－T.

China Steel Technical Report, No. 21, pp. 45S. 51,Shen,

(2008)
Y. M. Wu, C. C. Huang and M. Z. Huang 45

Influence of Rolling Chemicals on Temper

Rolling Process and Anti-Rust Performance
of Cold Rolled Steels

SEN-TSAN SHEN*, YI-MING WU**,

CHIH-CHING HUANG** and MIN-ZHANG HUANG***
*New Materials Research and Development Department
**Rolling Mill Department
China Steel Corporation
Hsiao Kang, Kaohsiung 81233, Taiwan, R.O.C.
***Himag Magnetic Co., Ltd., Taiwan, R.O.C.

The temper rolling process is an essential step for the modification of the surface quality of cold rolled steels
(CR) by applying a wet rolling chemical before further treatment with antirust oil. In this article, two newly
developed temper rolling chemicals, RL1B and RL1C, are formulated by combining surfactant, wetting
agent, anti-rust and anti-wear additives to improve the rolling performance. In the laboratory simulation
and during actual rolling in the temper mill, the rolling lubricity by using the new rolling chemicals RL1B
and RL1C were significantly improved by 20～40% and the cleanliness of the CR surface after rolling were
increased by 10%. Moreover, the lubricity of the work roller was doubled and the repair frequency of work
roller decreased by 20% at CSC’s temper mill in 2007. Based on the use of the newly developed rolling
chemicals, the anti-oil stain and anti-rust performance of CR coils during storage period were greatly
enhanced, from less than 6 months to over one year.

1. INTRODUCTION 2. EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS

The purpose of the temper rolling process is to release 2.1 Indoor Air Exposure Corrosion Test and Anti-Oil
the yield point and to augment the stretching strain Stain Evaluation
during the post forming procedures. The wet temper The test panels were immersed in a 5% temper so-
rolling procedure(1) is generally adopted to provide bet- lution. The panels were exposed in the 60~80% rela-
ter shape, lubricity, and anti-rust and cleanliness pro- tive humidity and 26 ± 4°C temperature conditions in
perties on the surface quality in comparison with the order to compare anti-rust performance. In the center
dry rolling procedure. The original wet temper rolling areas, the additional rust preventive oil film was applied
chemical RL1A with lower anti-rust property in the to evaluate the anti-oil stain performance.
temper mill was applied to provide acceptable lubricity.
However, an excess of rolling chemical residues on the 2.2 Anti-Wear Tests (ASTM2266)
CR surface or water condensation during the storage In the Falex four ball wear tester, a sample tank
stage will stimulate the white stain, oil stain or red rust was filled with the temper solution. The rolling condi-
defects after 6 months storage time. Therefore, a new tion of four balls were loaded with 40kg force, and set
superior formulation of rolling chemicals was neces- in the initial temperature at 40°C and 1,200 rpm con-
sary to improve the anti-oil stain performance for stant rolling speed.
longer than a 1 year storage time. Furthermore, it was
desirable that the newly-proposed rolling chemicals 2.3 Phoenix Tribology Tester (TE53)
could improve the cleanliness on the CR surface and The instrument can be applied with different loads
provide better lubrication on the roll bite. The wear and temperatures as showed in Fig. 1. In this study, the
rates and maintenance frequency of work roller during lower load with 5 kg was applied, and the initial tem-
temper rolling could therefore be reduced significantly. perature was set at 40°C.
46 Influence of Rolling Chemicals on Temper Rolling Process and Anti-Rust Performance of Cold Rolled Steels

Sample vessel

Heater in the bottom

Fig. 1. Phoenix Tribology (TE53): Rolling friction tester Fig. 2. The foaming tester with circulation flowrate:
with 400 rpm rolling and 5 kg load. 250 ml/min.

2.4 Electrochemical Corrosion Tester The basic components of the temper rolling chemi-
cals were formulated with anti-wear agents, anti-rust
EG&G 273 Electrochemical Corrosion Meter were additives, surfactant, wetting agents and defoamer or
used to evaluate the polarization impedance and the other co-solvents, as shown in Table 1. The ratio and
Tafel corrosion current of the CR panels versus diffe- components were correlated with their rolling perform-
rent temper solutions. ance or surface quality after rolling.(2)
2.5 Foaming Tester Four types of rolling solution have special physical
properties as shown in Table 2, where SK3 solution is a
The apparatus will automatically circulate a flow commercial product. The different concentration of
rate of 250 ml/min, as shown in Fig. 2. The foaming chemicals resulted in different refractive indices, pH
height was recorded after 1 min pumping. values and surface tensions. The lower surface ten-
3. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS AND sions of RL1B and RL1C retain a better wetting ability.
DISCUSSION The foaming heights of RL1C, developed by our own
technique, and SK3 used as a second source, were
3.1 The Difference of Formulation Components and greatly reduced by the addition of defoamer compo-
Basic Properties nents, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1 Three Different Rolling Solutions with Various Ratios of Formulated Components

Amine Anti-rust Wetting Lubricant of Anti-wear Defoamer

Name H 2O Surfactants
solvent agents agent organic acid gradient Others
RL1A Balance 10～20 <5.0 <1.0 > 5.0
RL1B Balance 10～20 5～10 >1.0 >5.0
RL1C Balance 10～20 10～15 <1.0 >0.1 >1.0 > 0.05
SK3 Commercial product > 0.05

Table 2 The Basic Physical Properties of Temper Rolling Solutions

Character/Solution type RL1A RL1B RL1C SK3

5% PH 9.11 9.74 8.79 10.5
5% refractive index 1.6 1.9 1.8 1.1
10% refractive index 3.1 3.7 3.5 2.2
5% surface tension (dyne/cm) 34.6 28.7 26.3 30.5
Foaming height of 5% Solution 8 cm 24 cm 3 cm 3 cm
at 1 min pump recirculation
 S. T. Shen, Y. M. Wu, C. C. Huang and M. Z. Huang 47

3.2 The Evaluation of Rolling Lubrication Perform- tion and fast reaction of organic acid components in the
ance in Different Type of Temper Solutions particular formulation of RL1C or RL1B, the friction
coefficient decreased gradually with the rolling times.
By four ball lubrication tester with point contact at
However, since the property of RL1A or SK3 could not
40 kg load, the rolling performances were measured
provide a sufficiently strong protection film during the
and are summarized in Table 3. The advanced formu-
rolling schedule, the friction coefficients increased with
las of RL1B and RL1C impart lower friction coeffi-
the testing time. An unstable friction coefficient or
cient, wear diameter and temperature increase. The
rolling force was observed in the case of SK3 rolling
ranking of rolling lubricity at 40 kg load is as follows
schedule, as shown in Fig. 3. As a result, the large
RL1B > RL1C > SK3 > RL1A. When the contact load
amounts of scratched iron powder from the rolling disc
was increased to 80~100 kg, temper solutions with 5%
were found in the SK3 solution during this simulation
or 10% concentration of RL1A are unable to pass the
test at area contact load.
test. However, the new RL1B solution at 10% concen-
tration possesses sufficient lubricity to pass the test
Table 5 Tribology Test of Various Temper Solu-
with slightly expanded scar diameter (wear) as shown
tions with Area Contact at 5 kg Load
in Table 4.
Friction Wear width Temperature
Name
Table 3 Tribology Test of Various Temper Solu- coefficient (mm) increase
tions with Point Contact at 40 kg Load 5%RL1A 0.123 1.31 14.2
Average Scar 5%RL1B 0.064 0.53 0
Temperature
Name friction diameter
increase 5%RL1C 0.084 0.77 0
coefficient (mm)
5%SK3 0.141 2.06 18.2
5%RL1A 0.325 1.92 30.6
5%RL1B 0.045 0.63 0.7
3.3 The Evaluation of Rust Preventive and Anti-Oil
5%RL1C 0.082 0.76 1.8
Stain Performance on the CR Steels after Treat-
5%SK3 0.155 1.39 26.9 ment with Temper Solutions and Additional Rust
Preventive Oil Film
Table 4 Tribology Test of Two Temper Solutions The clean test panels were initially treated with 5%
with Point Contact at 80~100 kg Load or 10% temper solutions and exposed to the indoor
environment for 10~17 days to examine the anti-rust
40 kg 80 kg 100 kg
performance. It was found that the panels treated with
Name/Conditions Wear Wear Wear
RL1A and SK3 films suffered from larger or denser
(mm) (mm) (mm)
spot rust. In comparison, the anti-rust performance of
5%RL1A 1.92 Fail Fail panels treated with the newly-developed RL1B/RL1C
5%RL1B 0.63 Fail Fail rolling solution was clearly augmented. After 17 days
10%RL1A 1.09 Fail Fail air exposure test, the RL1C treated panels showed <
3% edge spot rust. In contrast, the RL1A or SK3
10%RL1B 0.50 0.93 1.22 treated panels demonstrated serious rust, as shown in
Table 6 and Fig. 4.
Using the Phoenix Tribology tester with area con- In simulation of the rolling process the CR panels
tact at lower load of 5 kg, the rolling performance was were initially treated with a rolling solution and further
shown in Table 5. The newly-developed temper solu- coated with anti-rust oil RP93 in the middle area to
tions RL1B and RL1C presented less wear diameter, assess the compatibility of double layer treatments and
lower friction coefficients, and better cooling effects or anti-oil stain performance. After a 20-day air exposure
lubrication performance than the RL1A solution. The test, the RL1C and SK3 treated panels showed no oil
temperature increase is near to zero in the case of the stain in the middle areas, moreover the outside area of
RL1B/RL1C temper solutions. In contrast, the poor the SK3 panels showed 90% dense rust. The compati-
lubricities of RL1A or SK3 resulted in wider wear di- bility and synergetic effects by new rolling solutions,
ameters and larger temperature increases. The ranking RL1C and RL1B, and RP93 oil were positively en-
of rolling lubricity at 5 kg load is as follows RL1B > dorsed. The compatibility between the RL1A solution
RL1C > RL1A > SK3. The rolling process during TE53 and RP93 oil was shown to be poor. Serious rust co-
tribology test was monitored by friction coefficient vered the whole areas of the RL1A panel both with and
versus time, as shown in Fig. 3. Due to strong adsorp- without RP93 oil treatment, as shown in Fig. 5.
48 Influence of Rolling Chemicals on Temper Rolling Process and Anti-Rust Performance of Cold Rolled Steels

Fig. 3. The friction coefficient versus rolling time in different solutions (a) 5%RL14C (b) 5%SK3.

Table 6 The Anti-Rust and Anti-Oil Stain Performance of CR Panels with Temper Solution Treatment
Character/Solution type RL1C RL1A SK3
10 days exposure panels <1% edge rust 5% large edge rust >90% dense light rust
with temper solution only (0.1 mm) (1～3 mm)
17 days exposure panels <3%edge rust (0.1 mm) 30～50% large >90%
with temper solution only spot rust (1～3 mm) dense deep red rust
20 days exposure panels with No oil stain light oil stain to No oil stain in middle area
temper solution and RP93 oiling in the middle areas serious red rust Serious rust in side area

(a) RL1C (b) RL1A (c) SK3

Fig. 4. The anti-rust performance after 17 days exposure of CR panels with 10% different temper solution treatment,
(a)10%RL1C (b)10%RL1A (c)10%SK3.
 S. T. Shen, Y. M. Wu, C. C. Huang and M. Z. Huang 49

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 5. The anti-rust and anti-oil stain performance after 20 days exposure test of panels with 10% different solutions and additional
RP93 oil in the middle area (a)RL1C (b)RL1A (c)SK3.

3.4 The Evaluation of Corrosion Current and Polari- Table 7 The Comparative Evaluation of Polariza-
zation Resistance of CR Test Panels Immersed in tion Resistance and Corrosion Currents
the Temper Solution by Electrochemical Cells of Panels in 4 Different Temper Solutions
It was shown that the anti-rust resistance of panels (Panels Treated with #1000 Sand Paper)
was measured by an electrochemical corrosion test. Polarization Corrosion
When the voltage with ± 10 mv or ± 250 mv near to an Name Resistance current
open circuit potential was applied, the polarization re- Rp (Ω/cm2) (amp/cm2)
sistance and corrosion current were measured by Tafel
polarization techniques. The lower corrosion current 10%RL1A 6913 3.79×10-6
and higher polarization resistance of RL1B or RL1C 10%RL1B 13149 1.99×10-6
with reference to RL1A and SK3 are shown in Table 7.
10%SK3 8063 3.25×10-6
The corrosion current induced by electrochemical
methods and the atmospheric rust presented the same 10%RL1C 12539 2.09×10-6
tendency, as shown in Table 7 and Fig. 4. Although the
rust area of panels with RL1A was smaller than the rust
coverage on SK3, the largest and deeper rust on RL1A solution during the temper rolling process. Those re-
related with highest corrosion current was detected in sults are similar to the conclusions observed from Table
the above evaluation tests. 4 and Table 5, where the friction tests were carried out
at the point of contact and the area of contact. In addi-
3.5 The Actual Performance of the Newly-Developed tion, the cleanliness of the CR surface was detected by
Rolling Chemicals in the Temper Mill a reflection meter and showed a >10% improvement in
It was shown that the rolling force remained stable the case of the RL1B temper solution compared with
after the 6th rolled coil under the application of a 5% the RL1A solution, as shown in Table 9. Therefore the
temper solution and at 1.0~1.25% reduction rates, surface cleanliness and surface quality image have been
whereas the amount of rolling force is also dependent greatly improved at CSC’s temper mill by using the
on steel thickness, width and its materials.(3,4) In Table RL1B solution.(5) Meanwhile the lubricity of the work
8 it is demonstrated that the 5% RL1B solution con- roller was doubled and the repair frequency of the work
tributed better lubricity at 16~40% than the 5% RL1A roller decreased 20% in 2007.

Table 8 The Assessment of Rolling Lubricity of RL1B and RL1A in the Temper Mill

Name/rolling conditions Thinner coil Thin coil Note (stable rolling after 6th coil)
0.4×1222 mm 0.6×1222 mm
5% RL1B 408-421 MT 284-339 MT The rolling force of RL1B
Avg:415 MT Avg:300 MT decrease 40 % at 0.4 mm CR
5% RL1A 594-890 MT 333-382 and decrease 16 % at 0.6 mm CR
Avg:687 MT Avg:358 MT
50 Influence of Rolling Chemicals on Temper Rolling Process and Anti-Rust Performance of Cold Rolled Steels

Table 9 Surface Cleanliness of CR Coils after has been verified in two different mills. The reason
Temper Rolling by Reflection Meter why both of the RL1B and the RL1C solutions could
present higher lubricity than the RL1A solution is due
Average
Sampling detergency to strong chemical adsorption films contributed by the
Name/rolling conditions
number (%) organic acid lubricants in the formulation, as shown in
Table 1.
5% RL1A 5 60-80 The anti-rust and anti-oil stain performance of the
5% RL1B at first test 4 92.6 temper rolled coils with and without RP93 oil treatment
was monitored over a long period. It is demonstrated in
5% RL1B at second test 2 92 Table 11 that CR coils treated only with temper solu-
tions have a different level of anti-rust property. Coils
It was also demonstrated that the rolling force was treated with the RL1A rolling solution were initially
mutually affected by the RL1A and RL1C solutions found with rust defects after 3.5 months storage time.
under the application of two types of temper solution In addition, larger areas of spot rust gradually deve-
and 0.98% steel reduction ratio, whereas the amount of loped with time. However, coils treated with RL1B
rolling force is dependent on lubricity of temper solu- rolling solution showed better anti-rust characteristics
tion at the same condition of entry coils. Table 10 with only a few areas of spot rust (0.01%) occurring
shows that for the initial 5 coils with an application of after 6 months storage time. Furthermore, the coils
the RL1A solution the average rolling force showed process with RL1A solution and RP93 oiling treatment
339 tons and that for the 6th to 20th subsequent coils, showed edge spot rust due to the evaporation of the oil
by changing to RL1C, the force was reduced down to film, and oil stain in the center areas due to the over-
247 tons, which indicated 20% decrease. From the residue of rolling solution when the coils were stored
21st coil the RL1A solution, partially mixed with RL1C above 6 months, as shown in Table 12. However, using
in pipe line, was spraying onto the mill and the rolling the RL1B solution and RP93 treatment, neither oil stain
force increased gradually. The same trend of rolling nor rust was observed after 5.5 months and 1 year
performance with higher lubricity of RL1B and RL1C storage stages.

Table 10 The Assessment of Rolling Lubricity of RL1C and RL1A in the Skin Pass Rolling at CAL Process

Solution type Size (mm) Materials Rolling force (Ton) Reduction rate %
RL1A (at initial 5 coils) 0.6*1209 CQS 339 0.98
RL1C (6th to 20th coil) 0.6*1209 CQS 247 0.98
st
RL1A (after 21 coil) 0.6*1209 CQS 279 0.98

Table 11 Anti-Rust Performances of CR Coils after Temper Rolling and Wrapping with VCI Paper
Name of solution/ 3.5 months 4.5 months 6 months
coil number storage time storage time storage time
RL1A/102814 0.05% spot rust 3% spot rust 5% spot rust
RL1B/436276 Pass, No rust Pass, No rust 0.01% spot rust

Table 12 Anti-Oil Stain and Anti-Rust Properties after Rolling Solution and RP93 Oiling Treatment

Name of solution/ 1st assessment 2nd assessment

coil number 5.5 months storage time 6～12 months storage time

RL1A+RP93 Edge rust, Oil stain Edge rust, Oil stain

/015158,587263 in the center area (5%) Fail
RL1B+RP93 No rust, No oil stain No rust, No oil stain
435815,436276 Pass Pass
 S. T. Shen, Y. M. Wu, C. C. Huang and M. Z. Huang 51

sure test for CR steel panels.

4. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTION
(4) The anti-oil stain properties of CR panels treated
From the formulation development and laboratory with RL1B and RL1C rolling solutions and RP93
simulation, it was found that lubricity evaluation can oiling film showed a higher performance than CR
effectively predict rolling performance. The surface panels treated with RL1A rolling solutions and
quality was also improved by the rolling chemicals. RP93 because of the compatibility of the rolling
The significant conclusions obtained were as follows. chemicals and the anti-rust oil. In actual CR steel
(1) The new rolling chemicals of RL1B and RL1C con- coils, it was established that RL1B can sustain a
tain unique gradients of lubricants, antirust agents, >12 months anti-oil stain performance, whereas
wetting agents and other additives. Different physi- RL1A protects against oil stain and rust for < 6
cal properties, such as lower surface tension, lower months in storage period.
friction, and higher refractive index, were obtained
in this study. The RL1C chemical possesses lower REFERENCES
foaming, and slightly less lubricity than the RL1B 1. G. Cervellini and D. Migliorino: Wet skinpassing
chemical to meet the different rolling processes. process conditions in CGL [J]. 16th Rolling Con-
(2) By four ball tester and TE53 tribology tester it was ference, 2006, pp. 535-542.
observed that the new rolling chemicals offered a 2. M. Q. Huang, Y. Lu, J. R. Liu, D. Xiao and Z. X.
tremendous improvement in rolling lubricity. The Yang: Development of Temper Rolling Liquor for
formulation with organic acid additives can con- Single Stand and Double Stands [J]. Materials Pro-
tribute to the protection film which can reduce the tection (China). 2004, vol. 37, No. 12, pp. 17-20.
friction coefficient and decrease the rolling force by 3. T. H. Yeh: Development of Cold Rolled Medium
20-40% in the rolling mill. Moreover, the lubricity Carbon Steel [J]. Technology and Training (Tai-
of the work rollers was doubled and the repair fre- wan). 2005, vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 128-135.
quency of the work rollers decreased by 20% at 4. P. Chen, D. T. Li and F. Z. Lu: Study on rolling
CSC’s temper mill. force model in a 2030 cold rolling skin pass mill
(3) By electrochemical corrosion study with polariza- [J]. Gangtie Yanjiu (Res. Iron Steel). 2004, vol. 32,
tion and Tafel techniques, RL1B and RL1C temper No. 6, pp. 47-49.
solutions can provide 1.8 times higher polariza- 5. C. L. Chen and S. T. Shen: Countermeasure of
tion resistance and one half less corrosion current Smudge on the Surface of Cold Rolled Steel Prod-
than RL1A or SK3 solutions. The trend of anti- ucts [J]. Technology and Training (Taiwan). 2005,
corrosion performance from the electrochemical vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 80-86. □
test is consistent with the results from the air expo-