机械专业毕业论文外文翻译

附录一英文科技文献翻译英文原文：Experimental investigation of laser surface textured parallel thrust bearingsPerformance enhancements by laser surface texturing (LST) of parallel-thrust bearings is experimentally investigated. Testresults are compared with a theoretical model and good correlation is found over the relevant operating conditions. A compari-son of the performance of unidirectional and bi-directional partial-LST bearings with that of a baseline, untextured bearing ispresented showing the benefits of LST in terms of increased clearance and reduced friction.KEY WORDS: fluid film bearings, slider bearings, surface texturing1. IntroductionThe classical theory of hydrodynamic lubrication yields linear (Couette) velocity distribution with zero pressure gradients between smooth parallel surfaces under steady-state sliding. This results in an unstable hydrodynamic film that would collapse under any external force acting normal to the surfaces. However, experience shows that stable lubricating films can develop between parallel sliding surfaces, generally because of some mechanism that relaxes one or more of the assumptions of the classical theory.A stable fluid film with sufficient load-carrying capacity in parallel sliding surfaces can be obtained, for example, with macro or micro surface structure of different types. These include waviness [1] and protruding microasperities [2–4]. A good literature review on the subject can be found in Ref. [5]. More recently, laser surface texturing (LST) [6–8], as well as inlet roughening by longitudinal or transverse grooves [9] were suggested to provide load capacity in parallel sliding. The inlet roughness concept of Tonder [9] is based on ‘‘effective clearanc e’’ reduction in the sliding direction and in this respect it is identical to the par- tial-LST concept described in ref.[10] for generating hydrostatic effect in high-pressure mechanical seals.Very recently Wang et al. [11] demonstrated experimentally a doubling of the load-carrying capacity for the surface- texture design by reactive ion etching of SiCparallel-thrust bearings sliding in water. These simple parallel thrust bearings are usually found in seal-less pumps where the pumped fluid is used as the lubricant for the bearings. Due to the parallel sliding their performance is poorer than more sophisticated tapered or stepped bearings. Brizmer et al. [12] demon-strated the potential of laser surface texturing in the form of regular micro-dimples for providing load-carrying capacity with parallel-thrust bearings. A model of a textured parallelslider was developed and the effect of surface texturing on load-carrying capacitywas analyzed. The optimum parameters of the dimples were found in order to obtainmaximum load-carrying capacity. A micro-dimple ‘‘collective effect’’ was identi-fied that is capable of generating substantial load-carrying capacity, approaching that of optimumconventional thrust bearings. The purpose of the present paper is to investigate experimentally the validity of the model described in Ref. [12] by testing practical thrust bearings and comparing the performance of LST bearings with that of the theoretical predictions and with the performance of standard non-textured bearings2. BackgroundA cross section of the basic model that was analyzed in Ref. [12] is shown in figure1. A slider having a width B is partially textured over a portion Bp =αB of its width.The textured surface consists of multiple dimples with a diameter，depth and area density Sp. As a result of the hydrodynamic pressure generated by the dimples the sliding surfaces will be separated by a clearance depending on the sliding velocity U, the fluid viscosity l and the external load It was found in Ref. [12] that an optimum ratio exists for the parameter that provides maximum dimensionless load-carrying capacity where L isthe bearing length, and this optimum value is hp=1.25. It was further found in Ref. [12] that an optimum value exists for the textured portion a depending onthe bearing aspect ratio L/B. This behavior is shown in figure 2 for a bearing with L/B = 0.75 at various values of the area density Sp. As can be seen in the range of Sp values from 0.18 to 0.72 the optimum a value varies from 0.7 to 0.55, respectively. It can also be seen from figure 2 that for a < 0.85 no optimum value exists for Sp and the maximum load W increases with increasing Sp. Hence, the largest area density that can be practically obtained with the laser texturing is desired. It is also interesting to note from figure 2 the advantage of partial-LST (a < 1) over the full LST (a = 1) for bearing applications. At Sp= 0.5, for example, the load W at a = 0.6 is about three times higher than its value at a = 1. A full account of this behavior is given in Ref. [12].3. ExperimentalThe tested bearings consist of sintered SiC disks 10 mm thick, having 85 mm outer diameter and 40 mm inner diameter. Each bearing (see figure 3) comprises a flat rotor (a) and a six-pad stator (b). The bearings were pr ovided with an original surface finish by lapping to a roughness average Ra= 0.03 lm. Each pad has an aspect ratio of 0.75 when its width is measured along the mean diameter of the stator. The photographs of two partial-LST stators are shown in figure 4 wher e the textured areas appear as brighter matt surfaces. The first stator indicated (a) is a unidirectional bearing with the partial-LST adjacent to the leading edge of each pad, similar to the model shown in figure 1. The second stator (b) is a bi-directional version of a partial-LST bearing having two equal textured portions, a/2, on each of the pad ends. The laser texturing parameters were the following; dimple depth, dimplediameter and dimple area density Sp= 0.60.03. These dimple dimensions were obtained with 4 pulses of 30 ns duration and 4 mJ each using a 5 kHz pulsating Nd:YAG laser. The textured portion of the unidirectional bearing was a= 0.73 and that of the bi-directional bearing was a= 0.63. As can be seen from figure 2 both these a values should produce load-carrying capacity vary close to the maximum theoretical value.The test rig is shown schematically in figure 5. An electrical motor turns a spindle to which an upper holder of the rotor is attached. A second lower holder of the stator is fixed to a housing, which rests on a journal bearing and an axial loading mechanism that can freely move in the axial direction. An arm that presses against a load cell and thereby permits friction torque measurements prevents the free rotation of this housing. Axial loading is provided by means of dead weights on a lever and is measured with a second load cell. A proximity probe that is attached to the lower holder of the stator allows on-line measurements of the clearance change between rotor and stator as the hydrodynamiceffects cause axial movement of the housing to which the stator holder is fixed. Tapwater is supplied by gravity from a large tank to the center of the bearing and the leakage from the bearing is collected and re-circulated. A thermocouple adjacent to the outer diameter of the bearing allows monitoring of the water temperature as the water exit the bearing. A PC is used to collect and process data on-line. Hence,theinstantaneous clearance, friction coefficient, bearing speed and exit water temperaturecan be monitored constantly.The test protocol includes identifying a reference “zero” point for the clearance measurements by first loading and then unloading a stationary bearing over the full load range. Then the lowest axial load is applied, the water supply valve is opened and the motor turned on. Axial loading is increased by steps of 40 N and each load step is maintained for 5 min following the stabilization of the friction coefficient ata steady-state value. The bearing speed and water temperature are monitored throughout the test for any irregularities. The test ends when a maximum axial load of 460 N is reached or if the friction coefficient exceeds a value of 0.35. At the end ofthe last load step the motor and water supply are turned off and the reference for the clearance measurements is rechecked. Tests are performed at two speeds of 1500and 3000 rpm corresponding to average sliding velocities of 4.9 and 9.8 m/s, respectively and each test is repeated at least three times.4. Results and discussionAs a first step the validity of the theoretical model in Ref. [12] was examined by comparing the theoretical and experimental results of bearing clearance versus bearing load for a unidirectional partial-LST bearing. The results are shown in fig ure 6 for the two speeds of 1500 and 3000 rpm where the solid and dashed lines correspond to the model and experiment, respectively. As can be seen, the agreement between the model and the experiment is good, with differences of less than 10%, aslong as the load is above 150 N. At lower loads the measured experimental clearances are much larger than the model predictions, particularly at the higher speed of 3000 rpm where at 120 N the measured clearance is 20 lm, which is about 60% higher than the predicted value. It turns out that the combination of such large clearances and relatively low viscosity of the water may result in turbulent fluid film. Hence, the assumption of laminar flow on which the solution of the Reynolds equation in Ref.[12] is based may be violated making the model invalid especially at the higher speed and lowest load. In order to be consistent with the model of Ref. [12] it was decided to limit further comparisons to loads above 150 N.It should be noted here that the first attempts t o test the baseline untextured bearing with the original surface finish of Ra= 0.03 lm on both the stator and rotor failed due to extremely high friction even at the lower loads. On the other hand the partial-LST bearing ran smoothly throughout the load range. It was found that the post-LST lapping to completely remove about 2 lm height bulges, which are formed during texturing around the rims of the dimples, resulted in a slightly rougher surface with Ra= 0.04 lm. Hence, the baseline untextured stator was also lapped to the same rough- ness of the partial-LST stator and all subsequent tests were performed with the same Ra value of 0.04 lm for all the tested stators. The rotor surface roughness remained, the original one namely, 0.03 lm. Figure 7 presents the experimental resultsfor the clearance as a function of the load for a partial-LST unidirectional bearing (see stator in figure 4(a)) and a baseline untextured bearing. The comparison is made at the two speeds of 1500 and 3000 rpm. The area density of the dimples in the partial-LST bearing is Sp= 0.6 and the textured portion is a ¼ 0:734. The load range extends from 160 to 460 N. The upper load was determined by the test-rig limitation that did not permit higher loading. It is clear from figure 7 that the pa rtial-LST bearing operates at substantially larger clearances than the untextured bearing. At the maximum load of 460 N and speed of 1500 rpm the partial-LST bearing has a clearance of 6 lm while the untextured bearing clearance is only 1.7 lm. At 3000 rpm the clearances are 6.6 and 2.2 lm for the LST and untextured bearings, respectively. As can be seen from figure 7 this ratio of about 3 in favor of the partial-LST bearing is maintained over the entire load range.Figure 8 presents the results for the bi-directionalbearing (see stator in figure 4(b)). In this case the LST parameters are Sp ¼ 0:614 and a ¼ 0:633. The clearances of the bi-directional partial-LST bearing are lower compared to these of the unidirectional bearing at the same load. At 460 N load the clearance for the 1500 rpm is 4.1 lm and for the 3000 rpm it is 6 lm. These values represent a reduction of clearance between 33 and 10% compared to the unidirectional case. However, as can be seen from figure 8 the performance of the partial-LST bi-directional bearing is still substantially better than that of the untextured bearing.The friction coefficient of partial-LST unidirectional and bi-directional bearings was compared with that of the untextured bearing in figures 9 and 10 for the two speeds of 1500 and 3000 rpm, respectively. As can be seen the friction coefficient of the two partial-LST bearings is very similar with slightly lower values in the case of the more efficient unidirectional bearing. The friction coefficient of the untextured bearing is much larger compared to that of the LST bearings. At 1500 rpm (figure 9) and the highest load of 460 N the friction coefficient of the untextured bearing is about 0.025 compared to about 0.01 for the LST bearings.At the lowest load of 160 N the values are about 0.06 for the untextured bearing and around 0.02 for the LST bearings. Hence, the friction values of the untextured bearing are between 2.5 and 3 times higher than the corresponding values for the partial-LST bearings over the entire load range. Similar results were obtained at the velocity of3000 rpm (figure 10) but the level of the friction coefficients is somewhat higherdue to the higher speed. The much higher friction of the untextured bearing is due to the much smaller clearances of this bearing (see figures 7 and 8) that result in higher viscous shear.Bearings fail for a number of reasons，but the most common are misapplication，contamination，improper lubricant，shipping or handling damage，and misalignment. The problem is often not difficult to diagnose because a failed bearing usually leaves telltale signs about what went wrong．However，while a postmortem yields good information，it is better to avoid the process altogether by specifying the bearing correctly in The first place．To do this，it is useful to review the manufacturers sizing guidelines and operating characteristics for the selected bearing.Equally critical is a study of requirements for noise, torque, and runout, as well as possible exposure to contaminants, hostile liquids, and temperature extremes. This can provide further clues as to whether a bearing is right for a job.1 Why bearings failAbout 40% of ball bearing failures are caused by contamination from dust, dirt, shavings, and corrosion. Contamination also causes torque and noise problems, and isoften the result of improper handling or the application environment．Fortunately, a bearing failure caused by environment or handling contamination is preventable，and a simple visual examination can easily identify the cause．Conducting a postmortem il1ustrates what to look for on a failed or failing bearing．Then，understanding the mechanism behind the failure, such as brinelling or fatigue, helps eliminate the source of the problem.Brinelling is one type of bearing failure easily avoided by proper handing and assembly. It is characterized by indentations in the bearing raceway caused by shock loading－such as when a bearing is dropped-or incorrect assembly. Brinelling usually occurs when loads exceed the material yield point(350,000 psi in SAE 52100 chrome steel)．It may also be caused by improper assembly, Which places a load across the races．Raceway dents also produce noise，vibration，and increased torque.A similar defect is a pattern of elliptical dents caused by balls vibrating between raceways while the bearing is not turning．This problem is called false brinelling. It occurs on equipment in transit or that vibrates when not in operation. In addition, debris created by false brinelling acts like an abrasive, further contaminating the bearing. Unlike brinelling, false binelling is often indicated by a reddish color from fretting corrosion in the lubricant.False brinelling is prevented by eliminating vibration sources and keeping the bearing well lubricated. Isolation pads on the equipment or a separate foundation may be required to reduce environmental vibration. Also a light preload on the bearing helps keep the balls and raceway in tight contact. Preloading also helps prevent false brinelling during transit.Seizures can be caused by a lack of internal clearance, improper lubrication, or excessive loading. Before seizing, excessive, friction and heat softens the bearing steel. Overheated bearings often change color，usually to blue-black or straw colored．Friction also causes stress in the retainer，which can break and hasten bearing failure．Premature material fatigue is caused by a high load or excessive preload．When these conditions are unavoidable，bearing life should be carefully calculated so that a maintenance scheme can be worked out．Another solution for fighting premature fatigue is changing material．When standard bearing materials，such as 440C or SAE 52100，do not guarantee sufficient life，specialty materials can be recommended. In addition，when the problem is tracedback to excessive loading，a higher capacity bearing or different configuration may be used．Creep is less common than premature fatigue．In bearings．it is caused by excessive clearance between bore and shaft that allows the bore to rotate on the shaft．Creep can be expensive because it causes damage to other components in addition to the bearing．0ther more likely creep indicators are scratches，scuff marks，or discoloration to shaft and bore．To prevent creep damage，the bearing housing and shaft fittings should be visually checked．Misalignment is related to creep in that it is mounting related．If races are misaligned or cocked．The balls track in a noncircumferencial path．The problem is incorrect mounting or tolerancing，or insufficient squareness of the bearing mounting site．Misalignment of more than 1/4·can cause an early failure．Contaminated lubricant is often more difficult to detect than misalignment or creep．Contamination shows as premature wear．Solid contaminants become an abrasive in the lubricant．In addition。