metals

Article
Effects of Variated Final Temperature and Workpiece Thickness
for Hot Rolling of Aluminum Alloy EN AW-8011
Jakob Kraner 1 , Peter Cvahte 1 , Primož Šuštarič 2 , Tomaž Šuštar 2 , Črtomir Donik 3 , Irena Paulin 3 ,
Shae K. Kim 4 and Kyung Il Kim 4, *

1 Impol Aluminium Industry, Partizanska 38, 2310 Slovenska Bistrica, Slovenia; jakob.kraner@impol.si (J.K.)
2 Centre for Computation Continuum Mechanics, C3M, Tehnološki Park 21, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
3 Institute of Metals and Technology, IMT, Lepi Pot 11, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia
4 Research Institute of Advanced Manufacturing and Materials Technology, Korea Institute of Industrial
Technology, Incheon 21999, Republic of Korea
* Correspondence: kandrew@kitech.re.kr

Abstract: Hot rolling in the process chain of aluminum-rolled products presents the critical element
of material quality and influences productivity. To increase the letter demand modifications of hot
rolling, the consequential changes of microstructure, crystallographic texture, and mechanical and
formability properties must be acknowledged and consistently considered when planning the rolling
process and rolled product. Achieving lower thicknesses of the hot-rolled band would enable fewer
passes with cold rolling; consequently, hot rolling with the same number of passes can be completed
with lower temperatures. Microstructural and texture characterizations conducted using the light
microscope and scanning electron microscope, respectively, of the 3.25 mm hot-rolled band revealed
that the smaller grains appeared in the center of the cross-section, unlike for the 6 mm hot-rolled band,
where smaller grains were detected on the top and bottom positions of the cross-section. Furthermore,
the comparison also shows that the 6 mm hot-rolled band had 64% of random texture components
and 83% of recrystallized grains, whereas the proportional adjustment for the 3.25 mm hot-rolled
band had 42% of random texture components and 55% of recrystallized grains. For the mechanical
testing results, the elongation values in rolling and transverse directions significantly differ only in
Citation: Kraner, J.; Cvahte, P.;
the case of a hot-rolled band of 3.25 mm. Consequently, the earing results are more than 1.5% higher
Šuštarič, P.; Šuštar, T.; Donik, Č.;
Paulin, I.; Kim, S.K.; Kim, K.I. Effects
for the 3.25 mm hot-rolled band, than the 6 mm hot-rolled band.
of Variated Final Temperature and
Workpiece Thickness for Hot Rolling Keywords: aluminum alloy; hot rolling; simulations; metallography; mechanical properties
of Aluminum Alloy EN AW-8011.
Metals 2023, 13, 1301. https://
doi.org/10.3390/met13071301
1. Introduction
Academic Editors: Daniel Casellas,
Jens Hardell and Mats Oldenburg Hot rolling is a process of metal forming performed above the recrystallization tem-
perature. In the industry, there are two typical hot-rolling mills. The first option is the
Received: 19 June 2023 reverse rolling mill, often replaced with the tandem rolling mill as the second option [1]. A
Revised: 14 July 2023
comparison of the hot-rolled aluminum alloy EN AW-8021B to the aforementioned two
Accepted: 18 July 2023
mill types results in the differences in microstructure, texture and mechanical properties.
Published: 20 July 2023
The diverse average grain size and homogeneity of the microstructure’s cross-section and
the texture intensity produced with hot rolling were transferred to the cold rolling process
and to the final foil thickness. The performance of the hot-rolling process is essential to
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.
further improve metal-forming processes, whereby one or more intermediate annealing
Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. regimes and cold rolling—and, if needed to reach the desired properties, also the final
This article is an open access article annealing—are executed [2,3].
distributed under the terms and Numerical simulations of hot rolling for aluminum alloys assume various technologi-
conditions of the Creative Commons cal and operational parameters [4,5]. The attractiveness is often focused on the temperature,
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// stress, strain or rolling force predictions. The influences can be observed with the var-
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ ious numbers of rolling passes [6,7]. More detailed analyses of hot-rolling simulations
4.0/). were performed by A. R. Shahani et al. [8], where the workpiece geometry, rolling force,

Metals 2023, 13, 1301. https://doi.org/10.3390/met13071301 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/metals

Metals 2023, 13, 1301 2 of 11

rolling speed, reduction (strain), initial thickness and friction coefficient were systematically
changed and influentially evaluated.
The change of rolling temperature from 250 ◦ C to 450 ◦ C for the EN AW-7075 in-
creased elongation (more than 10%) and ultimate tensile stress (more than 150 MPa). The
described improvements were confirmed with a 50% as well an 80% reduction [9]. Be-
sides the temperature and reduction’s influence on the mechanical properties, the changed
chemical compositions of EN AW-6063 were performed for hot rolling and studied by
B. Byra Reddy et al. [10].
In this paper, the importance of microstructure, texture, mechanical and formability
properties for hot-rolled EN AW-8011 aluminum alloy is studied in detail. The influence
of temperature and reduction changes is compared between simulated and industrially
produced hot rolling. Analyzing the hot-rolled band (HRB) with the light microscope (LM)
and scanning electron microscope (SEM) contributes to the understanding of correlations
between the fractions of random texture components and recrystallized grains according
to the changing hot-rolling parameters. At the same time, mechanical testing realizes the
connection between divergent elongations (A) and earing (Ea) measurements.

2. Experimental Procedure
The slabs of aluminum alloy EN AW-8011 with dimensions 490 × 1150 × 5000 mm3
were reverse hot-rolled to the different thicknesses of the hot-rolled band (HRB). The reverse
hot rolling was performed on a single stand mill. The roughing mill (reverse mill) was used,
including all blocks and coiling passes, despite the possibility of using a combination of
roughing mill and finishing mill (tandem mill) for block passes, with only one coiling pass,
after the tandem mill. With the HRB thickness also decreased, the surface temperature of
HRB after the last pass was reduced. For the 6 mm HRB, the measured temperature after
hot rolling was 356 ◦ C. The hot rolling of 3.25 mm HRB finished with a surface temperature
of 320 ◦ C. The homogenization of slabs before hot rolling was performed with the same
regime. Figure 1 presents both slabs, treated with the same heating and cooling rates.
After the slabs were charged in the homogenization furnace, they were heated for 8 h from
approximately 275 ◦ C to 580 ◦ C. For the following 6 h, the temperature of the slabs’ surfaces
did not deviate for more than 10 ◦ C. After the homogenization regime, the hot rolling initial
temperature (500 ◦ C) was reduced in the furnace over 3 h. Similar to the homogenization
process, minor differences can be observed for the chemical compositions of 6 mm HRB
and 3.25 mm HRB (Table 1). Both HRBs’ chemical compositions correspond to the standard
aluminum alloy EN AW-8011.
The model for numerical simulation was custom-made and validated for the two
hot-rolling mills in Impol Aluminum Industry Group (Šibenik, Croatia and Sevojno, Serbia).
The simulations set-up contained data of the work roll diameter (885 mm), the width
of a workpiece (1150 mm) and the rolling schedule with the number of rolling passes
(19) and reduction per pass to the final (exit) thickness. The number of coiling passes
(3) with unwind and rewind tensions was also considered. The alloy yield curve was
described with the Hansel–Spittel constitutive equation. For the material behavior during
hot rolling, the density of 2613.8 kg·m−3 , elastic modulus of 57,700 MPa and Poisson ratio
of 0.33 were considered. The heat-transfer model functions according to the used rolled
material with a thermal conductivity of 232.1 W/(m·K), specific heat of 988.8 J/(kg·◦ C)
and linear thermal expansion of 27.2 × 10−6 m/(m·◦ C). The results of simulations were
presented as a comparison of rolling force and surface temperature to the measured values
during industrial hot rolling. The roll-gap visualization was used to present the last pass of
hot rolling compared to the final thicknesses of 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB.
MetalsMetals
2023, 13, x FOR
2023, PEER REVIEW
13, 1301 3 of 123 of 11

Figure 1. Graph of homogenization regime for slabs of analyzed 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB.
Figure 1. Graph of homogenization regime for slabs of analyzed 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB.
Table 1. Chemical composition of the analyzed material.
Table 1. Chemical composition of the analyzed material.
Si Fe Mn Mg Cu Ti Al
Si Fe Mn Mg Cu Ti Al
Standard
0.65–0.80 Standard
0.65–0.75 0.65– 0.65–
0.08–0.10 0.08–
0.03–0.05 0.03– <0.1 0.02–
0.02–0.04 Bal.
EN AW-8011 <0.1 Bal.
EN AW-8011 0.80 0.75 0.10 0.05 0.04
6 mm HRB 0.68 0.68 0.09 0.04 0.01 0.03 Bal.
6 mm HRB 0.68 0.68 0.09 0.04 0.01 0.03 Bal.
3.25 mm HRB 0.68 3.25 mm HRB
0.67 0.68 0.09 0.67 0.04
0.09 0.04 0.01 0.01 0.02
0.02 Bal. Bal.

The model for numerical simulation

The metallographic preparationwas custom-made
of the and validated
samples captures for the (320
the grinding two hot-
grit) and
rolling mills in Impol Aluminum Industry Group (Šibenik, Croatia
polishing processes (diamond and finished, respectively, with the short time of and Sevojno, Serbia).
120 s with
The simulations
oxide polishing)set-up(Struers,
contained data of theDenmarkGatan).
København, work roll diameter (885
For themm),
lightthe width of a(LM),
microscopy
workpiece (1150 mm)
an electrolytic and the
etching rolling
with HF (5 schedule
mL conc. withHFthe
andnumber
100 mL ofHrolling passes (19) and ◦
2 O) for 30 s at 40 C, with
reduction
30 V per
andpass0.5 mA,to thewasfinal (exit)All
used. thickness. The number
three sample of coiling
preparation stepspasses
were (3) with un-
executed for the
windscanning
and rewind tensions
electron was also (SEM)
microscopy considered. The with
analyses, alloy the
yield curve was
replaced described
etching with the
step, where
the Hansel–Spittel
ion polishing constitutive
with a PECSequation.
Gatan 628 For the material
(Gatan GmbH,behavior
Munich,duringGermany) hot rolling,
for 50 minthe was
density of 2613.8 kg·m −3, elastic modulus of 57,700 MPa and Poisson ratio of 0.33 were
executed. The average grain size determination was in accordance with the ASTM E112-10
considered.
(ASTMThe heat-transfer
International, model
West functions according
Conshohocken, PA, USA). to the
SEM used rolled material
analyses based onwith electron
a thermal conductivity
backscatter of 232.1
diffraction W/(m·K),
(EBSD) specific
were the inverseheatpole
of 988.8
figuresJ/(kg·°C)
in the Z and linear thermal
direction (IPF-Z), and
expansion of 27.2·10
the grain average −6 m/(m·°C).
misorientationThe results
(GAM) of figures
simulations
werewere presented
obtained. as a compari-
The mentioned figures
son ofenabled
rolling the
force and surface
detailed texturetemperature
components to arrangement
the measuredanalysis
values during
and the industrial hot
microstructure’s
recrystallized,
rolling. The roll-gap substructured
visualizationand wasdeformed grains proportions.
used to present the last passThe of GAM criteria
hot rolling com-indicate
the degree of orientation uniformity within
pared to the final thicknesses of 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB. each grain. The misorientation interval was
◦ ◦
frommetallographic
0 to 5 , whichpreparation
is the basis offorthe
thesamples
grains’ state, determination
The captures the grindingand (320fraction
grit) and of their
evaluation
polishing processes[11–13].
(diamond and finished, respectively, with the short time of 120 s with
Mechanical
oxide polishing) properties
(Struers, København,were DenmarkGatan).
measured according For theto ISO
light6892-1:2016
microscopy(tensile (LM), an test in
rollingetching
electrolytic direction RDHF
with and(5transverse
mL conc. HF direction
and 100 TD).
mLTheH2O)rectangular
for 30 s attension
40 °C, withtest specimens
30 V
with
and 0.5 mA,a reduced
was used. parallel section
All three geometry
sample were prepared
preparation steps were in executed
dimensions for and tolerances for
the scanning
standard Specimen A. The loading rate until the yield point was 10 MPa · s −1 (the testing
electron microscopy (SEM) analyses, with the replaced etching step, where the ion polish-
velocity
ing with a PECS wasGatan s−1 ,(Gatan
0.008 628 which GmbH,
is in accordance with the testing
Munich, Germany) for 50 method
min wasB). For the cup
executed.
extraction,
The average grainthesize
90 mm × 90 mm samples
determination were takenwith
was in accordance fromthe HRBs.
ASTM The loading
E112-10 force was
(ASTM
6 kN, which
International, WestisConshohocken,
in accordance with the ISO
PA, USA). SEM 11531:2015
analyses (earing
based on test–anisotropy)
electron backscatter standard.
 rolling direction RD and transverse direction TD). The rectangular tension test specim
with a reduced parallel section geometry were prepared in dimensions and tolerance
standard Specimen A. The loading rate until the yield point was 10 MPa·s−1 (the te
velocity was 0.008 s−1, which is in accordance with the testing method B). For the cu
traction, the 90 mm × 90 mm samples were taken from HRBs. The loading force was 6
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 4 of 11
which is in accordance with the ISO 11531:2015 (earing test–anisotropy) standard. Fo
tension test and earing measurements, the five repetitions were performed and the re
are presented as their average values.
For the tension test and earing measurements, the five repetitions were performed and the
results are presented as their average values.
3. Results

3. Results 3.1. Simulations

3.1. Simulations The simulated and industry-measured results of rolling force (Figure 2a) and su
temperature
The simulated (Figure 2b) are compared
and industry-measured results ofbetween two (Figure
rolling force rolling schedules for the final t
2a) and surface
temperature (Figure 2b) are compared between two rolling schedules for the final thick- is obser
nesses of 6 mm and 3.25 mm. The deviation (around 1000 kN) at the beginning
nesses of 6 mm where the mm.
and 3.25 predicted forces with
The deviation the simulations
(around 1000 kN) at are the lower thanisthe
beginning measured forc
observed,
industrial hot rolling. The difference between measured
where the predicted forces with the simulations are lower than the measured forces and predicted forces
in is that
pass is smaller, from the seventh pass in the majority
industrial hot rolling. The difference between measured and predicted forces is that each matching up to the fifteenth pas
thefrom
pass is smaller, industrial rollingpass
the seventh of 3.25 mmmajority
in the HRB, thematching
drop of the up force
to theisfifteenth
observedpass. between the
In the industrial rolling of 3.25 mm HRB, the drop of the force is observed between the hot rol
three passes. The same is also predicted with the simulation for 3.25 mm HRB
The rolling
last three passes. The same forceisin both
also of the final
predicted withthicknesses is higher
the simulation at themm
for 3.25 measured
HRB hot values. Fo
rolling. The rolling force in both of the final thicknesses is higher at the measured values.much sm
3.25 mm HRB, the difference in rolling force for the last nineteenth pass is
For the 3.25 mmbetween
HRB,the themeasured
differenceand predicted
in rolling rolling
force for theforces than for 6 mm
last nineteenth passHRB values and s
is much
smaller betweenlation
theresults.
measured In aand
similar path rolling
predicted as rolling forces,
forces thanthefor surface’s
6 mm HRB temperature
values and differs a
beginning
simulation results. of hot rolling.
In a similar path asInrolling
the comparison
forces, theof temperatures,
surface’s there is
temperature a deviation
differs at of 2
the beginningwhere
of hotpredicted
rolling. In temperatures
the comparison are higher than measured.
of temperatures, During
there the passes
is a deviation ofof hot rol
25 ◦ C, where the differences
predicted between measured
temperatures are higherand thansimulated
measured. temperatures
During the passes are reduced,
of hot and afte
fourteenth pass is reached, the overlapping of temperatures
rolling, the differences between measured and simulated temperatures are reduced, and occurs in both cases of in
trial hot
after the fourteenth rolling
pass and simulations.
is reached, the overlapping For the
of nineteenth
temperatures pass, the in
occurs predicted
both casestemperatures
of
industrial hotfectly
rollingmatch with the measured
and simulations. For the temperatures.
nineteenth pass, Thethestated is observed
predicted for 6 mm HRB
temperatures
perfectly match3.25with
mmthe HRB, where the
measured temperatures
temperatures. Thearestated
lowerisasobserved
in the compared
for 6 mm cases.
HRB
and 3.25 mm HRB, where the temperatures are lower as in the compared cases.

Figure 2. Comparison of 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB simulations at industrial hot rolling measured
Figure 2. Comparison of 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB simulations at industrial hot rolling m
values: (a) rolling force;
ured (b) (a)
values: temperature on the
rolling force; (b) surface of theon
temperature workpiece.
the surface of the workpiece.

The simulation results also visualize rolling gaps (half of the workpiece). In Figure 3a,
the visualization of the temperature of rolling gaps for the last hot-rolling pass is presented.
It is visible that the final temperature at 6 mm HRB is higher (around 370 ◦ C) than at
3.25 mm HRB (about 320 ◦ C). By comparing the mentioned visualizations of rolling gaps,
the entry temperature of 6 mm HRB is found to be similar to the exit temperature of
3.25 mm HRB. Figure 3b shows us the comparison of stress distribution during the last
pass of hot rolling. In the center of 3.25 mm HRB, stresses are higher than 100 N/mm2 . The
expected stresses for the 6 mm HRB in the center are similar to those for the 3.25 mm before
the exit of a rolling gap. Furthermore, there are strain rate visualizations of rolling gaps in
Figure 3c. Higher strain rate values were observed at the 3.25 mm HRB compared to the
6 mm HRB. The maximum strain rate at the 6 mm HRB is higher than 50 s−1 but in three
small spots. For the 3.25 mm HRB, the majority strain rate is higher than 40 s−1 . For the
aforementioned simulation (3.25 mm HRB), the strain rate in the center of the rolling gap is
higher than 60 s−1 . The velocity of the workpiece for both of the compared HRBs is even
(Figure 3d). On the entry of the rolling gap, the velocity is 1.12 m/s. The velocity of the
workpiece on the exit of a rolling gap is 2.63 m/s.
 gaps in Figure 3c. Higher strain rate values were observed at the 3.25 mm HRB compared
to the 6 mm HRB. The maximum strain rate at the 6 mm HRB is higher than 50 s−1 but in
three small spots. For the 3.25 mm HRB, the majority strain rate is higher than 40 s−1. For
the aforementioned simulation (3.25 mm HRB), the strain rate in the center of the rolling
gap is higher than 60 s−1. The velocity of the workpiece for both of the compared HRBs is
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 5 of 11
even (Figure 3d). On the entry of the rolling gap, the velocity is 1.12 m/s. The velocity of
the workpiece on the exit of a rolling gap is 2.63 m/s.

Figure 3. Visualization of rolling gaps for the last pass of hot rolling: (a) temperature; (b) von Mises
Figure 3. Visualization of rolling gaps for the last pass of hot rolling: (a) temperature; (b) von Mises
stress; (c)
stress; (c) strain
strain rate;
rate; (d)
(d) velocity.
velocity.

3.2. Metallography
3.2. Metallography
The cross-section LM microstructures of compared HRBs are presented in Figure 4. In
The the
general, cross-section LM microstructures
microstructures of the 3.25 mmofHRB compared HRBs
have more are presented in
homogeneously Figure 4.
distributed
In general,
crystal thethan
grains microstructures
for 6 mm HRB. of The
the shape
3.25 mmandHRB have
size of more
crystal homogeneously
grains distrib-
at 3.25 mm HRB are
uted crystal grains than for 6 mm HRB. The shape and size of crystal grains
more even from the top to the bottom sample cross-section. It is also remarkable that at 3.25 mm
Metals 2023, 13, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of at
12
HRB
6 mmareHRBmore even
at the from theedge
sample’s top 2,
to the
the crystal
bottomgrains
sampleincross-section.
the center areItsignificantly
is also remarkable
larger
that
thanatat6the
mm HRB atedge
sample’s the sample’s edge 2, the crystal grains in the center are significantly
1 and center.
larger than at the sample’s edge 1 and center.

Figure4.
Figure 4. LM
LM microstructures
microstructuresin
in the
the cross-section
cross-sectionamong
amongthe
thewidth
widthof
of66mm
mmHRB
HRBand
and3.25
3.25mm
mm HRB.
HRB.

Theaforementioned
The aforementioneddeviation
deviationofof grain
grain size
size in in
thethe center
center of the
of the edgeedge 2 sample
2 sample at 6
at 6 mm
mm HRB
HRB is seenis in
seen in Figure
Figure 5. IPF-Z
5. IPF-Z figuresfigures
from EBSDfrom maps
EBSD confirm
maps confirm the observations
the visual visual observa- of
LM
tionsmicrostructures. The topThe
of LM microstructures. andtopbottom locations
and bottom with the
locations finer
with thegrain
finermicrostructure
grain microstruc- of
cross-sections are more
ture of cross-sections aretypical
more for the 6for
typical mm theHRB6 mm samples. At the same
HRB samples. At thetime,
samethe grains
time, the
in the center
grains in the of the cross-section
center of the thicker
of the cross-section HRB areHRB
of the thicker larger
arethan
larger onthan
the edges
on theand
edgesin
the
andcenter
in the of the thinner
center HRB. ItHRB.
of the thinner is important to mention
It is important that the
to mention reduction
that in HRB
the reduction in final
HRB
final thickness (from 6 mm to 3.25 mm) has also resulted in some longitudinal (deformed)
crystal grains in the center of all three cross-sections among the width of 3.25 mm HRB.
 The aforementioned deviation of grain size in the center of the edge 2 sample at 6
mm HRB is seen in Figure 5. IPF-Z figures from EBSD maps confirm the visual observa-
tions of LM microstructures. The top and bottom locations with the finer grain microstruc-
ture of cross-sections are more typical for the 6 mm HRB samples. At the same time, the
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 6 of 11
grains in the center of the cross-section of the thicker HRB are larger than on the edges
and in the center of the thinner HRB. It is important to mention that the reduction in HRB
final thickness (from 6 mm to 3.25 mm) has also resulted in some longitudinal (deformed)
thickness
crystal (from
grains 6 mm
in the to 3.25
center mm)
of all hascross-sections
three also resulted inamong
some longitudinal
the width of(deformed) crystal
3.25 mm HRB.
grains in the center of all three cross-sections among the width of 3.25 mm HRB.

IPF-Zfrom
Figure5.5.IPF-Z
Figure fromEBSD
EBSDfor
forthe
thesamples’
samples’cross-sections:
cross-sections:(a)
(a)6 6mm
mmHRB,
HRB,(b)
(b)3.25
3.25mm
mmHRB.
HRB.

The detailed results of the crystal grains’ average sizes are presented in Table 2. The
The detailed results of the crystal grains’ average sizes are presented in Table 2. The
values of measurements with the LM and SEM-EBSD techniques are comparable and
values of measurements with the LM and SEM-EBSD techniques are comparable and
mostly deviate less than 10 µm. For the 6 mm HRB, the largest grains (213.7 µm) are in the
mostly deviate less than 10 µm. For the 6 mm HRB, the largest grains (213.7 µm) are in
central position of the edge 2 sample. For the 3.25 mm HRB, the largest grains (89.8 µm)
the central position of the edge 2 sample. For the 3.25 mm HRB, the largest grains (89.8
were measured at the central position of the edge 1 sample. The smallest crystal grains are
µm) were measured at the central position of the edge 1 sample. The smallest crystal
present at the center for both analyzed samples. The lowest value (28.3 µm) for 6 mm HRB,
confirms the larger heterogeneity among the cross-sections of the thicker HRB than at the
thinner HRB, where the smallest grains were 45.5 µm.

Table 2. Average crystal grain size values for 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB in the cross-section and
among the total widths. Measurements were performed with the LM technique and SEM-EBSD
technique.

Average Crystal Grain Size Diameter (µm)

Sample Position 6 mm HRB 3.25 mm HRB
LM SEM-EBSD LM SEM-EBSD
Top 30.4 32.4 75.5 84.9
EDGE 1 Centre 95.4 92.5 89.8 83.4
Bottom 32.5 29.4 63.5 82.2
Top 34.8 28.3 53.4 52.6
CENTRE Centre 89.8 88.2 63.5 64.9
Bottom 30.4 32.3 53.4 45.5
Top 57.4 65.4 75.5 57.4
EDGE 2 Centre 198.2 213.7 75.5 68.4
Bottom 51.3 49.9 75.5 66.1
 Top 34.8 28.3 53.4 52.6
CENTRE Centre 89.8 88.2 63.5 64.9
Bottom 30.4 32.3 53.4 45.5
Top 57.4 65.4 75.5 57.4
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 EDGE 2 Centre 198.2 213.7 75.5 68.4 7 of 11
Bottom 51.3 49.9 75.5 66.1

For
For the
the crystal
crystal orientation
orientation analysis,
analysis, the the fraction
fraction ofof the
the eight
eight most
most common
common texture
texture
components
components of of aluminum-rolled
aluminum-rolled texturestextures werewere compared
comparedfor for the
the 66 mm
mm HRB
HRB (Figure
(Figure 6a)
6a)
and
and 3.25
3.25mm mmHRB HRB(Figure
(Figure 6b). TheThe
6b). texture components
texture components R and R Cube
and Cube(more(more
than 4%)
thanhave
4%)
the
have largest fractions
the largest at the 6atmm
fractions theHRB
6 mm sample. There is There
HRB sample. a smaller is apercentage of all the other
smaller percentage of all
theanalyzed
six other sixtexture
analyzed texture components,
components, but with
but with a smaller a smaller
percent, whichpercent, which
explains explains
the 64.1% of
the 64.1% of random texture components. The random texture
random texture components. The random texture components value is defined and calcu- components value is
defined
lated as aand calculated
difference as a difference
of 100% and the sum of 100%
of alland theanalyzed
eight sum of all eight components
texture analyzed textureper-
components
centage. percentage.
Compared to theCompared
3.25 mm HRB, to thethe
3.25 mm HRB,
sample of thethe sampletexture
random of the random
componentstexture
is
components
reduced by moreis reduced
than 20%.by more than 20%.fraction
The increased The increased fraction
of all eight of alltexture
analyzed eight analyzed
compo-
texture
nents components
contribute contribute
to this trend. Onlyto this trend.
texture Only texture
components C andcomponents
D have a lower C and D have
fraction of
a lower fraction of 4%. Similarly at the 6 mm HRB and the
4%. Similarly at the 6 mm HRB and the 3.25 mm HRB, the texture components R and Cube 3.25 mm HRB, the texture
components
are dominant.RDespite
and Cube theare dominant.
above, Despite to
it is necessary thepoint
above,outitthat
is necessary to point
at the texture out mm
of 3.25 that
at the texture of 3.25 mm HRB, the component
HRB, the component P with around 15% is predominant. P with around 15% is predominant.

Figure 6.
Figure Fraction of
6. Fraction of texture
texture components
components of
of SEM-EBSD
SEM-EBSD analysis:
analysis: (a)
(a) 66 mm
mm HRB,
HRB, (b)
(b) 3.25
3.25 mm
mm HRB.
HRB.

The share
The share of
of recrystallized
recrystallized grains
grains is
is reduced
reduced in
in correlation
correlation to
to the
the reduction
reduction in
in the
the
random texture components with the decrease in HRB thickness from 6 mm
random texture components with the decrease in HRB thickness from 6 mm to 3.25 mm.to 3.25 mm.
This is shown with the grain average misorientation (GAM) maps, where Figure 7a presents
the ratio of recrystallized, substructured and deformed grains for 6 mm HRB, and Figure 7b
presents the ratio of the same grains (microstructure) condition for the 3.25 mm HRB.
The share of recrystallized grains is for the 6 mm HRB, around 82.8%. The percentage of
substructured grains is 13.0% for the same sample, and 0.4% of grains are in the deformed
condition. As previously mentioned, the share of recrystallized grains is decreased with
the reduction in HRB thickness. At the same time, the percentage of substructured and de-
formed grains is increased. For the 3.25 mm HRB, the share of recrystallized grains is 55.2%,
a percentage of 40.6% presents the substructured grains and 2.1% in the microstructure
belongs to the deformed condition of grains.

3.3. Mechanical Properties and Formability

The major differences in mechanical properties between 6 mm and 3.25 mm HRBs
were observed in the elongation (A) in the transverse direction (TD) according to the rolling
direction (RD). There is a difference of more than 6% on the sample of edge 2, the A value
is 41.0% for the 6 mm HRB and 25.8% for the 3.25 mm HRB. The interval of measured A is
for the thicker HRB from 40.0% to 41.0%, although the interval of the thinner HRB is from
41.6% to the aforementioned value of 25.8%, observed for the both RD and TD directions
of testing. There are also differences between Rm and Rp0.2 for the compared HRBs with
different thicknesses, but the values of the mentioned properties do not differ more than
6 MPa (Table 3).
 age of substructured grains is 13.0% for the same sample, and 0.4% of grains are in the
deformed condition. As previously mentioned, the share of recrystallized grains is de-
creased with the reduction in HRB thickness. At the same time, the percentage of substruc-
tured and deformed grains is increased. For the 3.25 mm HRB, the share of recrystallized
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 grains is 55.2%, a percentage of 40.6% presents the substructured grains and 2.1% in8 the
of 11
microstructure belongs to the deformed condition of grains.

Figure
Figure7.7.Grain
Grainaverage
averagemisorientation
misorientation(GAM)
(GAM)maps:
maps:(a)
(a)66mm
mmHRB,
HRB,(b)
(b)3.25
3.25mm
mmHRB.
HRB.

3.3. Mechanical
Table Properties
3. Mechanical and Formability
properties and formability of compared 6 mm HRB and 3.25 mm HRB.
The major differences in mechanical properties between 6 mm and 3.25 mm HRBs
Rm observed
were (MPa) Rp0.2 (MPa)
in the elongation (A) in the transverse A direction
(%) Ea (%)
(TD) according to the roll-
Sample Direction ing direction
HRB HRB (RD). ThereHRBis a difference
HRB of more HRB than 6% HRB
on the sample
HRB of edge 2,HRBthe A
6 mm 3.25 mm
value is 41.0% for the 66 mm
mm HRB3.25 and mm 6 mm
25.8% for the 3.253.25
mmmm HRB. The6 mm
interval 3.25 mm
of meas-
RD ured
103 A is for
97 the thicker 37HRB from 40.0%
37 to 41.0%,
40.0 although
41.6 the interval of the thinner
EDGE 1 HRB is from 41.6% to the aforementioned value of 25.8%, observed for1.04
the both RD 2.58and
TD 95 89 35 36 40.4 32.3
TD directions of testing. There are also differences between Rm and Rp0.2 for the com-
RD 102 101 36 35 40.4 40.1
CENTRE pared HRBs with different thicknesses, but the values of the mentioned1.03 properties 1.79
do not
TD 97
differ more 96 than 6 MPa 36 (Table 3). 34 40.0 33.2
RD 102 100 36 44 40.5 39.1
EDGE 2 Table 3. Mechanical properties and formability of compared 6 mm 1.02mm HRB.2.63
HRB and 3.25
TD 95 94 35 40 41.0 25.8
Rm (MPa) Rp0.2 (MPa) A (%) Ea (%)
In connection HRB
to the HRB
microstructure HRBmechanical
and HRB properties’
HRB HRB
(A) HRB HRB
heterogeneity, the
Sample Direction
6
values of earing (Ea) confirm 3.25
the findings.6 The anisotropy
3.25 of6 6 mm HRB
3.25 is significantly
6 3.25
lower compared to 3.25 mm mm HRB. mm mm Ea values
The highest mm (2.58% mm and 2.63%)
mm are mmpresented
mm
on edge 1 andRD2 positions103of the 97
3.25 mm 37HRB. The 37trend of the higher
40.0 41.6Ea is also visible
EDGE
at 1
the center position of 95
3.25 mm89HRB. The ±0.02) and 1.04 2.58
TD 35 extreme,
36 even (40.4 32.3drastically lower
values (aroundRD0.80%) are Ea values
102 101 for the366 mm HRB,
35 which shows the
40.4 40.1lower anisotropy
CENTRE
and homogeneity of the material (Table 3). 1.03 1.79
TD 97 96 36 34 40.0 33.2
4.EDGE
Discussion RD 102 100 36 44 40.5 39.1
2 1.02 2.63
Reducing HRB’s final thickness from 6 mm to 3.25 mm contributes25.8
TD 95 94 35 40 41.0 to fewer cold rolling
passes, which decreases the operation and the wear of rolling mills. As a result, the shorter
operating time of rolling mills generally allows a higher productivity. The environmental
protection, besides the possibility of rolling force reduction, is also recognized with the
reduced energy consumption when comparing the further cold rolling to the final foil
thickness of 90 µm [14]. Comparing the technologies of cold rolling from an energy point
of view revealed that the cold rolling of 3.25 mm HRB spent 53.2 kWh less power than the
cold rolling of 6 mm HRB to the foil of 90 µm.
The already mentioned decrease in rolling force is also possible with asymmetric
rolling [15,16]. Performing any option of asymmetry during cold rolling has peculiar
microstructural, texture and technological advantages [17,18]. However, the changes and
adjustments of hot rolling are easier to implement in industrial plants due to the suitability
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 9 of 11

of the rolling mill for asymmetric rolling. Further, the appearance of the ski effect with the
asymmetric rolling demand to the additional operation of tensile stretch or cutting off a
larger share of the rolled product reduces productivity [19].
For the special trendy foil products like coffee lids or battery foils, the characteriza-
tion encompassing SEM with the EBSD technique slowly passes from merely researching
and scientific approaches to the standard control techniques in the industry [20]. The
requirements for the specific formability properties, less anisotropic or certain share of
Cube texture components in a rolled material indicate the inability for control with the LM
techniques [21]. The detailed SEM-EBSD analyses have been proven to be extremely useful
with the results of random texture components and the percentage of recrystallized grains.
Those results for the HRBs enable the planning of suitable technology for cold rolling.
The desired mechanical and metallographic properties of foil were possible only with the
assistance of HRB’s properties and changes caused during hot rolling adjustments [22].
Through a further combination of mechanical properties and surface characteristics, the en-
tire surface analysis can be performed via fracture surface parameters to identify differences
caused during hot rolling [23].
The major focus for aluminum special rolled products is most often on the formability,
deep-drawability and anisotropy properties, which can be connected and explained with
the microstructure (grain size) and texture of material [24,25]. The reduction in the final
hot-rolling temperature and thickness of HRB for the Rm and Rp0.2 measured values does
not represent a key influence [26,27]. On the other hand, the mentioned two changed
parameters have an effect on the A in TD and Ea values. The decrease in hot rolling
temperature helped by producing the average of the smaller crystal grains, but at the
same time, the increase in the share of deformed and substructured grains has the greater
influence on the reduction in A values in TD [28,29]. The decrease in recrystallized grains
with the smaller HRB final thickness also has a contribution to the higher anisotropy
shown by Ea values [30]. The drop of recrystallized grains and especially the random
texture components’ share for the lower HRB thickness, which finished with the lower
hot-rolling temperature, are the reason and the explanation for the higher heterogenic
Ea values among the widths of rolled products [31]. The 1.5% higher Ea value for the
3.25 mm HRB compared to the 6 mm HRB can be explained with the 36 ◦ C lower finish
temperature of hot rolling for 3.25 mm HRB. The lower temperature contributes to the more
texture-orientated microstructure with a lower fraction of random texture components,
which, in combination with a higher share of deformed grains from the GAM criteria, tends
to the more anisotropic material.

5. Conclusions
The influences of the thickness reduction and the surface temperature after the last pass
of industrial hot rolling were studied on the EN AW-8011 aluminum alloy. The chemical
compositions and homogenization regimes of analyzed 6 mm and 3.25 mm hot-rolled
bands (HRBs) material were the same. From the combination of the simulation calculations,
industrial hot-rolling and the materials characterization analysis, it can be concluded that:
• The hot rolling simulations predicted the rolling force and temperature on the surface
of the workpiece for each rolling pass. Compared to the measured values of industrial
hot rolling, the simulation results match to a greater extent and predict the possible
intermediate deviations from increasing and decreasing trends.
• The thickness and, consequently, the temperature reduction in HRBs provide the
microstructure with more evenly distributed (homogeneous) grains of a similar size
through the cross-section. For the 3.25 mm HRB, the smaller grains appeared in the
center of the cross-section, unlike for the 6 mm HRB, where the smaller grains were
detected on the top and bottom positions of the cross-section.
• The 6 mm HRB has 64% of random texture components and 83% of recrystallized
grains. The effect of temperature and thickness reduction causes the proportional
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 10 of 11

adjustment for 3.25 mm HRB, where 42% are random texture components and 55% of
grains are recrystallized.
• Elongation (A) values in rolling (RD) and transverse (TD) directions significantly differ,
only in the case of 3.25 mm HRB. Consequently, the earing results (Ea) are more than
1.5% higher for 3.25 mm HRB compared to 6 mm HRB.
The reduction in HRB thickness partially affects the microstructure and mechanical
properties, which was also confirmed with HRB samples of intermediate 4 mm thickness.
Therefore, with the aim to increase production, the technology to further improve cold
rolling must be adapted while considering the microstructure, and the mechanically and
thermally deviated effects.

Author Contributions: Conceptualization, J.K. and P.C.; methodology, J.K. and S.K.K.; software, P.Š.
and T.Š.; validation, J.K.; formal analysis, T.Š., P.C., I.P. and Č.D.; investigation, J.K., I.P. and Č.D.;
writing—original draft preparation, J.K. and K.I.K.; writing—review and editing, J.K., S.K.K. and
K.I.K.; visualization, J.K. and K.I.K.; supervision, S.K.K. and K.I.K.; funding acquisition, K.I.K. All
authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by Ansan-Si Hidden Champion Fostering and Support project
and funded by Ansan city (funding No. PIZ22220). This work was financially supported by the
Slovenian Research Agency (core funding No. P2-0132).
Data Availability Statement: The data supporting the findings of this study are available within
the paper.
Acknowledgments: The tool for simulating heating, hot and cold rolling was developed within the
framework of the MARTINA AND MARTIN projects, which were co-financed by the Ministry of
Education, Science and Sports.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Nomenclature

HRB Hot-rolled band

SEM Scanning electron microscopy
EBSD Electron backscatter diffraction
IPF-Z Inverse pole figure in Z direction
GAM Grain average misorientation
LM Light microscopy
Rm Ultimate tensile strength, MPa
Rp0.2 Yield strength, MPa
A Elongation, %
Ea Earing measurements, %
RD Rolling direction
TD Transverse direction

References
1. Kraner, J.; Smolar, T.; Volšak, D.; Lažeta, M.; Skrbinek, R.; Fridrih, D.; Cvahte, P.; Godec, M.; Paulin, I. Influence of the Hot-Rolling
Technique for En Aw-8021B Aluminium Alloy on the Microstructural Properties of a Cold-Rolled Foil. Mater. Tehnol. 2021, 55,
773–779. [CrossRef]
2. Zhao, Q.; Liu, Z.; Li, S.; Huang, T.; Xia, P.; Lu, L. Evolution of the Brass texture in an Al-Cu-Mg alloy during hot rolling. J. Alloys
Compd. 2017, 691, 786–799. [CrossRef]
3. Maurice, C.; Driver, J.H. Hot rolling textures of aluminum. Mater. Sci. Forum 1994, 157–162, 807–812. [CrossRef]
4. Neumann, L.; Kopp, R.; Ludwig, A.; Wu, M.; Bührig-Polaczek, A.; Schneider, M.; Crumbach, M.; Gottstein, G. Simulation of
casting, homogenization, and hot rolling: Consecutive process and microstructure modelling for aluminium sheet production.
Model. Simul. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2004, 12, S19–S31. [CrossRef]
5. Nellippallil, A.B.; De, P.S.; Gupta, A.; Goyal, S.; Singh, A.K. Hot Rolling of a Non-heat Treatable Aluminum Alloy: Thermo-
Mechanical and Microstructure Evolution Model. Trans. Indian Inst. Met. 2017, 70, 1387–1398. [CrossRef]
6. Bruni, C.; El Mehtedi, M.; Forcellese, A.; Gabrielli, F.; Simoncini, M. Simulation of multipass hot rolling of AA6082 aluminium
alloy. J. Steel Relat. Mater. 2004, 2, 109–114.
Metals 2023, 13, 1301 11 of 11

7. Rudnytskyj, A.; Simon, P.; Jech, M.; Gachot, C. Constitutive modelling of the 6061 aluminium alloy under hot rolling conditions
and large strain ranges. Mater. Des. 2020, 190, 108568. [CrossRef]
8. Shahani, A.R.; Setayeshi, S.; Nodamaie, S.A.; Asadi, M.A.; Rezaie, S. Prediction of influence parameters on the hot rolling process
using finite element method and neural network. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2009, 209, 1920–1935. [CrossRef]
9. Abolhasani, A.; Zarei-Hanzaki, A.; Abedi, H.R.; Rokni, M.R. The room temperature mechanical properties of hot rolled 7075
aluminum alloy. Mater. Des. 2012, 34, 631–636. [CrossRef]
10. Byra Reddy, B.; Bharathesh, T.P.; Prasad, D.S. Effect of Hot rolling on Microstructure and Mechanical behaviour of B 4 C nano
particulates reinforced Al6063alloy Composites. J. Mech. Civ. Eng. 2021, 18, 53–62. [CrossRef]
11. Zheng, C.; Wang, Y.; Jin, J.; Gong, P.; Wang, X.; Wen, H.; Zhang, M. Recrystallization and grain growth behavior of variously
deformed CoCrFeMnNi high-entropy alloys: Microstructure characterization and modeling. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2022, 20,
2277–2292. [CrossRef]
12. Yoda, R.; Yokomaku, T.; Tsuji, N. Plastic deformation and creep damage evaluations of type 316 austenitic stainless steels by
EBSD. Mater. Charact. 2010, 61, 913–922. [CrossRef]
13. Ghosh, S.; Patnamsetty, M.; Somani, M.C.; Peura, P. Characteristics of dynamic softening during high temperature deformation of
CoCrFeMnNi high-entropy alloy and its correlation with the evolving microstructure and micro-texture. J. Mater. Res. Technol.
2021, 15, 6608–6623. [CrossRef]
14. Kraner, J.; Fajfar, P.; Palkowski, H.; Kugler, G.; Godec, M.; Paulin, I. Microstructure and texture evolution with relation
to mechanical properties of compared symmetrically and asymmetrically cold rolled aluminum alloy. Metals 2020, 10, 156.
[CrossRef]
15. Kraner, J.; Fajfar, P.; Palkowski, H.; Godec, M.; Paulin, I. Asymmetric cold rolling of an aa 5xxx aluminium alloy. Mater. Tehnol.
2020, 54, 575–582. [CrossRef]
16. Rudnytskyj, A.; Vorlaufer, G.; Leimhofer, J.; Jech, M.; Gachot, C. Estimating the real contact area in lubricated hot rolling
ofaluminium André. Tribiol. Int. 2023, 180, 108283. [CrossRef]
17. Kraner, J.; Smolar, T.; Volsak, D.; Cvahte, P.; Godec, M.; Paulin, I. A Review of Asymmetric Rolling Osnovni Pregled Asimetričnega
Valjanja. Mater. Tehnol. 2020, 54, 731–743. [CrossRef]
18. Frodal, B.H.; Thomesen, S.; Børvik, T.; Hopperstad, O.S. On fracture anisotropy in textured aluminium alloys. Int. J. Solids Struct.
2022, 244–245, 111563. [CrossRef]
19. Brun, O.; Chauveau, T.; Bacroix, B. Influence of temperature on hot rolling textures of aluminium alloys in absence of recrystalli-
sation. Mater. Sci. Technol. 1991, 7, 167–175. [CrossRef]
20. Sidor, J.J. Effect of hot band on texture evolution and plastic anisotropy in aluminium alloys. Metals 2021, 11, 1310. [CrossRef]
21. Kraner, J.; Kevorkijan, V.; Godec, M.; Paulin, I. Metallographic Methods for Determining the Quality of Aluminium Alloys. Mater.
Tehnol. 2021, 55, 541–547. [CrossRef]
22. Gravier, P.; Mas, F.; Barthelemy, A.; Boller, E.; Salvo, L.; Lhuissier, P. Pore closure in thick aluminum plate: From industrial hot
rolling to individual pore observation. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2022, 303, 117509. [CrossRef]
23. Macek, W.; Branco, R.; Szala, M.; Marciniak, Z.; Ulewicz, R.; Sczygiol, N.; Kardasz, P. Profile and areal surface parameters for
fatigue fracture characterisation. Materials 2020, 13, 3691. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
24. Zhang, L.; Wang, Y.; Yang, X.; Li, K.; Ni, S.; Du, Y.; Song, M. Texture, microstructure and mechanical properties of 6111 aluminum
alloy subject to rolling deformation. Mater. Res. 2017, 20, 1360–1368. [CrossRef]
25. Danilov, S.V.; Mustaeva, I.A.; Golovnin, M.A. Influence of hot rolling technological regimes on 6061 aluminium alloy sheet texture.
Solid State Phenom. 2017, 265, 999–1004. [CrossRef]
26. Li, W.; Wu, M.; Xiao, D.; Huang, L.; Liu, W.; Tang, S. Effect of rolling temperature on microstructure and properties of TA31
titanium alloy hot rolled plate. Materials 2022, 15, 7517. [CrossRef]
27. Zhao, X.; Chen, L.; He, K.; Wu, N.; Zeng, J. Effect of contact heat transfer on hot rolling of aluminum alloy. Procedia Manuf. 2019,
37, 91–96. [CrossRef]
28. Wang, B.B.; Xie, G.M.; Wu, L.H.; Xue, P.; Ni, D.R.; Xiao, B.L.; Liu, Y.D.; Ma, Z.Y. Grain size effect on tensile deformation behaviors
of pure aluminum. Mater. Sci. Eng. A 2021, 820, 141504. [CrossRef]
29. Skejić, D.; Dokšanović, T.; Čudina, I.; Mazzolani, F.M. The basis for reliability-based mechanical properties of structural aluminium
alloys. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 4485. [CrossRef]
30. Hirsch, J. Texture evolution during rolling of aluminium alloys. TMS Light Met. 2008, 2008, 1071–1077.
31. Yoshida, K.; Ishizaka, T.; Kuroda, M.; Ikawa, S. The effects of texture on formability of aluminum alloy sheets. Acta Mater. 2007,
55, 4499–4506. [CrossRef]

Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.