Experimental and Numerical Study of Single and Multiple Impacts of Angular Particles on Ductile Metals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid particle erosion occurs when small high speed particles impact surfaces. It can be either destructive such as in the erosion of oil pipelines by corrosion byproducts, or constructive such as in abrasive jet machining processes.\n\nTwo dimensional finite element (FE) models of single rhomboid particles impact on a copper target were developed using two different techniques to deal with the problem of element distortion: (i) element deletion, and (ii) remeshing. It was found that the chip formation and the material pile-up, two phenomena that cannot be simulated using a previously developed rigid-plastic model, could be simulated using the FE models, resulting in a good agreement with experiments performed using a gas gun. However, remeshing in conjunction with a failure model caused numerical instabilities. The element deletion approach also induced errors in mass loss due to the removal of distorted elements.\n\nTo address the limitations of the FE approach, smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) which can better accommodate large deformations, was used in the simulation of the impact of single rhomboid particles on an aluminum alloy target. With appropriate constitutive and failure parameters, SPH was demonstrated to be suitable for simulating all of the relevant damage phenomena observed during impact experiments.\n\nA new methodology was developed for generating realistic three dimensional particle geometries based on measurements of the size and shape parameter distributions for a sample of\n\n150 µm nominal diameter angular aluminum oxide powder. The FE models of these generated particles were implemented in a SPH/FE model to simulate non-overlapping particle impacts. It was shown that the simulated particles produced distributions of crater and crater lip dimensions that agreed well with those measured from particle blasting experiments.\n\nFinally, a numerical model for simulating overlapping impacts of angular particles was developed and compared to experimental multi-particle erosion tests, with good agreement. An investigation of the simulated trajectory of the impacting particles revealed various erosion mechanisms such as the micromachining of chips, the ploughing of craters, and the formation, forging and knocking off crater lips which were consistent with previously noted ductile solid particle erosion mechanisms in the literature.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 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 teacher head, 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".