Effect of Crusher Arm Position and Surface Friction on the Mechanical Behaviour of a Crusher under Static Conditions

Abstract

Crushers are utilized to break down or crush various components in industrial applications are subjected to high stresses. The crushing process is carried out by a crusher arm located on the crusher itself. The shape and length of the crusher arm influence the deformation on the arm and the efficiency of crushing process. During the crushing process, stress concentrations occur at the contact regions and especially at the connection location of the crusher arm and the drive shaft. This study examined the connection of the crusher arm at various positions on the shaft and explored variations in stress. Finite element analysis was used in the analyses. The used material is standard steel that behaved elastically. The stresses changed in a way that was not proportional to the movement of the tangential crusher arm towards the center of the shaft. The d=8 mm and d=24 mm locations are the most suitable places to move the crusher arm rather than the tangential position (d=40 mm). The highest stresses occurred at the corners where the shaft and crusher arm connected and formed a stress concentration. The friction effects on the contact surface were also examined and the increased friction coefficient slightly reduced the stress values of the crusher system, but increased the stresses on the crushed object. Only maximum stress levels that are observed at the surface of the beam are mainly considered. The results regarding the crusher arm are discussed in detail.

Keywords

• Crusher
• Contact Interaction
• Deformation
• Friction
• Sliding Distance

References

1. Sato R, Maruyama I, Sogabe T, Sogo M. Flexural behavior of reinforced recycled concrete beams. Journal of Advanced Concrete Technology. 2007;5(1):43-61.
2. Wang K. Study of reasonable hanging roof length on hard roof. Procedia Engineering. 2011;26:772–77.
3. Tran T, Hou S, Han X, Nguyen T, Chau M. Theoretical prediction and crashworthiness optimization of multi-cell square tubes under oblique impact loading. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences. 2014;89:177–193.
4. Dong H, Gao G, Chen X, Guan W, Zou X. Crushing analysis of splitting–bending steel plate energy absorber under axial loading. International Journal of Mechanical Sciences. 2016;110:217–228.
5. Zhou L, Riska K, Ji C. Simulating transverse icebreaking process considering both crushing and bending failures. Marine Structures. 2017;54:167-87.
6. Tran T. A study on nested two-tube structures subjected to lateral crushing. Thin-Walled Structures. 2018;129:418–28.
7. Mohsenizadeh S, Ahmad Z. Auxeticity effect on crushing characteristics of auxetic foam-filled square tubes under axial loading. Thin-Walled Structures. 2019;145(106379):1-21.
8. Li J, Gao G, Yu Y, Guan W. Experimental and numerical study on splitting process of circular steel tube with enhanced crashworthiness performance. Thin-Walled Structures. 2019;145(106406):1-11.

9. Zhang X, Zhang H, Ren W. Axial crushing of tubes fabricated by metal sheet bending. Thin-Walled Structures. 2018;122:252–263.
10. Chen Y, Ye L, Escobedo-Diaz JP, Zhang Y, Fu K. Quasi-static and dynamic progressive crushing of CF/EP composite sandwich panels under in-plane localised compressive loads. Composite Structures. 2019;222(110839):1-11.
11. Tran T, Le D, Baroutaji A. Theoretical and numerical crush analysis of multi-stage nested aluminium alloy tubular structures under axial impact loading. Engineering Structures. 2019;182:39–50.
12. Wu Y, Fang J, Cheng Z, He Y, Li W. Crashworthiness of tailored-property multi-cell tubular structures under axial crushing and lateral bending. Thin–Walled Structures. 2020;149(106640):1-22.
13. Reddy KY, Kumar AP, Nagarjun J. A computational study on the crushing behaviour of aluminium capped cylindrical tubes subjected to oblique load. Materials Today: Proceedings. 2020;27:1923–27.
14. Ghanbari-Ghazijahani T, Nabati A, Azandariani MG, Fanaie N. Crushing of steel tubes with different infills under partial axial loading. Thin–Walled Structures 2020;149(106614):1-14.
15. Alkhatib F, Mahdi E, Dean A. Crushing response of CFRP and KFRP composite corrugated tubes to quasistatic slipping axial loading: Experimental investigation and numerical simulation. Composite Structures. 2020;246(112370):1-16.
16. Guo Y, Zhang J, Chen L, Du B, Liu H, Chen L, Li W, Liu, Y. Deformation behaviors and energy absorption of auxetic lattice cylindrical structures under axial crushing load. Aerospace Science and Technology. 2020;98(105662):1- 11.
17. Huang Z, Zhang X, Fu X. On the bending force response of thin-walled beams under transverse loading. Thin– Walled Structures. 2020;154(106807):1-10.
18. Allende-Seco R, Artigas A, Bruna H, Carvajal L, Monsalve A, Sklate-Boja MF. Hardening by transformation and cold working in a hadfield steel cone crusher liner. Metals. 2021;11(6):961.
19. Moncada M, Toledo P, Betancourt F, Rodríguez CG. Torque analysis of a gyratory crusher with discrete element method. Minerals. 2021;11(8):878.
20. Chen Z, Wang G, Xue D, Cui D. Simulation and optimization of crushing chamber of gyratory crusher based on the DEM and GA. Powder Technology. 2021;384:36–50.
21. Mishchuk YO, Nazarenko II, Mishchuk DO, Definition of rational operating modes of a vibratory jaw crusher. Naukovyi Visnyk Natsionalnoho Hirnychoho Universytetu. 2021;4:56-62.
22. Astanakulov K, Karshiev F, Gapparov S, Khudaynazarov D, Azizov S, Mini crusher-shredder for farms. E3S Web of Conferences, Conmechydro. 2021;264(04038):1-8.
23. Tamborrino A, Perone C, Veneziani G, Berardi A, Romaniello R, Servili M, Leone A. Experimental investigation of a new modular crusher machine developed for olive oil extraction plants. Foods. 2022;11:3035.
24. Doroszuk B, Król R. Industry Scale optimization: hammer crusher and dem simulations. Minerals. 2022;12:244.
25. Bwalya MM, Chimwani N. Numerical simulation of a single and double-rotor impact crusher using discrete element method. Minerals. 2022;12:143.
26. Mishchuk YO, Nazarenko II. Analysis of the energy laws of material destruction. Strength of Materials and Theory of Structures. 2023;110:294-315
27. Trahair NS. Non-linear biaxial bending of steel Z-beams. Thin-Walled Structures. 2018;129:317–26.
28. Budynas R, Nisbett K. Shigley's mechanical engineering design 11th Edition, McGraw Hill; 2020.
29. Young WC, Budynas RG. Roark’s formulas for stress and strain, Seventh Edition, McGraw-Hill; 2002.