Wear 319 (2014) 1218

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Wear
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/wear

Inuence of tool steel microstructure on friction and initial

material transfer
Patrik Karlsson n, Anders Grd, Pavel Krakhmalev
Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Karlstad University, Universitetsgatan 2, 65637 Karlstad, Sweden

art ic l e i nf o a b s t r a c t

Article history: An investigation was conducted to study the inuence of tool steel microstructure on initial material
Received 31 December 2013 transfer and friction. Two different powder metallurgy tool steels and an ingot cast tool material were
Received in revised form tested in dry sliding against 1.4301, 1.4162, Domex 355 MC and Domex 700 MC sheet materials. It was
30 June 2014
found that tool steel hard phase heights inuence initial material transfer and friction. The coefcient of
Accepted 1 July 2014
Available online 16 July 2014
friction increased with decreasing tool steel hard phase heights at 50 N normal load and initial material
transfer occurred around protruding hard phases. At higher load of 500 N the sheet material adhered to
Keywords: both the tool steel matrix and hard phases. Coefcient of friction decreased with increasing proof
Material transfer strength of the sheet material at 500 N normal load.
Friction
& 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Galling
Microstructure
Tool steel

1. Introduction
Surface damage related to material transfer and adhesive wear
in sheet metal forming (SMF) operations is known as galling. The
ASTM standard G40 denes galling as A form of surface damage
arising between sliding solids, distinguished by macroscopic, usually
localized, roughening and creations of protrusion rising above the
original surface; it often includes material transfer, or plastic ow, or
both [1]. In SMF, galling results in high and unstable friction,
scratching of produced parts and damage of the metal forming
tool causing costly production stops due to replacement of the
tool. Therefore, it is of high importance for the sheet metal
forming industry to gain more knowledge about galling.
It has been shown that galling is a gradual process and is
inuenced by factors such as tool and sheet mechanical properties
and surface roughness, type of lubricant, contact pressure and
lubricant failure due to frictional heating [27]. Tool steel micro-
structure is another important factor inuencing the galling
resistance of the tool [2,5,813]. However, details of the very
beginning stage of galling are not systematically investigated.
Thus, tests focusing on the initial material transfer are important.
It has been shown in studies of the early stage of galling under
lubricated conditions [11,13] that material transfer already
occurred after short sliding distances. Mechanisms of the very
n
Corresponding author. Tel.: +46547001533; fax: +46547001449.
E-mail address: Patrik.Karlsson@kau.se (P. Karlsson).
rst transfer are not clear and inuences of tool steel microstruc-
ture, phase composition and chemical composition have not been
systematically investigated. Therefore, it is important to investi-
gate the initiation of material transfer for several different material
couples.
In the present study the inuence of tool steel microstructure
on initial material transfer and friction was studied. Three different
tool steels were tested against four different sheet materials under
dry sliding conditions in a slider-on-at-surface (SOFS) tribometer
using a single pass of sheet material over the tool steel surfaces.
Tests were done under high- and low-load conditions to evaluate
inuence of contact situation on the beginning of sheet material
transfer to the tool steel surface.
2. Experimental
2.1. Wear tests
Wear tests were performed in ambient air (24 1C, 30% relative
humidity) under dry sliding condition in a slider-on-at-surface
(SOFS) tribometer, Fig. 1(a), using a sliding speed of 0.0025 m/s
and normal loads of 50 N and 500 N. Changes in friction during
wear testing were continuously logged by a computer through
collection of signals from force gauges measuring normal force, F1,
and friction force F2, Fig. 1(a). In the SOFS tribometer a disc was
slid against a counterbody material. The disc was slid in one
direction and at a predetermined sliding length the disc was lifted
and moved back to the point of origin. After a small shift

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2014.07.002
0043-1648/& 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
 P. Karlsson et al. / Wear 319 (2014) 1218
Fig. 1. Overview of the SOFS (a) displaying the disc xed in a disc holder and force gauges F1 and F2. In the SOFS tests, discs made of sheet material were slid against plates
made of tool steels (b).
Fig. 2. Microstructure of the IC (a) steel comprising M7C3 carbides and the Vancron 40 steel (b) comprising M(C,N) carbonitrides and M6C carbides. In (c) the microstructure
of the PM2 tool steel containing MC carbides is shown.
perpendicular to the sliding direction the disc sliding movement
might be reiterated against a fresh counterbody surface. The
history of material transfer and wear was preserved on the surface
of the counterbody. In the present study, the sheet material
transfer to tool steel surface was in focus and, therefore, tool
steels were chosen as counterbody. In the tests done in the present
research, a double-curved disc made of sheet material with 25 mm
and 5 mm radii was pressed and slid against plates made of tool
steels with size of approximately 85  45  12 mm3, Fig. 1(b). The
disc was slid in a single stroke against the tool steel plate and the
stroke length was 75 mm. Test specimens were ultrasonically
cleaned in ethanol prior to testing to ensure that no surface
contaminants would affect the results.
2.2. Materials
The investigated tool materials were ingot cast (IC) EN
X153WCrMoV12 tool steel and two different powder metallurgy
(PM) steels: Uddeholm Vancron 40 and PM2, Fig. 2. The IC steel
comprises M7C3 carbides with size of about 57 mm in diameter
and 1520 mm in length and the Vancron 40 steel contains M(C,N)
carbonitrides and M6C carbides with a diameter of approximately
12 mm. MC carbides with a diameter of about 12 mm were the
hard phase in the PM2 material. Austenitizing temperatures of
approximately 1050 1C and 1020 1C with holding time of 30 min
and tempering at 525 1C for 2  2 h and 560 1C for 3  1 h were
used to achieve the hardness of the IC and Vancron 40 tool steels,
respectively. The austenitizing temperature for the PM2 steel was
about 1020 1C with holding time of 30 min and tempering was
performed at 525 1C for 2  2 h.
The sheet materials were austenitic (EN 1.4301) and duplex (EN
1.4162) stainless steels and two carbon steel sheet materials:
13
Domex 355 MC (DX355) and Domex 700 MC (DX700). Data from
the manufactures of the materials on chemical composition and
mechanical properties are shown in Table 1. Independent of tool
material type, the corresponding contact pressures to the normal
loads used in the SOFS wear tests were approximately 0.83
0.85 GPa and 0.991.0 GPa at normal loads of 50 N and 500 N
respectively in tests against the sheet materials EN 1.4301 and
DX355. The corresponding contact pressures to 50 N and 500 N
normal loads were 1.01.1 GPa and 1.51.7 GPa respectively in
tests against the EN 1.4162 and DX700 sheet materials. Both the
tool steels and sheet materials were delivered in as hardened
condition.
Prior to wear tests, the test specimens were polished to
approximately 0.05 mm (Ra) and subsequently cleaned in ethanol.
The surface preparation of the discs made of sheet materials was
performed manually using 500, 800 and 1000 mesh SiC papers for
4 min at each SiC paper mesh. Subsequently, polishing the discs to
a mirror-like surface nish was performed using Struers MD-plus
polishing disc and 3 mm diamond slurry for 4 min. The grinding
and polishing of the tool steel plates were done automatically
using Hermes EWK 500 mesh grinding disc for initial grinding of
the plates at 150 N for 1 min. Subsequently, the tool steel plates
were polished with Struers MD-Allegro polishing disc with 9 mm
diamond slurry at 180 N for 5 min and MD-Plus with 3 mm at
140 N for 4.5 min. In the last surface preparation step of the tool
steel plates a mirror-like surface was achieved by polishing the
plates using Struers MD-Nap with 1 mm diamond slurry at 60 N for
1.5 min.
Surface roughness, height of hard phases and microstructure
were investigated using a GEMENI LEO 1530 FEG scanning electron
microscope (SEM) and a Innova atomic force microscope (AFM).
Heights of the tool steel hard phases were measured using AFM.
14 P. Karlsson et al. / Wear 319 (2014) 1218
Table 1
Chemical composition and mechanical properties of the steel types. Rp0.2 and A5 stands for proof stress and ductility of the materials respectively. The ductility A5 was
measured as % elongation.
Steel Chemical composition [Wt%]
IC 1.5C, 12Cr, 0.9Mo, 0.8V
PM 1.1C, 4.5Cr, 3.2Mo, 3.7W, 1.8N, 8.5V
PM2 2.3C, 4.8Cr, 3.6Mo, 0.4Si, 8.0V
1.4301 0.04C, 18Cr, 8.1Ni
1.4162 0.03C, 21.5Cr, 0.3Mo, 0.22N, 1.5Ni
DX355 0.10C, 0.03Si, 1.5Mn, 0.025P, 0.010S, 0.015Al, 0.09Nb, 0.20V, 0.15Ti
DX700 0.12C, 0.10Si, 2.10Mn, 0.025P, 0.010S, 0.015Al, 0.09Nb, 0.20V, 0.15Ti
Fig. 3. The coefcient of friction values for the material couples measured in SOFS at 50 N (a) and 500 N (b) load. Below the diagram (b), the proof strength of each sheet
material is included.
Scan areas of 10 mm  10 mm in AFM were compared to SEM scans
of the same area and by this method it was possible to distinguish
the different hard phases from the tool steel matrix.
3. Results
3.1. Friction coefcient
An average coefcient of friction value for each material couple
tested in SOFS was calculated for steady-state conditions, which
was reached after approximately 2 cm sliding distance. The aver-
age coefcient of friction (COF) data, representing the average COF
values for the material couples during the sliding period of 27.5 cm,
at 50 N and 500 N loads, is presented in Fig. 3. The general trend at
50 N load was that independently of sheet material type, the COF
values were the lowest for the Vancron 40 tool steel followed by IC
and PM2 tool steels, Fig. 3(a). The highest COF value of approxi-
mately 0.6 was observed for the PM2 tool steel against the carbon
sheet material DX355. The lowest COF value of approximately
0.3 was observed for the Vancron 40 tool steel against the duplex
stainless steel type 1.4162. The observed COF value for the IC tool
steel against all sheet material types was approximately 0.45.
At 500 N load the COF values for the material couples
decreased with increasing proof strength of the sheet material,
Fig. 3(b). The highest COF value of approximately 0.6 was observed
for the Vancron 40 tool steel against the austenitic stainless steel
sheet 1.4301. In tests against the sheet material types DX355,
1.4162 and DX700 the highest COF was observed for the PM2 tool
steel. The lowest COF value of approximately 0.3 was observed for
the IC tool steel against the carbon steel sheet material DX700.
Additionally, the COF values were the lowest for the tool steel IC
independent of sheet material type.
Hard phase content [vol%] Rp0.2 [MPa] Hardness A5 [%]
13% M7C3 61 HRC
5% M6C,14% M(C,N) 61 HRC
17% MC 60 HRC
300 1707 10 HV0.05 45
600 2707 30 HV0.05 30
355 1307 10 HV0.05 23
700 230 710 HV0.05 12
3.2. Material transfer
Typical sites of sheet material transfer to the tool surfaces are
shown in Fig. 4 at 2 cm sliding distance. At 50 N load, the
transferred and adhered sheet material was more pronounced
around the tool steel hard phases, Fig. 4(a, c, and e). The site of
material transfer for the two different hard phases of the Vancron
40 tool steel was more pronounced around the M(C,N) carboni-
trides, Fig. 4(a). On the IC tool steel, lumps of transferred material
were more pronounced around the M7C3 carbides. However,
material was also transferred to the IC tool steel matrix as shown
in Fig. 4(c). Similar transfer was observed on the PM2 tool steel
where transferred material was observed around the MC carbides
and the tool steel matrix.
At 500 N load, transferred sheet material was observed at both
hard phases and matrix of all tested tool steels, Fig. 4(b, d, and f).
The sheet material was smeared out in the sliding direction as can
be seen for the IC tool steel after tests at 500 N against the steel
sheet type 1.4301, Fig. 4(d). However, the transferred material was
less pronounced on the Vancron 40 M(C,N) carbonitrides and the
PM2 MC carbides, Fig. 4(b and f).
3.3. Hard phase heights
Fig. 5(a) shows typical hard phase height values for the
different tool steels using AFM. In the PM tool steel Vancron 40
the two hard phases M(C,N) carbonitrides (dark hard phase in
Fig. 5(b)) and M6C carbides (bright hard phase in Fig. 5(b)) differed
in height. This was observed in SEM with tilted specimens as
shown in Fig. 5(b) and the hard phase heights were measured in
AFM after phase type conrmation in SEM, Fig. 5(c and d).
The height of the hard phases in Vancron 40 was approximately
2225 nm for the M(C,N) carbonitrides and 35 nm for the M6C
carbides. The height of the MC carbides in the PM2 steel were
 P. Karlsson et al. / Wear 319 (2014) 1218 15

Fig. 4. Typical material transfer sites, indicated with arrows, on the Vancron 40 (a, b), IC (c, d) and PM2 (e, f) tool steel after tests at 50 N (a, c, e) and 500 N (b, d, f) against the
sheet materials 1.4162 (a) and 1.4301 (bf). Sliding direction of the sheet material discs against the tool steel plates from top to bottom.

about 24 nm and the M7C3 carbides in the IC tool steel had a
height of approximately 57 nm.
4. Discussion
Prior to tests, the tool steels were polished to a mirror-like
surface. However, as has been shown in [10] that even for very ne
polished tools the tool steel microstructure features inuence the
nano scale roughness. The surface roughness on the nano scale
involves surface protrusions such as tool steel hard phases and
the origin of these protrusions is believed to be the difference in
hardness between the tool steel matrix and the hard phases. To
understand what parts of microstructure are in the very rst
contact, nanoroughness measurements were done, Fig. 5. It was
observed that the heights of the different hard phases differed,
Fig. 5(a). The heights were approximately 2225 nm for the M(C,N)
carbonitrides and 35 nm for the M6C carbides in the Vancron 40
steel, 24 nm for the MC carbides in the PM2 steel and 57 nm for
the M7C3 carbides in the IC tool steel. The height values were
measured using AFM surface scans and additional validation of
type of hard phases was performed by scanning the same area
using SEM, Fig. 5(c and d). Similar height values have been
reported in [10], which interestingly indicate that hard phases in
tool steels protrude above the matrix even though the preparation
method is different.
Investigations of the worn tool steel surfaces at 50 N load
showed that the main area of transferred material was around the
tool steel hard phases, Fig. 4. This trend was observed for all
investigated tool steels, but some material transfer also occurred
to the matrix of the tool steels. It is likely that more contact
between sheet material and tool steel matrix occurs for tool steels
with lower hard phases such as the IC and PM2 tool steels. Other
factors such as volume fraction, size and distribution of the hard
phases also affect the separation of sheet material to the tool steel
matrix. Because of these factors, the IC tool steel has large open
areas of matrix which are vulnerable to damage and material
transfer. Nevertheless, material transfer was more pronounced
around the hard phases in this steel as well. The preferential area
of material transfer for the Vancron 40 tool steel was around the M
(C,N) carbonitrides. Due to the lower height of the second tool
steel hard phase M6C in the Vancron 40 tool steel, only minor
contact between the sheet material and the M6C phase occurs as
was observed in Fig. 4(a). Similar observations have been reported
16 P. Karlsson et al. / Wear 319 (2014) 1218
Fig. 5. Height of the hard phases (a). The difference in height of the M(C,N) carbonitrides and the M6C carbides in the Vancron 40 tool steel is shown with a tilted specimen
in SEM (b). The height values of the hard phases were extracted from AFM surface scans (c) after phase type conrmation in SEM (d).
in [1416] using different laboratory test equipments and lower
normal loads. In [14,15] for example, it has been shown that
aluminum transferred and accumulated on tool surface protru-
sions such as hard phases and surface damages such as scratches.
Transfer of material was more pronounced after several passages
of aluminum against the tool steel surfaces. The transfer of sheet
material to the M(C,N) hard phase in the present study could
therefore be attributed to height of the protruding hard phases.
However, it is generally believed that the carbonitrides have low
afnity against steel sheet materials [2,10,17]. Thus, the observed
transferred material to the hard phase is likely to occur due to
mechanical interlocking of sheet material against the hard phase
resulting in microploughing of the sheet material by tool steel
hard phases rather than adhesion between the sheet and the tool.
This effect was also observed for the IC and PM2 tool steels but less
pronounced because of the lower height of hard phases resulting
in more contact and thus additional transfer to the matrix of the
tool steels.
At 500 N load, the transferred and adhered sheet material was
observed on both the hard phases and matrix of all tested tool
steels. Thus, in dry sliding at higher loads the height of the tool
steel hard phase was not sufcient to prevent the sheet material to
reach the tool steel matrix. Due to strong adhesion in this contact
situation, material transfer to the tool steel matrix occurs as was
observed, Fig. 4. Transfer of sheet material to both the matrix and
hard phases of tool steels at higher loads is typical and has been
observed in tests under lubricated sliding too [5,9,13]. However,
the transferred material in the present study was less pronounced
on the Vancron 40 M(C,N) carbonitrides and the PM2 MC carbides.
Spaces in between the hard phases were lled with transferred
and adhered sheet material as can be seen in Fig. 4(b and f). The
reason for this is not clear but less adhesion is possible resulting in
more easy slip at the interface between the sheet material and the
tool steel hard phase and thus less material transfer. Similar results
have been shown in dry sliding of tool steels against carbon sheet
materials coated with a thin lm of gold [18].
The coefcient of friction is described in the theory of friction
as the ratio between the traction force and the normal force.
Factors such as adhesion, plowing and asperity deformation may
contribute to the traction force [19]. Plowing can occur at larger or
smaller scales. In the present study the disc made of sheet material
was softer than the counterbody made of tool steel and thus the
plowing effect of the disc against the tool steel surface was
negligible in the one-stroke tests. The contribution of asperity
deformation to friction is small for smooth surfaces. Prior to
testing the tool steel plates and sheet material discs were polished
to a mirror-like surface resulting in Ra of approximately 0.05 mm.
The effect of sheet asperity deformation on friction may, therefore,
be considered negligible. Interlocking of sheet material against the
protruding tool steel hard phases resulting in microploughing on
the other hand could occur even though the heights of the hard
phases were in nanometer scale. However, because of the smooth
surfaces and selected test arrangement, the microploughing effect
on friction may be considered as minor and the remaining factor
contributing to friction is adhesion.
In the present study, the coefcient of friction was measured
in tests at 50 N and 500 N normal loads. It was observed that the
coefcient of friction differed at the different load regimes, Fig. 3.
The general trend for tests performed at 50 N load was that the
coefcient of friction increased with decreasing tool steel hard
 P. Karlsson et al. / Wear 319 (2014) 1218
phase height. At 50 N load the measured coefcient of friction
among the tested tool steels was the lowest for the Vancron 40
tool steel, Fig. 3(a). This trend was observed in tests against all
sheet materials. With decreasing tool steel hard phase height the
sheet material is more in contact with the tool steel matrix. This
results in a steel to steel contact with high adhesion and thus
higher coefcient of friction as was observed for the IC and PM2
tool steels [20]. Interlocking of sheet material against the protrud-
ing hard phases resulting in microploughing on the other hand
could occur. However, if microploughing was the dominating
factor contributing to friction, the Vancron 40 with the high M
(C,N) carbonitrides should have the highest friction particularly in
the tests against the softer sheet materials. In the present study,
the Vancron 40 had the lowest coefcient of friction values among
the tested tool steels. Therefore, the microploughing effect on
friction may be considered negligible compared to adhesion at
tests performed at 50 N normal load.
Contrary to the results obtained at the lower load of 50 N, the
coefcient of friction was higher at 500 N load for tool steels
comprising high hard phases. This was more pronounced for tests
with Vancron 40 against the austenitic stainless steel sheet 1.4301,
Fig. 3(b). The reason may be designated to adhesion between the
materials as the softer sheet material is pressed down to the
matrix at higher loads resulting in a steel to steel contact and thus
high friction. However, the microstructure of the IC tool steel has
more open areas of matrix than the other tool steels. Sheet
material can therefore more easily reach the tool steel matrix
resulting in higher friction. Additionally, it has been shown that in
lubricated tests quicker damage to the tool steel matrix occurs for the
IC tool steel due to open areas matrix resulting in wear-induced
galling initiation sites [13]. Nevertheless, as can be seen in Fig. 3
(b) the IC tool steel has lower coefcient of friction values than the
other tool steels against all sheet materials. It is therefore likely that
an additional mechanism to adhesion occurs. Possible mechanism
may be interlocking of sheet material against protruding hard phases
as has been shown in [14] resulting in microploughing of the sheet
material by tool steel hard phases. The ploughing effect on friction
may be higher for tool steels with higher hard phases in tests against
softer low strength sheet materials because of larger penetration
depth of the microploughing. This would explain the higher coef-
cient of friction value for tests with Vancron 40 against the austenitic
stainless steel sheet 1.4301, Fig. 3(b).
Compared to the M(C,N) carbonitrides in Vancron 40, the lower
height of the M7C3 carbides in IC allows for the sheet material to
ow more easily over the carbides resulting in less interlocking
and thus lower friction as was observed, Fig. 3(b). The results
obtained for the PM2 tool steel, however, do not follow the same
trend and other factors might affect the results. The height of the
MC carbides in the PM2 tool steel was the lowest among the tested
steels and following the previous discussion, the tool steel is
expected to have the lowest coefcient of friction values at
500 N. As seen in Fig. 3(b) the coefcient of friction values for
this steel are instead often higher than the other tested material
couples. One possible contributing factor to the deviating trend for
the PM2 tool steel which might be further investigated is higher
afnity between the MC carbides and the tested sheet materials.
The afnity between tool steel carbides and sheet material has
been discussed many times in literature but only a few attempts to
measure adhesion for different types of tool steel hard phases have
been made [2,17]. The measurements are challenging and factures
such as humidity, specimen cleaning methods and type of probe
material may affect the results.
Sheet material mechanical properties are another factor con-
tributing to the material transfer and friction. It was observed
that independently of tool steel type, the coefcient of friction
decreased with increasing proof strength of the sheet material as
17
for tests at 500 N, Fig. 3(b). The highest coefcient of friction value
of approximately 0.6 was observed for the austenitic stainless steel
type 1.4301 with proof strength of 300 MPa. The lowest coefcient
of friction value of approximately 0.3 was observed for the high
strength carbon steel sheet material DX700 with a proof strength
of 700 MPa. Additionally, the sheet material DX700 has lower
ductility as can be seen in Table 1 showing a A5 value of 12%
compared to the 1.4301 steel type with A5 value of 45%. It has been
shown that materials with higher strength are less prone to galling
and thus transfer and related wear problems such as galling
depend on mechanical properties of materials [13,20,21]. In [13]
for example it has been shown that in lubricated galling tests
galling occurred at higher contact pressures for sheet materials
with higher proof strength. Additionally, in [13] it was observed
that the ow of sheet material against the tool steel surface caused
tool steel damages around the tool steel hard phases resulting in
wear induced galling initiation sites. In the present study, the high
coefcient of friction in tests against sheet material with lower
proof strength and higher ductility might also be explained by the
plastic deformation of sheet material. Sheet material with lower
proof strength and ductility will ow more easily in between the
tool steel hard phases and quickly reach the matrix of the tool
steels. This results in high friction because of high adhesion in the
metal to metal contact. Another possible factor contributing to
higher friction is microploughing of the sheet material by protrud-
ing tool steel hard phases. The plowing effect may be more
pronounced for the softer low strength sheet material because of
larger plowing penetration depth resulting in higher friction.
5. Conclusions
The inuence of tool steel microstructure on friction and initial
material transfer was investigated. An ingot cast (IC) tool steel EN
X153WCrMoV12 and two different powder metallurgy (PM) tool
steels Vancron 40 and PM2 were tested against EN 1.4301 and EN
1.4162 stainless steels and DX355 and DX700 carbon steels under
dry sliding conditions.
It was shown that at lower loads the tool steel microstructure
inuences both the initial material transfer and the coefcient of
friction. Independently of sheet material type, the Vancron 40 tool
steel had the lowest coefcient of friction among the tool steels at
50 N normal load. The M(C,N) carbonitrides with a height of
approximately 2225 nm were the highest of all tool steel hard
phases. Higher tool steel hard phases are benecial because the
material transfer to the tool steel matrix is prevented which most
likely results in less adhesion and thus lower friction. However,
because of the height the sheet material interlocked on tool steel
hard phases which were more pronounced on the M(C,N) than the
M6C carbides of the Vancron 40 tool steel.
At higher load of 500 N sheet mechanical properties such as proof
strength and ductility inuenced friction. The highest coefcient of
friction value of 0.6 was observed for the austenitic stainless steel
type 1.4301 with proof strength of 300 MPa and A5 ductility value of
45%. In tests against the high strength carbon sheet material DX700
with proof strength of 700 MPa and ductility value A5 of 12%, the
lowest coefcient of friction value of 0.3 was observed. The highest
coefcient of friction value of 0.6 was observed in tests against the
Vancron 40 tool steel with the highest hard phase height. The lowest
coefcient of friction value of 0.3 was observed in tests against the IC
tool steel with lower hard phase heights. Thus, higher hard phase
heights are not benecial at higher loads in dry sliding conditions
possibly because of more interlocking between high hard phases and
sheet material resulting in higher friction.
18 P. Karlsson et al. / Wear 319 (2014) 1218
Acknowledgements
The authors greatly acknowledge Uddeholms AB, Outokumpu
Stainless AB and SSAB for supplying of the tested materials.
References
[1] ASTM G40 Standard Terminology Relating to Wear and Erosion; 1999.
[2] N. Bay, A. Azushima, P. Groche, I. Ishibashi, M. Merklein, M. Morishita,
T. Nakamura, S. Schmid, M. Yoshida, Environmentally benign tribo-systems
for metal forming, CIRP Ann. Manuf. Technol. 59 (2010) 760780.
[3] A. Grd, P. Krakhmalev, J. Bergstrm, N. Hallbck, Galling resistance and wear
mechanismscold work tool materials sliding against carbon steel sheets,
Tribol. Lett. 26 (2007) 6772.
[4] A. Grd, P. Krakhmalev, J. Bergstrm, Wear mechanisms in deep drawing of
carbon steelcorrelation to laboratory testing, Tribotest 14 (2008) 19.
[5] P. Karlsson, A. Grd, P. Krakhmalev, J. Bergstrm, Galling resistance and wear
mechanisms for cold-work tool steels in lubricated sliding against high
strength stainless steel sheets, Wear 286287 (2012) 9297.
[6] P. Karlsson, J. Eriksson, A. Grd, P. Krakhmalev, M. Olsson, J. Bergstrm,
Galling resistance evaluation of tool steels by two different laboratory test
methods for sheet metal forming, Lubr. Sci. 24 (2012) 263272.
[7] E. van der Heide, D.J. Schipper, Galling initiation due to frictional heating,
Wear 254 (2003) 11271133.
[8] G.A. Fontalvo, R. Humer, C. Mitterer, K. Sammt, I. Schemmel, Microstructural
aspects determining the adhesive wear of tool steels, Wear 260 (2006)
10281034.
[9] I. Heikkil, N. Stavlid, S. Hogmark, Adhesion of selected PM tool steels and
coated tool steels in sliding contact with stainless steel, in: Proceedings of the
International Conference Powder Metallurgy Particulate Materials, Part 6,
2003, pp. 225241.
[10] I. Heikkil, Inuence of tool steel microstructure on galling resistance against
stainless steel, Tribology Series 43 (2004) 641649.
[11] P. Karlsson, A. Grd, P. Krakhmalev, J. Bergstrm, Inuence of size and
distribution of hard phases in tool steels on the early stage of galling, in:
Proceedings of the 9th International Tooling Conference, 2012, pp. 469476.
[12] O. Sandberg, Advanced nitrogen alloyed steels-properties and application
experiences. in: Proceedings of the 8th International Tooling Conference,
2009, pp. 357367.
[13] P. Karlsson, P. Krakhmalev, A. Grd, J. Bergstrm, Inuence of work material
proof stress and tool steel microstructure on galling initiation and critical
contact pressure, Tribol. Int. 60 (2013) 104110.
[14] J. Heinrichs, M. Olsson, S. Jacobson, Inuence of tool steel microstructure on
initial material transfer in metal formingin situ studies in the SEM, Wear 302
(2013) 12491256.
[15] J. Heinrichs, M. Olsson, S. Jacobson, New understanding of the initiation of
material transfer and transfer layer build-up in metal formingin situ studies
in the SEM, Wear 292293 (2012) 6173.
[16] N. Safara Nosar, M. Olsson, Inuence of tool steel surface topography on
adhesion and material transfer in stainless steel/tool steel sliding contact,
Wear 303 (2013) 3039.
[17] S. Hatami, A. Nafari, L. Nyborg, U. Jelvestam, Galling related surface properties
of powder metallurgical tool steels alloyed with and without nitrogen, Wear
269 (2010) 229240.
[18] A. Grd, P. Krakhmalev, J. Bergstrm, Inuence of tool steel microstructure on
origin of galling initiation and wear mechanisms under dry sliding against a
carbon steel sheet, Wear 267 (2009) 387393.
[19] N.P. Suh, H.-C. Sin, The genesis of friction, Wear 69 (1981) 91114.
[20] H. Merchant, K.J. Bhansali, Metal Transfer and Galling in Metallic Systems, The
Metallurgical Society, Warrendale, PA, 1981.
[21] K.G. Budinski, Incipient galling of metals, Wear 74 (1981) 93105.