## 5 Results
### Roll Gap Asymmetry Adjustment during Rolling  
Figure 11 shows the results of rolling simulation featuring the developed roll gap misalignment compensation method and the proposed RAC configuration. At the time \(t_{1}\) = 4 s, rolls grip the strip. Rolling forces \(F_{\text{DS}}\) and \(F_{\text{OS}}\) (Panel 2) increase from 0 to 30 MN. At the time \(t_{2}\) = 5 s, the system begins to process the 2 mm increase in the DS gauge (not shown in Figure 11). This causes forces in the hydraulic cylinders in Panel 2 to deviate and raises the RAC output \(U_{\text{RAC}}\) (Panel 3) whereas the gauge controller output \(U_{\text{PT}}\) remains virtually constant. These signals control the inputs of SD position controllers, hence they are given in mm. As a result, signals fed to the servo valves (Panel 4) change, and mismatch is compensated by adjusting the hydraulic cylinder pressure.  
The presented dependencies lead to a conclusion that the proposed solutions compensate roll gap misalignment with a satisfactory precision. Rapid adjustment of hydraulic cylinder pressure (Panel 2) helps maintain DS and OS gauge precisely. There is no variation in thickness across the feed over the entire passage. The dependencies \(h_{\text{OS}}\) and \(h_{\text{DS}}\) in Panel 1 confirm that. The pressure \(F_{\text{DS}}\) rises by 33% (30 to 40 MN), whereas \(F_{\text{OS}}\) drops from 30 to 25 MN.  
Figure 11: Simulation of roll gap misalignment with the proposed solutions: Panel 1 shows side-specific gauge, mm; Panel 2 shows rolling forces for DS and OS, MN; Panel 3 shows the controller outputs, mm; Panel 4 shows signals to the SD servo valves, bar.  
Figure 12 shows similar dependencies derived by running an actual passage with electric drive acceleration and deceleration. The strip is gripped at the time \(t_{1}\), then at the time \(t_{2}\) the system begins to process the 2 mm increase in the DS gauge as shown in Figure 11. The system processes this disturbance until the time \(t_{3}\), when the electric drive decelerates. The goal of such simulation is to evaluate the precision of misalignment compensation as affected by dynamic acceleration and deceleration of the main electric drives that actuate the upper roll and the lower roll (UMD, LMD).  
Below is a brief analysis of the Figures 11 and 12:  
1. In both figures, \(F_{\text{DS}}\) and \(F_{\text{OS}}\) are proportionally controlled with opposite signs. Thus, the total rolling force \(F_{\Sigma}\) remains constant.
2. Forces reach steady-state values in one second in the timeframe \(t_{2}\)-\(t_{3}\) from 5 s to 6 s in both figures.
3. Since change in the drive speeds does not affect the rolling force, roll gap misalignment is adjusted precisely in both steady state and dynamic operation. This is shown by side-specific gauge curves \(h_{\text{OS}}\) and \(h_{\text{DS}}\) in Panel 1, Figure 11, which are fully aligned.
4. Applying relatively slow change in the forces \(F_{\text{DS}}\), \(F_{\text{OS}}\) (Panel 3 in Figure 12) does not affect the drive speeds and torques in Panels 1 and 2.  
Thus, the hydraulic SDs on the DS and OS do not affect each other. Moreover, SD movements do not affect speed drives due to relatively slow change in the rolling force. Their influence is effectively countered by the fast-response speed control system. Rolling speeds (accelerations and decelerations) do not produce feedback that could affect the precision of SD positioning.