4.6 Article

Simulation and Experimental Study on Wear of U-Shaped Rings of Power Connection Fittings under Strong Wind Environment

期刊

MATERIALS
卷 14, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ma14040735

关键词

wear; surface morphology; surface analysis; finite element modelling; wear modeling

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51865055]
  2. Tianshan Talents Plan of Xinjiang Autonomous Region of China [201720025]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the wear characteristics of U-shaped rings in power connection fittings in strong wind environments, and constructed a wear failure prediction model. It was found that wear load significantly affects the wear of U-shaped rings, leading to changes in surface hardness, plastic deformation layers, and wear mechanisms. The simulation results were in good agreement with test values, with a small error of 1.56%.
The objective of this study was to investigate the wear characteristics of the U-shaped rings of power connection fittings, and to construct a wear failure prediction model of U-shaped rings in strong wind environments. First, the wear evolution and failure mechanism of U-shaped rings with different wear loads were studied by using a swinging wear tester. Then, based on the Archard wear model, the U-shaped ring wear was dynamically simulated in ABAQUS, via the Umeshmotion subroutine. The results indicated that the wear load has an important effect on the wear of the U-shaped ring. As the wear load increases, the surface hardness decreases, while plastic deformation layers increase. Furthermore, the wear mechanism transforms from adhesive wear, slight abrasive wear, and slight oxidation wear, to serious adhesive wear, abrasive wear, and oxidation wear with the increase of wear load. As plastic flow progresses, the dislocation density in ferrite increases, leading to dislocation plugs and cementite fractures. The simulation results of wear depth were in good agreement with the test value of, with an error of 1.56%.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据