:25–48
Kuhn HA (1978) Formability topics – metallic materials, ASTM STP 647. ASTM International,
Philadelphia
Maclellan GDS (1952) Some friction effects in wire drawing. J Inst Metals 81:1–13
Male AT, Cockroft MG (1964) A Method for the determination of coefficient of friction of metal
under conditions of bulk plastic. J Inst Metals 93:38–46

Page 40 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Marciniak Z, Kuckzynski K (1967) Limit strains in the process of stretch-forming sheet metal. Int
J Mech Sci 9:609–662
Matin PH, Smith LM (2004) Practical limitations to the influence of through-thickness normal stress
on sheet metal formability. Int J Plast 21:671–690
Mei Z, Morris JW (1993) Stress-concentration due to a hemispherical surface inclusion. Int J Fract
64:43–61
Ozturk F, Lee DY (2004) Analysis of forming limits using ductile fracture criteria. J Mater Process
Technol 147:397–404
Ramana Rao TV (2003) Metal casting: principles and practice. New Age International (reprint),
New Delhi, India
Seah KHW, Lee KS (1988) The effects of titanium nitride coatings on punches and dies in the deep
drawing of cold rolled mild steel. Int J Mach Tool Manuf 28:339–407
Semiantin SL (1988) Forming and forging, metals handbook, vol 14, 9th edn. ASM International,
Metals Park
Simha CH, Grantab R, Worswick MJ (2007) Computational analysis of stress-based forming limit
curves. Int J Solids Struct 44:8663–8684
Smith LM, Averill RC, Lucas JP, Stoughton TB, Martin PH (2003) Influence of transverse normal
stress on sheet metal formability. Int J Plast 19:1567–1583
Storen S, Rice JR (1975) Localized necking in thin sheets. J Mech Phys Solids 23:421–441
Stoughton TB (2000) A general forming limit criterion for sheet metal forming. Int J Mech Sci
42:1–27
Stoughton TB (2001) Stress-based forming limits in sheet metal forming. J Engi Mater Sci
123:417–422
Stoughton TB, Yoon JW (2004) A pressure-sensitive yield criterion under a non-associative flow
rule for sheet metal forming. Int J Plast 20:705–731
Stoughton TB, Zhu X (2004) Review of theoretical models of the strain-based fld and their relevance
to the stress-based FLD. Int J Plast 20:1463–1486
Swift HW (1952) Plastic instability under plane stress. J Mech Phys Solids 1:1–18
Ter Haar R (1996) Friction in sheet metal forming: the influence of local contact conditions and
deformation. PhD thesis, University of Twente
Totten GE (2007) Steel heat treatment: metallurgy and technology. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton
Wenzloff GJ, Van Tyne CJ, Matlock DK (1993) The importance of microstructure and properties on
the formability of eletrogalvanized sheet steels. In: Marder AR (ed) The physical metallurgy of
zinc coated steel. TMS, Warrendale, pp 275–293
Wilson WRD, Hsu TC, Huang XB (1995) A realistic friction model for computer simulation of sheet
metal forming processes. J Eng Ind 117:202–209
Wisterich JG (1955) Investigation of the mechanics of wire drawing. Proc Inst Mech Eng
169:654–665
Yao H, Cao J (2002) Prediction of forming limit curves using an anisotropic yield function with
prestrain induced backstress. Int J Plast 18:1013–1038
Zhu X, Weinmann K, Chandra A (2001) A unified bifurcation analysis of sheet metal forming limits.
J Eng Mater Technol Trans ASME 123:329–333

Page 41 of 42
Handbook of Manufacturing Engineering and Technology
DOI 10.1007/978-1-4471-4976-7_42-1
# Springer-Verlag London 2013

Index Terms:
Casting 34–35, 37
defects 34
heat treatment 37
segregation 35
surface cleaning 37
Cemented carbides 15
Ceramics 16
Dendritic segregation 36
Formability 3
Forming limit diagram (FLD) 7
Graphite 17
Gravity segregation 36
Heat treatment 37
Ingot preheating 37
Lubricants for forming 26
Maraging steels 15
Materials selection 18, 23
bulk metal forming 18
sheet metal forming 23
Medium-carbon low-alloy steel 14
Micro-segregation 35
Non-ferrous alloys 17
Powder metallurgy (P/M) tool steel 13
Steel-bonded carbides 16
Surface cleaning 37
Tool and die materials 10
Wrought tool steel 10

Page 42 of 42