Experimental and Modeling Study of Abrasive Wear of Tungsten Carbide Drilling Bit in Wet and Dry Conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The results of theoretical and experimental investigations carried out to study the effect of load and relative sliding speed on the abrasive wear behavior in drilling bit teeth surfaces of an insert tungsten carbide bit have been presented. Experimentally, an apparatus for abrasive wear tests conducted on the modified ASTM-G65 was modified and fabricated to facilitate loading and measurement of wear rate for the sand/ steel wheel abrasion test, which involves two cases of contact; first is at dry sand and second is under wet condition. These tests have been carried under varied operating parameters of normal load and sliding speed. A theoretical model based upon the Archard equation has been developed for predicting wear simulation by using ANSYS12.1 program for dry and wet abrasive wear rates. The general trend for all the results of wet tests is that an increase in the applied load as well as wheel rotational speed produces an increase in wear rate, while at the dry tests the behavior shows an increase and fluctuating in wear rate due to the transition in wear mechanism. As compared to the dry tests, the volume losses in wet tests have much higher values, that is because the presence of water which causes high adhesion between sand particles and specimen surface as well as wear-corrosion interaction which accelerate the wear rates. The percentage errors between theoretical and experimental results are more stable with the wet than dry tests due to the stability in wear rates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".