952-插秧機系統(tǒng)設計

952-插秧機系統(tǒng)設計,插秧機,系統(tǒng),設計 鹽城工學院機械工程系畢業(yè)設計( 論文)任務書機 械 設 計 制 造 及 其 自 動 化 專 業(yè)設計（論文）題目 PF455S 插秧機及其側(cè)離合器手柄的探討和改善設計學 生 姓 名 汪 波 班 級 材 機 99(5) 學 號 B9912015 起 訖 日 期 3.21~6.26 指 導 教 師 倪 文 龍 教研室主任 系 主 任 發(fā)任務書日期 年 月 日鹽城工學院機械工程系畢業(yè)設計說明書（論文）1摘 要本文主要介紹了有關當前中國從韓國引進的 PF455S 動力插秧機的主要原理，特征和性能，以及在使用過程中出現(xiàn)的與中國土地種植環(huán)境的差異而出現(xiàn)的問題，比如說：并對此問題，作了研究，提出了一些解決方案。由于篇幅有限，本文在解決方案上主要介紹了側(cè)離合器手柄的探討與改進設計。針對此問題列出了不同的方案，最總經(jīng)過方案比較，考慮高效、穩(wěn)定和經(jīng)濟的方案，使插秧機的性能得到進一步的完善。關鍵詞：PF455S 插秧機 側(cè)離合器手柄 改進設計PF455S 插秧積及其側(cè)離合器手柄的探討和改進設計2AbstractCardinal principle about present PF455S power Rice transplanter introduced from Korea S. of China of main introduction of this text, Characteristic and performance, and appear in the course of using plant problem that difference appear of environment with Chinese land, And this question, have been studied, has put forward some solutions. Because space limited, this text main introduction incline clutch discussion and improvement of handle design at solution. List different scheme to question this , compare scheme always most, Consider that high-efficient, stability and economic scheme, make the performance of the seeding machine get further perfection. Keywords： PF455S Rice Transplanter Incline the clutch handle Improve and design鹽城工學院機械工程系畢業(yè)設計說明書（論文）1目 錄引 言 ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….11 正文 ………………………………………………………………………3 1.1 總體方案論證 …………………………………………………………………… 31.1.1PF455S 插秧機的動力傳遞 …………………………………………………… 5 1.1.1.1 驅(qū)動和轉(zhuǎn)向驅(qū)動路線 …………………………………………………… 6 1.1.1.2 插植臂驅(qū)動和株距調(diào)整傳動路線……………………………………………71.1.1.3 苗箱移動及橫向送秧量的調(diào)節(jié)………………………………………………81.1.1.4 縱向送秧傳動路線 …………………………………………………………81.1.2 插秧機主要部件的構造…………………………………………………………81.1.2.1 發(fā)動機…………………………………………………………………………81.1.2.2 主變速箱……………………………………………………………………111.1.2.3 插植臂基本構造及工作原理..……………………………………………121.1.2.4 插植鏈輪箱基本構造……..………………………………………………121.2 計算部分………………………………………………………………………… 181.2.1 幾何尺寸的確認計算……………….…………………………………………181.2..2材料硬度的校核計算……………………………………………………………191.2.3 螺栓校核計算 ………………………………………………………………211.3 設計部分 …………………………………………………………………………231.3.1 對于調(diào)速手柄附和板的改進設計 ……………………………………………231.3.2 對于附著板的改進設計 ……………………………………………………242 結論 ………………………………………………………………………………26致謝 ………………………………………………………………………………… 27參考文獻 ………………………………………………………………………………28附件清單……………………………………………………………………………… 29一、設計（論文）內(nèi)容1)提出 PF455S 插秧機的主要特征及性能2)針對 PF455S 插秧機使用過程中出現(xiàn)的問題，提出相應的改進方案 3)參閱有關資料，對部裝和總裝進行繪制二、設計（論文）依據(jù)當前隨著社會經(jīng)濟技術的發(fā)展，農(nóng)業(yè)機械化的程度也不斷提高，動力插秧機在當農(nóng)業(yè)作業(yè)中應用廣泛，然而本文所介紹的 PF455S 插秧機是從韓國引進的高性能插秧機，由于各種條件的差異，所以在國產(chǎn)化的過程中出現(xiàn)了不少的問題，如側(cè)離合器手柄，形成不及，安裝加緊不到位、拉線卡死等核多問題，這就是本課題所要解決的。三、技術要求側(cè)離合器手柄：1)轉(zhuǎn)向力和操作靈敏、穩(wěn)定 拉線行程 22±1mm2)油門控制穩(wěn)定、準確 拉線行程 25±1mm3)安裝方便、牢固，對其他配件不能有傷害4)外觀結構進一步標準化、國產(chǎn)化四.畢業(yè)設計（論文）物化成果的具體內(nèi)容及要求(具體內(nèi)容參照機械工程系畢業(yè)設計大綱及實施細則的有關要求填寫)1）繪制 PF455S 插秧機總裝圖一份 注明主要特征參數(shù)，要求及各主要部裝名稱2）繪制離合器手柄部裝圖（左和右）以及該部裝中所有零件圖（含改進前后）3）繪制和側(cè)離合器手柄相關的主要零件圖- 4）根據(jù)方案確定及相關計算和要求，書寫畢業(yè)設計說明書一份，自數(shù) 1萬字左右全部計算機會圖五. 畢業(yè)設計（論文）進度計劃起訖日期 工作內(nèi)容 備 注3．31~04.1004．11~04.2404.25~！05.28.5.30~06.1006.15~06.2006.23~06.27實習、搜集資料整理資料、擬訂方案，寫實習小結設計繪制部裝圖、零件圖整理、匯編設計說明書整理錐被上交材料分小組進行答辯六. 主要參考文獻：1、 《簡明農(nóng)業(yè)機械標準應用手冊》 裝桂林主編 機械工業(yè)出版社 1993.11 第一版2、 《農(nóng)業(yè)機械》 農(nóng)業(yè)機械編寫小組 北京出版社 1978.2 第一版3、 《材料力學》 劉鴻文 主編 高等教育出版社 1992.9 第二版4、 《機械設計》 徐錦康 主編 高等教育出版社 1992.9 第二版5、 《PF455S 插秧機培訓教材》 江蘇農(nóng)技推廣站 2003.5 第一版6、 《機械設計零件手冊》 高等教育出版社7、 《機械設計手冊》 機械工業(yè)出版社8、 《機械原理》 高等教育出版社9、 《機械設計課程設計》 陳秀寧 編 浙江大學出版社10、 《互換性與測量技術基礎》 王伯平 機械工業(yè)出版社七、其他performance,form17pressurecomparing the performance of a double inlet cyclone withPowder Technology 145 (2004)operation. However, the increasing emphasis on environ-ment protection and gas–solid separation is indicating thatfiner and finer particles must be removed. To meet thischallenge, the improvement of cyclone geometry and per-formance is required rather than having to resort to alterna-tive units. Many researchers have contributed to largevolume of work on improving the cyclone performance,by introducing new inlet design and operation variables.These include studies of testing a cyclonic fractionator forresearchers, was developed, and the experimental study onaddressing the effect of inlet type on cyclone performanceswas presented.2. ExperimentalThree kinds of cyclone separators with various inletgeometries, including conventional tangential single inlethave became one of most important particle removal devicethat preferably is utilized in both engineering and processclean air by Lim et al. [6]. In this paper, the new inlet type,which is different type of inlet from that used by formersimplicity to fabricate, low cost to operate, and well adapt-ability to extremely harsh conditions, cyclone separatorsKeywords: Cyclone; Symmetrical spiral inlet; Collection efficiency; Pressure drop1. IntroductionCyclone separators are widely used in the field of airpollution control and gas–solid separation for aerosolsampling and industrial applications [1]. Due to relative[2], developing a mathematic model to predict the collectionefficiency of small cylindrical multiport cyclone by DeOtte[3], testing a multiple inlet cyclones based on Lapple’ typegeometry by Moore and Mcfarland [4], designing andtesting a respirable multiinlet cyclone sampler that minimizethe orientation bias by Gautam and Streenath [5],andparticle size and flow rate in this paper. Experimental result indicated that the symmetrical spiral inlet (SSI), especially CSSI inletgeometry, has effect on significantly increasing collection efficiency with insignificantly increasing pressure drop. In addition, theresults of collection efficiency and pressure drop comparison between the experimental data and the theoretical model were alsoinvolved.Short communiDevelopment of a symmetricalcyclone separatorBingtao Zhao*, HenggenDepartment of Environmental Engineering, Donghua UniversityReceived 28 October 2003; received in revisedAvailable onlineAbstractThree cyclone separators with different inlet geometry were designed,direct symmetrical spiral inlet (DSSI), and a converging symmetricalperformance characteristics, including the collection efficiency andsampling that used multiple inlet vanes by Wedding et al.* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-21-62373718; fax: +86-21-62373482.E-mail address: zhaobingtao@mail.dhu.edu.cn (B. Zhao).Shen, Yanming KangNo. 1882, Yanan Rd., Shanghai, Shanghai 200051, China24 February 2004; accepted 3 June 2004July 2004which include a conventional tangential single inlet (CTSI), aspiral inlet (CSSI). The effects of inlet type on cyclonedrop, were investigated and compared as a function ofcationspiral inlet to improve47–50(CTSI), direct symmetrical spiral inlet (DSSI), and converg-ing symmetrical spiral inlet (CSSI), were manufactured andstudied. The geometries and dimensions these cyclones arepresented in Fig. 1 and Table 1. To examine the effects ofinlet type, all other dimensions were designed to remain thesame but only the inlet geometry.The pressure drops were measured between two pressuretaps on the cyclone inlet and outlet tube by use of a digitalby 0.15–1.15% and 0.40–2.40% in the tested velocityrange.Fig. 4(a)–(d) compares the grade collection efficiency ofthe cyclones with various inlet types at the flow rate of3Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of experimental system setup.B. Zhao et al. / Powder Technology 145 (2004) 47–5048micromanometer (SINAP, DP1000-IIIC). The collectionefficiency was calculated by the particle size distribution,by use of microparticle size analyzer (SPSI, LKY-2). Due tohaving the same symmetrical inlet in Model B or C, the flowrate of each inlet of multiple cyclone was equal to anotherand controlled by valve; two nozzle-type screw feeders wereused in same operating conditions to disperse the particleswith a concentration of 5.0 g/m3in inlet tube. The solidparticles used were talcum powder obeyed by log-normalsize distribution with skeletal density of 2700 kg/m3, mass–mean diameter of 5.97 Am, and geometric deviation of 2.08.The mean atmospheric pressure, ambient temperature, andrelative humidity during the tests were 99.93 kPa, 293 K,and less than 75%, respectively.3. Results and discussionThe experimental system setup is shown in Fig. 2.Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of cyclones geometries: (a) conventionaltangential single inlet, Model A; (b) direct symmetrical spiral inlet, ModelB; (c) converging symmetrical spiral inlet, Model C.3.1. Collection efficiencyFig. 3 shows the measured overall efficiencies of thecyclones as a function of flow rates or inlet velocities. It isusually expected that collection efficiency increase with theentrance velocity. However, the overall efficiency of thecyclone with symmetrical spiral inlet both Models B and Cwas always higher than the efficiency of the cyclone withconventional single inlet Model A at the same velocity; andespecially, the cyclone with CSSI, Model C has a highestoverall efficiency. These effects of improved inlet geometrycontribute to the increase in overall efficiency of the cycloneTable 1Dimensions of cyclones studied (unit: mm)DDehH B Sab300 150 450 1200 1125 150 150 60388.34, 519.80, 653.67, and 772.62 m /h, with the inletvelocities of11.99, 16.04,20.18, and23.85m/s,respectively.As expected, the frictional efficiencies of all the cyclonesare seen to increase with increase in particle size. Theshapes of the grade collection efficiency curves of allmodels have a so-called ‘‘S’’ shape. The friction efficienciesof the DSSI (Model B) and CSSI cyclones (Model C) aregreater by 2–10% and 5–20% than that for the CTSIcyclone (Model A), respectively. This indicates that theinlet type or geometry to the cyclone plays an importantrole in the collection efficiency. It was expected thatparticles introduced to the cyclone with symmetrical spiralinlet (Models B and C) would easily be collected on thecyclone wall because they only have to move a shortdistance, and especially, the CSSI (Model C) changes theparticle concentration distribution and makes the particlepreseparated from the gas before entering the main body ofcyclone.Fig. 5 compares the experimental data at a flow rate of653.67 m3/h (inlet velocity of 20.18 m/s) with existingclassical theories [7–11]. Apparently, the efficiency curvesbased on Mothes and Loffler’ model and Iozia and Leith’smethod match the experimental curves much closer thanother theories do. This result corresponds with the studycarried out by Dirgo and Leith [12] and Xiang et al. [13].Fig. 3. Overall efficiency of the cyclones at different inlet velocities.velocityB. Zhao et al. / Powder Technology 145 (2004) 47–50 49Fig. 4. Grade efficiency of the cyclones at different inlet velocities. (a) Inlet(d) Inlet velocity=23.85 m/s.The comparison show that some model can predict atheoretical result that closed the experimental data, but thechanges of flow pattern and particle concentration distribu-tion induced by symmetrical spiral inlet having effects oncyclone performance were not taken into account adequatelyin developed theories.To examine the effects of the symmetrical spiral inlet oncyclone performance more clearly, Fig. 6 was prepared,depicting the 50% cut size for all models with varying theflow rate or inlet velocity. The 50% cut size of Models Cand B are lower than that of Model A at the same inletFig. 5. Comparison of experimental grade efficiency with theories.=11.99 m/s. (b) Inlet velocity=16.04 m/s. (c) Inlet velocity=20.18 m/s.velocity. As the inlet velocity is decreased, the 50% cut sizeis approximately decreased linearly. With inlet velocity20.18 m/s, for example, the decrease rate of 50% cut sizeis up to 9.88% for Model B and 24.62% for Model C. Thisindicated that the new inlet type can help to enhance thecyclone collection efficiency.3.2. Pressure dropThe pressure drop across cyclone is commonly expressedas a number gas inlet velocity heads DH named the pressureFig. 6. The 50% cut size of the cyclones.inlet velocity are presented in Table 2.Obviously, higher pressure drop is associated with higherBarth5.18B. Zhao et al. / Powder Technology 145 (2004) 47–5050flow rate for a given cyclone. However, specifying a flowrate or inlet velocity, the difference of pressure drop coef-ficient between Models B, C, and A is less significant, andvaried between 5.21 and 5.76, with an average value 5.63,for Model B, 5.22–5.76, with an average value 5.67, forModel C, and 5.16–5.70, with an average value 5.55, forModel A, calculated by regression analysis. This is animportant point because it is possible to increase the cyclonecollection efficiency without increasing the pressure dropsignificantly.The experimental data of pressure drop were alsocompared with current theories [14–20], and results arepresented in Table 3. The results show that the model ofAlexander and Barth provided the better fit to theexperimental data, although for some cyclones the modelsof Shepherd and Lapple and Dirgo predicted equallywell.4. ConclusionsA new kind of cyclone with symmetrical spiral inletdrop coefficient, which is the division of the pressure dropby inlet kinetic pressure qgmi2/2. The pressure drop coeffi-cient values for the three cyclones corresponding to differentTable 2Pressure drop coefficient of the cyclonesCyclone Inlet velocity (m/s)model11.99 16.04A 5.16 5.18B 5.21 5.27C 5.22 5.35Table 3Comparison of pressure drop coefficient with theoriesTheory Shepherd Alexander First StairmandValue 6.40 5.62 6.18 5.01(SSI) including DSSI and CSSI was developed, and theeffects of these inlet types on cyclone performance weretested and compared. Experimental results show the overallefficiency the DSSI cyclone and CSSI is greater by 0.15–1.15% and 0.40–2.40% than that for CTSI cyclone, and thegrade efficiency is greater by 2–10% and 5–20%. Inaddition, the pressure drop coefficient is 5.63 for DSSIcyclone, 5.67 for CSSI, and 5.55 for CTSI cyclone. Despitethat the multiple inlet increases the complicity and the costof the cyclone separators, the cyclones with SSI, especiallyCSSI, can yield a better collection efficiency, obviously witha minor increase in pressure drop. This presents the possi-bility of obtaining a better performance cyclone by means ofimproving its inlet geometry design.References[1] Y.F. Zhu, K.W. Lee, Experimental study on small cyclones operatingat high flowrates, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 30 (10) (1999) 1303–1315.[2] J.B. Wedding, M.A. Weigand, T.A. Carney, A 10Am cutpoint inlet forthe dichotomous sampler, Environ. Sci. Technol. 16 (1982) 602–606.[3] R.E. DeOtte, A model for the prediction of the collection efficiencycharacteristics of a small, cylindrical aerosol sampling cyclone, Aero-sol Sci. Technol. 12 (1990) 1055–1066.[4] M.E. Moore, A.R. Mcfarland, Design methodology for multiple inletcyclones, Environ. Sci. Technol. 30 (1996) 271–276.[5] M. Gautam, A. Streenath, Performance of a respirable multi-inletcyclone sampler, J. Aerosol Sci. 28 (7) (1997) 1265–1281.[6] K.S. Lim, S.B. Kwon, K.W. Lee, Characteristics of the collectionefficiency for a double inlet cyclone with clean air, J. Aerosol Sci.34 (2003) 1085–1095.[7] D. Leith, W. Licht, The collection efficiency of cyclone type particlecollectors: a new theoretical approach, AIChE Symp. Ser. 68 (126)(1972) 196–206.[8] P.W. Dietz, Collection efficiency of cyclone separators, AIChE J. 27(6) (1981) 888–892.[9] H. Mothes, F. Loffler, Prediction of particle removal in cyclone sepa-rators, Int. Chem. Eng. 28 (2) (1988) 231–240.[10] D.L. Iozia, D. Leith, The logistic function and cyclone fractionalefficiency, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 12 (1990) 598–606.[11] R. Clift, M. Ghadiri, A.C. Hoffman, A critique of two models forcyclone performance, AI ChE J. 37 (1991) 285–289.[12] J. Dirgo, D. Leith, Cyclone collection efficiency: comparison of ex-perimental results with theoretical predictions, Aerosol Sci. Technol. 4(1985) 401–415.[13] R.B. Xiang, S.H. Park, K.W. Lee, Effects of dimension on cycloneperformance, J. Aerosol Sci. 32 (2001) 549–561.[14] C.B. Shepherd, C.E. Lapple, Flow pattern and pressure drop in cy-20.18 23.85 average5.45 5.70 5.555.57 5.76 5.635.67 5.76 5.67Casal Dirgo Model A Model B Model C7.85 4.85 5.55 5.63 5.67clone dust collectors: cyclone without inlet vane, Ind. Eng. Chem. 32(1940) 1246–1256.[15] R.M. Alexander, Fundamentals of cyclone design and operation,Proc. Aust. Inst. Min. Met. (New Series) (1949) 152–153, 202–228.[16] M.W. First, Cyclone dust collector design, Am. Soc. Mech. Eng. 49(A) (1949) 127–132.[17] C.J. Stairmand, Design and performance of cyclone separators, Trans.Inst. Chem. Eng. 29 (1951) 356–383.[18] W. Barth, Design and layout of the cyclone separator on the basis ofnew investigations, Brennst. Wa¨rme Kraft 8 (1956) 1–9.[19] J. Casal, J.M. Martinez-Bennet, A batter way to calculate cyclonepressure drop, Chem. Eng. 90 (3) (1983) 99–100.[20] J. Dirgo, Relationship between cyclone dimensions and performance,Doctoral Thesis, Harvard University, USA, 1988.