|
| 不同装夹方式下的连杆疲劳寿命 |
| Connecting Rod Fatigue Life under Different Clamping Modes |
| Received:October 10, 2014 Revised:November 10, 2014 |
| DOI：10.3969/j.issn.1674-6457.2014.06.025 |
| 中文关键词: 连杆 模拟工况 装夹方式 疲劳寿命 |
| 英文关键词: connecting rod simulated operating condition clamping manner fatigue life |
| 基金项目: |
|
| Hits: 4846 |
| Download times: 4172 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 分析大头间隙配合及大头小头均间隙配合这2 种不同装夹方式,对连杆疲劳寿命的检测产生的不同的结果。方法 采用MTS880±500 kN 和MTS322±250 kN 疲劳试验系统,采用不同的装夹方式模拟发动机工作状态,并通过“可靠性试验SAFL 方法”进行数据处理。结果 采用大头间隙配合装夹的连杆失效概率为5. 2×10-5,大头小头均间隙配合装夹的连杆失效概率为0. 87×10-5;并且2 种装夹方式会影响连杆疲劳试验后的断裂位置。结论 连杆疲劳试验中,采用大头小头均间隙配合装夹方式得到的连杆失效概率,较大头间隙配合装夹方式更小。进行疲劳试验需谨慎选择装夹方式。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To analyze the different results of connecting rod fatigue life detection under two different clamping modes, the big head clearance fit and the big head small head clearance fit. Methods The engine working conditions under different modes of the clamping were simulated using the MTS880±250 kN and MTS322±250 kN fatigue test systems. And the data was processed with the SAFL data analysis method. Results The connecting rod failure probability under the big head clearance fit clamping mode was 5. 2×10-5 ,while the connecting rod failure probability under the big head small head clearance fit clamping mode was 0. 87×10-5 . These two kinds of clamping manners affected the fracture location of the connecting rod after fatigue test. Conclusion In the connecting rod fatigue test, the connecting rod failure probability obtained by using the big head small head clearance fit clamping was lower than that by using the big head clearance fit clamping. So we must be careful when choosing the clamping manner in the fatigue tests. |
|
View Full Text
View/Add Comment Download reader |
| Close |
|
|
|
渝公网安备 50010702501719号