EDGE RETENTION/ROLLING PART II

[EOU]

Interesting way to look at the problem Larrin and we would propose that both could be true; more weight and less weight. If enough force were applied to begin bringing in the underlying and thicker metal into the calculation then one would suppose that a more brittle metal would have a greater resistance to rolling. It would seem to be more prone to chipping, but less to rolling. However, the design goal of the SET unit was to reproduce the sort of common rolls that are produced through ordinary and typical usage. 150 grams seems to have satisfied that need. In other applications, perhaps a greater application force would be appropriate. 

With regard to less force, we would say that it might boil down to this; if some physical effect on the order of "foil effect" renders HRC50 and HRC62 edges, essentially,  indistinguishable from each other then a lesser force is not going to affect the outcome comparatively speaking. If there is some difference between the two then a lesser force might help measure that difference. 

Speaking to our general audience here, we would like to remind everyone that while these tests, to date, might not seem to indicate a lot of difference between HRC50 and HRC62 steels with regard to edge rolling that there does seem to be a very large difference between hardened steels (HRC50+) in general and unhardened steels. Our tests on unhardened steels indicated roll rates far in excess of hardened steels.