0
Research Papers: Friction & Wear

Design and Performance of Slurry Erosion Tester

[+] Author and Article Information
A. Abouel-Kasem

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Assiut University, Assiut 71516, Egyptabouelkasem@yahoo.com

Y. M. Abd-elrhman

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Assiut University, Assiut 71516, Egypty_mahmoud_a@hotmail.com

K. M. Emara

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Assiut University, Assiut 71516, Egyptemara@aun.edu.eg

S. M. Ahmed

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Assiut University, Assiut 71516, Egyptshemy2001@yahoo.com

J. Tribol 132(2), 021601 (Apr 26, 2010) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.4001449 History: Received December 18, 2008; Revised March 02, 2010; Published April 26, 2010; Online April 26, 2010

A slurry whirling arm erosion test ring was constructed and a series of erosion tests and post-erosion analysis were carried out using a paint erosion indication technique. The pattern of the paint removal presented a highly visual and accelerated map for the erosion process and its behavior. Also, the erosion rate of paint removal was investigated under a number of erosion variables. It was observed that the rebounding of the erodent particles from the sample surface play an important role in developing erosion for this tester. The erosion pattern showed that the effect of the rebound particles depends on the impact velocity and impingement angle. It was also observed that the erosion behavior of paint as a function of impingement angle, impact velocity, and erosion time was similar to that reported in literature for engineering materials. The slurry whirling arm erosion tester seems to be promising for simulating the slurry process in real cases.

Copyright © 2010 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

(a) Schematic diagram of a slurry pot, and (b) schematic diagram of a slurry jet tester

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Schematic diagram of the slurry erosion whirling-arm rig

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Schematic diagram of the specimen holder and the impingement angle indicator

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Measured rate of slurry flow and solid particle concentration in slurry: (a) Cw=2 wt % and (b) Cw=10 wt %, erodent (250–355 μmSiO2)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Impact velocity and impingement angle

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Scanning electron microphotograph of silica sand with mean diameter=302 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Photographs of the eroded paint surfaces at different test durations and test conditions: v=15 m/s, C=1 wt %, and d=302 μm; using four rotating arms

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Schematic diagram of (a) four rotating arms, (b) resultant angle of impact, and (c) dynamic location of specimens with respect to the falling slurry stream

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Photographs of the eroded surfaces at test conditions: v=15 m/s, C=1 wt %, and d=302 μm

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Photographs of the eroded paint surfaces at different erodent mass and test conditions as: v=15 m/s, d=302 μm, and C=1 wt %

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Mass loss and erosion rate of paint material as a function of erodent mass at impingement angles of 30 deg and 90 deg, v=15 m/s, d=302 μm, and C=1 wt %

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Photographs of the eroded paint surfaces at different impingement angles and test conditions as: v=15 m/s, d=302 μm, C=1 wt %, and m=1.87 g

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Relationship between erosion rate of paint material and impingement angle at: v=15 m/s, d=302 μm, C=1 wt %, and m=1.873 g

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 14

Photographs of the eroded paint surfaces at different impact velocities and test conditions as: d=302 μm, C=1 wt %, and m=1.87 g

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 15

Relationship between erosion rate of paint material and impact velocity for different impingement angles at: d=302 μm, C=1 wt %, and m=1.87 g

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 16

Photographs of the eroded paint surfaces at different particle concentration at impingement angles of 30 deg and 90 deg, v=15 m/s, d=302 μm, and m=2.81 g

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 17

Variation in weight loss of the paint material versus particle concentration at impingement angles of 30 deg and 90 deg, v=15 m/s, d=302 μm and m=2.81 g

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 18

Photographs of the eroded surfaces at different durations and test conditions as: v=15 m/s, d=302 μm, C=1 wt %, and θ=30 deg

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 19

Schematic diagram to illustrate the impacting and rebounding particles in slurry erosion tests

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In