首页> 外文OA文献 >Comparison of Cavitation Erosion between Cavitating Jet and Vibratory Methods Specified in ASTM Standard
【2h】

Comparison of Cavitation Erosion between Cavitating Jet and Vibratory Methods Specified in ASTM Standard

机译:asTm标准中规定的空化射流与振动方法之间空蚀的比较

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Cavitation erosion was compared between cavitating jet and vibratory methods. It was found that the erosion by cavitating jets occurs 8 to 10 times as fast as that by the vibratory, thus the cavitating jet method is effective for the acceleration test. The erosion mechanisms produced in both apparatuses are the same, judging from the time interval of bubble collapse impact loads and the shape of pits. It was concluded that erosion is evaluated by the accumulated summation of squares of impact loads, not by the accumulated volume of pits for which it is obtained from the pit on the material surface exposed to cavitation for 1-5 seconds.
机译:比较了空化射流和振动方法之间的空化侵蚀。已经发现,空化射流的腐蚀发生速度是振动产生的侵蚀的8到10倍,因此空化射流方法对于加速测试是有效的。从气泡破裂冲击载荷的时间间隔和凹坑的形状来看,两种设备产生的腐蚀机理是相同的。得出的结论是,腐蚀是通过冲击载荷平方的总和来评估的,而不是通过从暴露于空化1-5秒的材料表面上的凹坑获得的凹坑的累积体积来评估的。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号