International Journal of Material Forming

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 269–278 | Cite as

Sensitivity analysis of the expansion process for alloy UNS N08028

  • Aitor NavarroEmail author
  • Mario Lechner
  • Unai Ruiz
  • Alejandra Lopez
Thematic Issue: Advances in Material Forming Simulation


Due to the good mechanical properties of forged parts, the forging process plays a decisive role in the manufacturing of seamless stainless steel pipes for oil country tubular goods (OCTG) lines. Tough competition between manufacturers gives them plenty of incentive to make their processes in raw material and energy usage more and more efficient. In this context the expansion process is one of the critical production steps in the manufacturing of seamless stainless steel pipes. This work presents a sensitivity analysis of a finite element method (FEM) for the simulation of the expansion of the alloy UNS N08028. The input parameters ram speed, tool angle, initial ID and final ID of the billet as well as temperature were used to describe responses like tool wear and material loss. With the aim to minimize the tool wear and to reduce the material waste, a study of influence of the input parameters on the mentioned responses were performed. This development is supported by experimental work in order to validate the simulation model. The sector demand for new materials with specific properties and the cost-intensive experimental trials justifies the use of such simulation tools and opens great opportunities for the industry.


Finite-element-method (FEM) Stainless steel Expansion process DOE analysis 



This work was supported by Tubacex Group. The author gratefully acknowledge the financial support from Tubacex Group.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. 1.
    Brensing KH, Sommer B (2009) Steel tube and pipe manufacturing processes, Res. Dpt., Salzgitter Mannesmann Röhrenwerke Gmb H, Mülheim an der Ruhr, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hansson S (2009) Modeling of the stainless steel tube extrusion process, Ph.D. diss., Dpt. of Appl. Ph. of Mech. Eng., Luleå Univ. of Tech., Luleå, SweedenGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Marie S et al. (2014) Inverse analysis of forming processes based on FORGE® environment. Transvalor. ESAFORMGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fanini S (2008) Modelling of the Mannesmann effect in tube piercing, Ph.D. diss., Dpt. of Mech. Inn. and Mgmt., Univ. of Padova, Padova, ItalyGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Sejournet J, Delcroix J (1995) Glass lubrication in the extrusion of steel. Lubr Eng 11:389–396Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu C, Zhang L, Kang F (2013) Experimental study on heat transfer boundary conditions for steel hot extrusion process. Adv M Res 668:856–860. Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dieter GE, Kuhn HA, Semiatin SL (2003) Handbook of workability and process Design, ASM Inter., Mat. Park, OhioGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cockroft MG, Latham DJ (1996) Ductility and the workability of metals. Int J Instr Media 96:33–39Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wang H et al (2017) Global sensitivity analysis for fiber reinforced composite fiber path based on D-MORPH-HDMR algorithm. Struct Multidiscip Optim:1–16Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Xue X et al (2016) Modelling and sensitivity analysis of twist springback in deep drawing of dual-phase steel. Mater Des 90:204–217. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Eriksson L, Johansson E, Kettaneh-Wold N, Wikstrom CA, Wold S (2008) Design of experiments- principles and applications. Umetrics ABGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France SAS, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aitor Navarro
    • 1
    Email author
  • Mario Lechner
    • 1
  • Unai Ruiz
    • 1
  • Alejandra Lopez
    • 1
  1. 1.Tubacex Group, Innovation DepartmentLlodioSpain

Personalised recommendations