4.5 Article

Research on the macro- and meso-mechanical properties of frozen sand mold based on Hertz-Mindlin with Bonding model

期刊

PARTICUOLOGY
卷 88, 期 -, 页码 176-191

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.partic.2023.08.019

关键词

Frozen sand mold; Hertz-Mindlin with Bonding model; Uniaxial compression test; Discrete element method; Mechanical properties

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, the macro- and meso-mechanical properties of frozen sand molds were discussed using the HMB model. A parameter calibration methodology was proposed and the effects of mesoscopic parameter variations on the compressive strength and stress-strain gradient were investigated. The study also verified the reliability and effectiveness of the frozen sand mold HMB model through compression tests and simulations.
In this study, macro-and meso-mechanical properties of frozen sand molds were discussed based on the Hertz-Mindlin with Bonding (HMB) model. Plackett-Burman, steepest ascent, and central composite designs were utilized to propose a parameter calibration methodology. The effects of mesoscopic parameter variations on the compressive strength and average gradient of stress-strain were investigated through response surface method analysis. Results showed that the relative error between the simulated and measured repose angle is 3.1% under calibrated intrinsic contact parameters. The compressive strength and average stress-strain gradient primarily depend on the normal and shear stiffness per unit area, as well as the particle size and porosity of the silica sand. Furthermore, taking load-displacement curves of three frozen sand molds with different geometric characteristics as the target value, the reli-ability and effectiveness of the frozen sand mold HMB model were verified through uniaxial compression tests and discrete element simulations.(c) 2023 Chinese Society of Particuology and Institute of Process Engineering, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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