鋼筋拉直機(jī)的設(shè)計(jì)【鋼筋校直機(jī)】

鋼筋拉直機(jī)的設(shè)計(jì)【鋼筋校直機(jī)】,鋼筋校直機(jī),鋼筋拉直機(jī)的設(shè)計(jì)【鋼筋校直機(jī)】,鋼筋,拉直,設(shè)計(jì),校直機(jī) 鋼筋拉直機(jī)的設(shè)計(jì) 院院 系：系：工學(xué)院工學(xué)院 班班 級(jí)：級(jí)：機(jī)制機(jī)制052052班班 姓姓 名：名：肖鈥鑫肖鈥鑫 學(xué)學(xué) 號(hào)：號(hào)：2005045120050451 指導(dǎo)老師：指導(dǎo)老師：吳瑞梅吳瑞梅一、設(shè)計(jì)方案分析和擬訂 n1.1設(shè)計(jì)目的 運(yùn)輸中為了方便以及節(jié)省運(yùn)輸空間常常會(huì)將10mm以下鋼筋卷成直徑約為1米左右的鋼筋圈。但是，作成了盤狀的鋼筋不能作為建筑工程的材料，設(shè)計(jì)的鋼筋拉直機(jī)就是以拉直被彎曲的鋼筋為目的的。一、設(shè)計(jì)方案分析和擬訂1電動(dòng)機(jī)2離合器3減速箱4聯(lián)軸器5卷筒1.2總體結(jié)構(gòu)設(shè)計(jì)一、設(shè)計(jì)方案分析和擬訂 1.3卷筒工作簡(jiǎn)圖二.牽引件的選擇：.1鋼絲繩的選用 鋼絲繩具有良好的各方向相同的撓性（過(guò)卷繞裝置時(shí)，容易彎曲），承載能力大，經(jīng)受沖擊大和過(guò)載能力強(qiáng)，使用安全可靠。從強(qiáng)度及安全性能等方面考慮，選擇鋼絲繩作為鋼筋拉直機(jī)的牽拉件。經(jīng)過(guò)計(jì)算確定選擇線接觸鋼絲繩6W（19）型（GB1102-74），選擇直徑d=14.0mm。二.牽引件的選擇：.2 鋼絲繩的連接 本設(shè)計(jì)采用繩卡固定法。即將鋼絲繩繞過(guò)套環(huán)后用繩卡固定。鋼絲繩直徑為7-16mm時(shí)，繩卡數(shù)為3個(gè)，間距等于5-6倍鋼絲繩直徑。三.卷筒的設(shè)計(jì)以及鋼絲繩的固定裝置.1卷筒的設(shè)計(jì)n卷筒將原動(dòng)機(jī)的回轉(zhuǎn)運(yùn)動(dòng)改變?yōu)槲锲返闹本€運(yùn)動(dòng)。設(shè)計(jì)選擇單層繞光面卷筒。n它與鋼絲繩的接觸面比較隨意，對(duì)其沒(méi)有特殊要求，因此選用HT200鑄鐵鑄造。三.卷筒的設(shè)計(jì)以及鋼絲繩的固定裝置.2鋼絲繩的固定裝置 為了保證鋼絲繩的正常安全工作以及易于更換。設(shè)計(jì)使用以壓板固定鋼絲繩。四.電動(dòng)機(jī)的選擇 n選用Y系列三相鼠籠式異步電動(dòng)機(jī) n型號(hào)Y132M1-6型n 轉(zhuǎn)速n=960r/min n輸出功率P=4KW n重量m=71kg 五.減速器的設(shè)計(jì).1選擇減速器的類型n本設(shè)計(jì)中選擇的是二級(jí)展開式圓柱齒輪減速器 n總傳動(dòng)比為 i=n/nk=960/44.7=21.8n高速級(jí)傳動(dòng)比i1=4.5 n低速級(jí)傳動(dòng)比i2=5.0.2減速器齒輪設(shè)計(jì)基本參數(shù)d齒輪1(高速級(jí))實(shí)體圓柱齒輪齒輪2（高速級(jí)）鑄造腹板圓柱齒輪齒輪3（低速級(jí)）實(shí)體圓柱齒輪齒輪4（低速級(jí)）鑄造腹板圓柱齒輪分度圓直徑dd1=60mmd2=258mmd3=63mmd4=315mm不變位齒輪的中心距aa12=159mma34=189mm嚙合角=20=23.27實(shí)際中心距 a34=193mm嚙合角cos20=0.9397cos23.27=0.9187中心距變動(dòng)系數(shù)yY=（a-a）/m=1.24齒高變動(dòng)系數(shù)yy=x1+x2-y=0.1齒頂圓直徑da1=m*（Z1+2*ha*）=66mmda2=264mmda3=m*（Z1+2*ha*+2*x1-y）=74mmda4=326mm齒根圓dfdf1=m*（Z1-2*ha*-2c*）=52.5mmdf2=250.5mmdf3=58mmdf4=311mm軸徑30mm50mm 40mm 60mm節(jié)圓直徑dd1=60mmd2=258mmd3=64.4mmd4=322mm齒寬b 1=50mmb 2=40mmb 3=90mmb 4=80mm五.減速器的設(shè)計(jì).3軸的設(shè)計(jì)n高速軸：總長(zhǎng)為L(zhǎng)=202mm，材料采用45號(hào)鋼n低速軸：總長(zhǎng)為L(zhǎng)=183mm，材料采用45號(hào)鋼 n傳動(dòng)軸：總長(zhǎng)為L(zhǎng)=230mm，材料采用45號(hào)鋼五.減速器的設(shè)計(jì) 4.4箱體的設(shè)計(jì)n箱蓋和箱座是用螺栓聯(lián)結(jié)成一體。這種箱體結(jié)構(gòu)緊湊、安裝方便。n選用材料HT200鑄造箱體六.聯(lián)軸器的選擇 n采用機(jī)械式聯(lián)軸器n根據(jù)所聯(lián)軸徑、所傳遞的轉(zhuǎn)矩和軸的轉(zhuǎn)速，從有關(guān)手冊(cè)中選擇合適的型號(hào)。由前述可知，低速軸的轉(zhuǎn)矩T3=763000 N.mm，轉(zhuǎn)速n3=44.7 r/min，所聯(lián)軸徑d=50。n根據(jù)軸徑和計(jì)算轉(zhuǎn)矩，最后選用凸緣聯(lián)軸器的型號(hào)為YLD11 七.離合器的確定n設(shè)計(jì)選用矩形牙嵌式離合器n特點(diǎn)：制造容易，接合、脫開較困難，停車時(shí)可不關(guān)機(jī)。八.夾具的設(shè)計(jì)n夾具是由三個(gè)部分組成：1.有一個(gè)將鋼筋卡死的鑄鐵棒。2.一個(gè)球體為主體，其中有兩個(gè)通孔一大一小。3.還有一小鐵棒是鋼筋裝夾好了之后用于固定鐵棒。n特點(diǎn)是：裝夾原理比較簡(jiǎn)單，其零部件可以通過(guò)鑄造生產(chǎn)，而且對(duì)工作表面沒(méi)有什么要求 八夾具的設(shè)計(jì)八.夾具的設(shè)計(jì)九.機(jī)座的設(shè)計(jì) n本設(shè)計(jì)中，鋼筋拉直機(jī)的機(jī)座是鑄造而成的，其鑄造材料為KTZ60-3，本材料韌性較低，但強(qiáng)度大，硬度高，耐磨性好，且加工性良好 n把底座設(shè)計(jì)成一個(gè)整體，在放置鋼筋拉直機(jī)的地方澆一塊帶有鏍孔的水泥平地，然后用鑼釘直接把底座固定在水泥地上。底座上各個(gè)鏍紋孔的位置由各部件的尺寸來(lái)確定。敬請(qǐng)各位老師批評(píng)指正。敬請(qǐng)各位老師批評(píng)指正！謝 謝！Upper yield dynamic stress Time dependent plasticity Split Hopkinson Tension Bar steel. SHTB. by LsDyna code features. Time dependent plasticity has been developed to explain upper and lower yield behavior precise they are the material These instabilities are due to the upper and lower yield stress of the material and have been investigated by several authors. The upper yield stress has been explained with metallic structure parameters such as the dislocation density and velocity 7.In any case, material models involving microstructure parameters are not suitable for engineering purposes. Structural assessment requires relations between the upper and the lower yield value dynamic Hardings for upper The experimental study of the dynamic tensile behavior scale quenched and self-tempered rebar (1640 mm in diameter) is practically impossible, except maybe in the case of very facilities (i.e. the large facility of the Joint Research Centre, Ispra). The unfeasibility of this study has led us to proceed to the charac- terization of the material 13 and the numerical analysis of the dynamic behavior of the material with the present paper. The importance of the numerical simulation is definitely based on the possibility of studying real scale structural elements by means of numerical simulation of tests otherwise not feasible for Corresponding author. Tel.: +41 58 6666 377; fax: +41 58 6666 359. Materials and Design 57 (2014) 156167 Contents lists available and E-mail address: ezio.cadonisupsi.ch (E. Cadoni). In the analysis of the experimental results often it is possible to face difficulties in interpreting the results due to the presence of instabilities (i.e. presence of the first peak), which are not consid- ered in the usual material constitutive laws as JohnsonCook 6. Harding 12, who introduced a linear relation between upper yield stress enhancement and loading rate. proach is the most suitable engineering formulation found in the literature. 0261-3069/$ - see front matter C211 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http:/dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.matdes.2013.12.049 ap- yield of full- large be properly based on correct experimental data. The difficulties connected to the complexity of the experimental tests can be appropriately understood and solved by numerical simulation. To better comprehend the experimental results it is essential to per- form the simulation of the testing machine 15 in order to obtain mutual verification. Engineering investigations of upper yield were made by Camp- ell and Harding 810. Campbell introduced the delay time and thermal activation theory by which the upper yield occurs after a characteristic time after the start of the loading stress due to the shear band thermal activation 11. The value of the upper yield stress was further investigated by 1. Introduction The understanding of the dynamic reinforcing steels is essential for the reinforced concrete structures when loading rate. These assessment studies means of finite element codes and values of the material resulting into a loading rate sensitivity. Finally, the material model has been used to reconstruct a virtual test over a rebar of 32 mm diameter, as an example of general procedure to cal- culate the global material response. C211 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. of concrete and assessment of existing are subjected to a high usually conducted by models have to with the engineering variables associated to the loading pulse, structure geometry, stress and strain tensor. Models that require the definition of material variables in terms of structure and dislo- cation density/velocity can be considered a phenomenological explanation of upper yield lacking of the complete parameteriza- tion of the stress strain curve including upper, lower yield and its time dependencies. Simulation High strain-rate have been discussed. The elastic and damping dispersion fonts have been introduced into the model to explain the real case variability in SHTB signals. Strain-rate dependent plasticity model has been used Numerical simulation of the high strain-rate and self-tempered reinforcing steel in tension Gianmario Riganti, Ezio Cadoni University of Applied Sciences of Southern Switzerland, CH-6952 Canobbio, Switzerland article info Article history: Received 27 September 2013 Accepted 19 December 2013 Available online 28 December 2013 Keywords: Reinforcing steel bar abstract This paper presents the numerical pered reinforcing steel in tension. imental facility (SHTB-Split interpretation of the experimental tion of the B450C reinforcing and output signals of the Materials journal homepage: www.else behavior of quenched analysis of the high strain-rate behavior of quenched and self-tem- The investigation has been performed properly simulating the exper- Hopkinson Tension Bar), highlighting criticism in the simulation and results. Finite element simulation has allowed a robust model valida- Parametrical finite element model has been used to rebuild the input Physical influence of damping in input wave and modeling strategies at ScienceDirect Design cisms of the SHTB. Section 3 reports the numerical model of the imen geometrical non linearity is included; (iii) the hypothesis of The input stress rising time is another significant characteristic for the material response and it is conditioned by the SHB set up (striker or pre-stressed bar), by the use of pulse shaper, and by other physical parameters out of direct control such as the facilities damping. The pulse shaper technique 17,18 is generally applied to smooth the input signal, in case of stress oscillations typical of stri- ker impact in SHB. By interposition of an intermediate deformable element between striker and input bar, a higher repeatability and a smooth input pulse is obtained. If short rising time is wanted, the input signal will be also affected by high frequency perturbations, especially in SHB configurations. High frequency perturbations widen the repeatability of signals and are subject to the elastic and damping dispersion phenomena. Usually in SHB a ratio length/diameter is adopted, which is always suitable to elastic and damping dispersion 17. The damping influences the input dispersion and its effect should be evaluated such as the elastic dispersion. Damping is not directly controlled in SHB. Different facilities could generate pulses with significant differences in rising time and perturbations. Referring to Fig. 1, three typologies of input signal could be generated: and Design 57 (2014) 156167 157 uniformity of stress/strain through the specimen is overcome; (iv) inertial effects are included; (v) multi material and small struc- ture specimen can be investigated; (vi) possible use of simulation for experimental facilities accuracy enhancement; and (vii) optimi- zation techniques and sensitivity analysis can be applied. 2.2. Effect of perturbations into the signal SHB relations contain several idealizations as the one-dimen- sional wave propagation through bars and specimen, the unifor- mity stress in the specimen, the absence of perturbations and inertial effects. It is well-known as a real input signal of SHTB dif- fers from the ideal trapezoidal pulse due to local perturbations when the real signals are used to obtain the material model param- eters, a series of errors are included due to simplified hypothesis and signal perturbations. The study of perturbed real signal effects to material model response is suitable to enhance the material model correctness. The influence of these factors on the material model response can be checked by means of finite element simulation. The input signal is mainly characterized by amplitude, duration, and rising time. These main characteristics can be adapted to gen- erate the wanted dynamic loading conditions into the specimen reaching the wanted rate during the experiment. experimental set-up. The numerical model results are presented in Section 4 both in terms of FEM and numerical analysis. These re- sults are discussed in Section 5. The model of the real size rebar is presented in Section 6. Finally, Section 7 summarizes the whole work. 2. Critical aspects of the Split Hopkinson Tension Bar 2.1. Signals analysis Signal analysis is usually adopted in the traditionaltheory of the Split Hopkinson Bar (SHB) to calculate stress, strain and strain-rate 17. Another methods consists in the combined use of the simula- tion and experimental test data. The validation of material model is then made by numerical and experimental gauge signal comparison. The advantages in combined use of simulation and experimen- tal data are: (i) accurate final material model verification; (ii) spec- technical or economic reasons. The present work completes, from a numerical point of view, what was started 13 with the experi- mental one, analyzing the various critical aspects regarding both experimental technique used and numerical simulation. The experimental technique used for the high strain rate mechanical characterization of B450C rebar was the Split Hopkin- son Tension bar (SHTB) and was described in 1315. In this par- ticular set-up the input pulse is not generated by a striker who hits the input bar, as in the traditional Split Hopkinson Pressure bar, but using the energy stored in a pre-stressed bar directly con- nected to the input bar 16. This set-up offers several advantages compared to the tradi- tional one, avoiding problems connected to the planar impact be- tween striker and input bar, to the pulse length, etc. The numerical analysis has been performed properly simulating the SHTB, highlighting criticism in the simulation and interpreta- tion of the experimental results. This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents the criti- G. Riganti, E. Cadoni/Materials The wanted input amplitude and duration are generated by tun- ing the physical parameters of the input pulse generation method (striker or pre-stressed bar). 1. Low loading rate, high rising time, no apparent wave dis- persion (curve a). 2. High loading rate, dispersion with hypercritical damping (curve b). 3. High loading rate, dispersion with sub critical damping (curve c). When a high loading rate is wanted to study loading rate dependent materials, input signal (b) or (c) has to be generated. The phenomena which generate the pulse perturbations can be grouped as: C15 Unlocking(SHTB)/contact(SHB) perturbations/combined use of shaping technique. C15 PochhammerChree wave dispersion 19,20. C15 Damping effects/damping dispersion. input pu lse time b c a Fig. 1. SHB input pulse in the case of: (a) pulse shape technique is used; (b) dispersion and over critical damping; and (c) dispersion and sub critical damping. The non-symmetric static stress due to gravity were several or- ders of magnitude lower than the average stress during the test, and with deformations lower than the geometrical imperfections. The gravity was not modeled but the static shear component at Teflon bearings correspondent to slipping condition is applied as concen- trated loads at bearings location. Static pre-loading acted along the axis direction. The axial-symmetric model was suitable to study the SHTB cause of geometrical and loading conditions. The axial-symmetric model allowed the inclusion of dispersion, damping, pre-loading and axial-stress wave propagation. Axial-symmetric volume weighted elements have been used due to efficiency advantages in computation while ensuring correct solution interpolation with the adequate mesh size. The numerical efficiency of the model was required for multiple runs in parametrical analysis. The element size in radial and axis direction was 2.5 mm. The size of the element was equal to the experimental gauge length to average the stress time history as the real test case. The variation of stresses in radial direction was of the second order influence with respect to the solution of wave propagation in axis direction for SHTB experimental purposes 20. Two ele- ments in radial direction allowed a correct interpolation of the solution. The specimen mesh size was 0.2 mm in axis direction, 0.275 mm in radial direction. The specimen was modeled using C15 Boundary conditions (friction and contact on holders, clamping, etc.). C15 Geometry/alignment errors. C15 Other unknown effects (bar homogeneity and isotropy). During the experiment, all the listed causes act simultaneously. The global effect on the input loading could be easily measured by input/output signal recording. Elastic dispersion occurs by a frequency dependent wave speed propagation. In SHB, the short distance between input/output gauge and specimen is suitable to affect elastic wave to dispersion. Gauge signal correction techniques can be applied to obtain data at specimen location. Those techniques are energy conservative and does not represent the dispersion due to damping. This hypothesis is usually correct because of distance between gauge and specimen is short. Analytical technique cannot be applied for signal correc- tion affected by dispersion damping. A long length of the input bar is suitable to stabilize signal per- turbations, but the input length increases the elastic dispersion ef- fects resulting in smaller loading rate. The influence of damping, dispersion and rising time will be numerically investigated before applying the simulation to the experimental data. 3. Numerical model of the experimental set-up Explicit time integration has been applied to simulate the dy- namic test with rate-dependent material modeling using LsDyna code. The SHTB geometry 1315 is basically axial-symmetric and the non-symmetry is a result of the small geometrical and align- ment imperfections. The axial length of the whole facilities was 15 m consisting of pre-loading bar (6 m), input bar (3 m), and out- put bar (6 m). The bar diameter was 10 mm and the estimated alignment error was 0.1 mm. Bars were horizontally placed and vertical holders consist of Teflon bushing supporting the bars each 500 mm. 158 G. Riganti, E. Cadoni/Materials coincident nodes with bar at outer tread diameter. The axial-symmetric solution excluded non symmetrical geo- metrical perturbations. A full 3D analysis could include the align- ment perturbation and contacts in SHTB holders, with a computation cost increase of two orders of magnitude. Pre-loading was represented by initial stress conditions of pre- loading bar elements. A uniform axis direction stress was assigned. This solution is highly efficient and neglects the pre-loading energy stored closer to the jack joint, which is too far from the specimen side to afflict the input wave shape. Fixed boundary conditions in axis direction were assigned to the jack location. Nodes on axis were automatically constrained in radial direction. Locking was modeled with an instantaneous release free of per- turbation. At the start of the analysis, the pre-stressed elements of the tension bar were free to deform and explicit calculation starts. The absence of unlocking perturbation allowed to focus the influ- ence of material model and dispersion. A full restart technique was applied to increase calculation effi- ciency, adding specimen elements and out bar elements before the arrival of the input wave. Total number of nodes/elements was 19,285/28,955. Calculation time is 15 min at strain-rate 250 s C01 . 3.1. Damping and numerical model Damping modifies propagation of waves with a frequency dependent function. Damping study is necessary to the following material response verification. The SHTB damping sources were grouped in four physical sources: (i) Material damping: constitutive material of SHTB bar had its own damping parameter. The damping parameter for bars was low compared to the damping induced by other SHTB physical sources, as confirmed by simulation results. (ii) Friction: the static bar weight was distributed along the holders and acted in radial direction. Once the input wave was released, the moving in axial direction through the holder was possible because the axial pre-loading force is greater than the weight multiplied by the static friction coef- ficient. (pre-loading 10 4 N, input and pre-loading bar 50 N weight each, estimated static friction force 5 N). During the wave propagation, the bar hits the holder moving through the Teflon gasket gap several times. The resultant dynamic friction forces are highly dependent on the experimental set up by alignment and bars pre-deformation. (iii) Viscous interface: The bar was in atmospheric air and the high frequency vibration of the bar release energy was in radial direction. (iv) Dynamic contacts: The previously described bar/holder impacted release energy at holder location with a phenom- ena dependent on gap distance, materials, pre-deformation and imperfections. The wave propagation through holders dissipate energy. Damping must be introduced into the numerical model for cor- rect input signal generation. There are two different approaches to model damping in SHTB simulation: (a) The phenomenological approach consists in introducing the single physical effect by modeling the interaction rules with their driven parameters, e.g. contact, vibration, imperfection, influence. This method requires the maximum effort in mod- eling, and is time consuming with regards to the operator and calculator. (b) Model the global effect of damping by assigning a damping Design 57 (2014) 156167 coefficient which converges the numerical results to the experimental ones. A parametric analysis is necessary to identify the correct damping coefficient. As the global result of damping causes is easily detectable by input gauge signal, this method offers the best efficiency in modeling and results. In the present work, the (b) method has been applied. Damping was modeled by using LsDyna keyword C3 damping_global. Damping value was anisotropic in the axial and radial directions, in accor- dance with the two different damping sources 21. Iterative solu- tion of the numerical model compared to the experimental input wave will allow to identify the optimal numerical values. To model the axial damping due to friction of bar over Teflon gaskets, a series of damper elements with damping coefficient pro- portional to the estimated axial friction forces has been defined. These elements act in axial direction. 4. Numerical model results 4.1. FEM analysis The FEM analysis has been performed to verify the dependency imental input pulse and the numerical one has been depicted, 4.1.2. Dispersion and material model verification The input/output gauge signals were generated by interaction between SHTB and specimen. The material model has been tested by fitting the numerical output to the experimental one. If differ- ences are introduced in the numerical stress wave, the fitting of numerical output gauge to real test case by material model param- eters identification will include errors in parameters to compen- sate for input differences. The error propagation is numerically investigated. Material verification was performed by studying a strain-rate dependent material subject to a damped and un-damped input wave. The test material was the B450C type C 13, modeled as ex- plained in the next section. The input wave represents the maximal differences in input stress caused by dispersion error generation using non-damped finite element model. The dispersion oscillations according to the acoustic impedance 1 10 -3 high_damp no_damp experimental 0 1380 1390 1400 1410 1420 1430 1440 time s Fig. 3. Input pulse amplitude and rising time for two pre-loading conditions. 0 200 10 -6 400 10 -6 600 10 -6 800 10 -6 1 10 -3 1300 1400 1500 1600 1700 1800 optimized damp experimental strain - time s Fig. 4. Comparison between experimental and numerical input pulse. G. Riganti, E. Cadoni/Materials and 0 2 10 -4 4 10 -4 6 10 -4 8 10 -4 1380 1390 1400 1410 1420 1430 1440 1450 strain - using the definitive dampi