4.5 Article

Microscale bone grinding temperature by dynamic heat flux in nanoparticle jet mist cooling with different particle sizes

期刊

MATERIALS AND MANUFACTURING PROCESSES
卷 33, 期 1, 页码 58-68

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/10426914.2016.1244846

关键词

Bone; contact-angle; dynamic; grinding; microscale; nanoparticle; temperature; viscosity

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51575290]
  2. Major Research Project of Shandong Province [2017GGX30135]
  3. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation, China [ZR2017PEE011, ZR2017PEE002]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanoparticle jet mist cooling (NJMC) is an effective solution to prevent heat injuries in clinical neurosurgery bone grinding. A simulation study on temperature field of microscale bone grinding was performed to discuss the effect of nanoparticle size on heat convection during this cooling method by the dynamic heat flux density model. Such dynamic heat flux density model was established through real-time acquisition of grinding force signals. Results showed that given the real-time dynamic heat flux, workpiece surface temperature changes with time. Nanofluids using 30 nm nanoparticles show the largest heat convection coefficient (1.8723 W/mm(2).K) and the lowest average surface temperature followed by nanofluids of 50, 70, and 90 nm nanoparticles successively. An experimental verification using fresh bovine femur was conducted with 2% (volume fraction) of different sizes of Al2O3 nanoparticles. The simulated temperature under dynamic heat flux comes close to the actual measured temperature. Under testing conditions, temperature under mist cooling is 33.6 degrees C, temperatures under NJMC using nanofluids (30, 50, 70, and 90 nm) are 21.4, 17.6, 16.1, and 8.3% lower, respectively. This result confirmed the positive correlation between the average workpiece surface temperature and nanoparticle size. Experimental results agreed with theoretical analysis, verifying the validity of theoretical modeling.

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