Engineering Rubber Track Performance Scenario Test Method

Abstract

This invention discloses a performance testing method for engineering rubber tracks. Using the rubber track—a walking component of engineering machinery—as the test object, the rubber track is installed on the engineering machinery device. Various walking routes, operations, and driving habits are simulated on working surfaces with different terrains, slopes, and hardness levels to test the rubber track. Under the same outdoor testing conditions, two rubber tracks on the same engineering machinery are compared to characterize the influence factors of different product designs, different formula designs, different working conditions, or different driving habits on the service life of engineering machinery rubber tracks, providing strong data support for the development of high-performance rubber track products.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the field of testing and detecting the performance of rubber tracks, particularly to a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks under simulated outdoor working conditions, and especially to a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks under specific scenarios. Background Technology

[0002] Rubber tracks are widely used in agricultural machinery, construction machinery, and transportation machinery due to their characteristics such as low ground pressure, high traction, low vibration, low noise, and no damage to the road surface. As a walking component of construction machinery, the performance and service life of rubber tracks directly affect the overall operating efficiency and stability of the machinery. Given the wide variety of construction machinery models and specifications, the service life and performance of rubber tracks are often difficult to comprehensively evaluate through a single laboratory test. Product service life data mainly relies on market feedback, which has a relatively long time cycle and cannot keep up with the rapid pace of product updates. Therefore, developing performance testing methods for rubber tracks to meet the high-performance requirements and quality assurance of construction machinery rubber track products is the development vision of the entire rubber track industry.

[0003] For example, Chinese patent application number 202310624366.5, entitled "A Method for Testing the Outdoor Performance of Rubber Tracks," discloses a method for testing the outdoor performance of rubber tracks, including a rubber track abrasion performance test and a rubber track edge-break durability test. The rubber track abrasion performance test lasts 100 hours, divided into four stages, each lasting 25 hours. After each stage, measurement data is recorded according to a prescribed method, accurately measuring the rubber track abrasion data. The rubber track edge-break durability test involves repeatedly rolling the track over a curb until the edge breaks, testing the durability of the rubber track. However, this method cannot be used for a full-scene simulation of outdoor conditions, and its effectiveness in testing the performance of rubber tracks is not specifically explained, i.e., how well the rubber tracks perform in use.

[0004] Another invention disclosed in application number 202311681849.5, entitled "A Track Durability Test Method," is a test method for track durability. The testing machine includes: a track drive assembly for mounting and driving the track to be tested, including a tensioning wheel assembly to adjust the track tension; a drum assembly including a drum located beside the track drive assembly, the drum contacting the track to provide frictional resistance; and a loading assembly for driving the track drive assembly towards the drum assembly to bring the track into contact with the drum. The test method includes: mounting the track to be tested on the track drive assembly; adjusting the track tension using the tensioning wheel assembly; driving the track drive assembly towards the drum assembly until the vertical section of the track contacts the drum; rotating the drum and track, with the drum acting as a simulated road surface to provide frictional resistance to the track. This test method provides more accurate and reliable durability performance test data by simulating the real working conditions of rubber tracks.

[0005] As can be seen from the specific solutions disclosed above, firstly, the rubber tracks are not tested under outdoor conditions; secondly, the track performance needs to be tested using equipment, and its performance testing of rubber tracks still has significant limitations.

[0006] Therefore, this paper proposes a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. The aim is to more realistically simulate the actual working environment of engineering machinery, thereby more accurately evaluating product performance. Addressing the existing wear and cut resistance of traditional rubber tracks, this method conducts outdoor scenario simulation tests on conditions such as easily damaged treads, chipping, and uneven tread surfaces. This more realistically simulates the actual working environment of engineering machinery, allowing for a more accurate evaluation of the performance of rubber track products in practical applications. The method is simple and convenient. Summary of the Invention

[0007] This invention provides a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. Using the rubber tracks of engineering machinery as the test object, the rubber tracks are installed on the machinery and tested on different terrains, slopes, and surfaces with varying degrees of hardness and softness, simulating various walking routes, operations, and driving habits. Under identical outdoor testing conditions, two rubber tracks on the same engineering machinery are compared to characterize the impact of different product designs, formulations, working conditions, and driving habits on the service life of the engineering machinery rubber tracks, providing strong data support for the development of high-performance rubber track products.

[0008] This invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. Using engineering machinery rubber tracks as the test object, the rubber tracks are installed on the engineering machinery device. Various walking routes, operations, and driving behaviors are simulated on working surfaces with different terrains, slopes, and hardness levels to test the rubber tracks. The method includes the following steps: The engineering machinery equipped with the test object rubber tracks is subjected to the following cyclical tests under different terrain, slope, and hardness level road surface conditions. In each cyclical test, all operations on each route are completed sequentially according to routes A, B, C, D, and E.

[0009] Route A: Press " "On shape-controlled engineering machinery, one rubber track remains stationary and moves one revolution clockwise; immediately, the other track is then kept stationary and moves one revolution counterclockwise; this completes one revolution." "Shape circle, counts as 1 time;"

[0010] Route B consists of four parts: B1, B2, B3, and B4.

[0011] B1: Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves one revolution clockwise.

[0012] B2: Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves counterclockwise one revolution;

[0013] B3: Keep one rubber track on the construction machinery stationary while rotating the other rubber track clockwise one full rotation. Then, reverse the operation and keep one rubber track stationary while rotating the other rubber track counterclockwise one full rotation. One full rotation clockwise and one full rotation counterclockwise constitute one cycle.

[0014] B4: Control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move and rotate simultaneously. Specifically, one track rotates clockwise and the other track rotates counterclockwise. After controlling the operation to rotate counterclockwise once, immediately rotate clockwise once. This counts as one cycle.

[0015] Route C: Set the test road route as a "W" shaped curve, control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move simultaneously, and complete the back-and-forth movement according to the "W" shaped curve route, which counts as 1 time;

[0016] Route D: Set the test road route as a right-angled "W" shaped bend with a bend angle of 88-92°; preferably 90°. Control the two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery to move simultaneously and complete the back-and-forth movement according to the right-angled "W" shaped bend road line, which counts as 1 time.

[0017] Route E: Set the test road route as a straight line, and move uphill on the way there and downhill on the way back. Control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move simultaneously. Complete the round trip as 1 time.

[0018] After completing one full cycle of the above test, the surface cracks and wear of the tested rubber track are recorded and analyzed.

[0019] The aforementioned method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks includes a cyclic testing frequency of 1-5 cycles per day; the surface cracks include cracks on the inner and outer sides of the rubber track tread and cracks on the wheel side; the wear degree characterizes the wear resistance of the rubber track in actual use, and the wear degree test includes fixed-point wear test and overall wear test.

[0020] The cyclic test described in this invention is a cyclic test in which route A is repeated 8-12 times; route B, wherein B1 and B2 are each repeated 8-12 times, and B3 and B4 are each repeated 8-12 times; routes C, D, and E are each repeated 8-12 times.

[0021] The present invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. In this method, the testing time for each route in each cycle of testing is controlled to be 10-25% of the total testing time for route A, 50-55% for route B, and 30-35% for routes C, D, and E.

[0022] The present invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. Specifically, the turning angle of Route C, specifically the "W"-shaped bend, is controlled at 120-130°; the turning angle of the right-angled "W"-shaped bend in Route D is controlled at 88-92°; the included angle at the turning point is preferably 90°. Figure 5 As shown.

[0023] Furthermore, the engineering rubber track performance scenario testing method of the present invention includes an overall wear test that measures the height of the tread grooves of the rubber track before and after wear, and calculates the wear change rate of the tread groove height of the test object rubber track; it also involves selecting multiple different positions of different rubber tracks to measure their tread heights, calculating the average value, and controlling the number of samples at different positions of different rubber tracks to be no less than 50% of the total number of sections of the entire rubber track, and calculating the average value.

[0024] The present invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks. The fixed-point wear test involves selecting three evenly distributed and symmetrical locations (X, Y, and Z) on the rubber track as fixed-point measurement sample locations and marking them accordingly. The test duration is recorded daily, and the tread height corresponding to the measured sample locations and test duration is calculated, with the arithmetic mean calculated. An actual tread height variation curve is plotted based on the test duration and its corresponding arithmetic mean. This curve is used to evaluate the accuracy, predictive ability, and trend consistency of the fitted curve for the overall wear test tread height variation.

[0025] The present invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. The X, Y, and Z positions all include the inner and outer sides of the rubber track. The measurement values ​​are taken as the reference points at the center points of the tread grooves on the inner and outer sides of the rubber track corresponding to the X, Y, and Z positions.

[0026] The aforementioned method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks involves controlling any two test rubber tracks of the test objects. During each cycle of testing, when each track completes all operations of each route in the order of routes A, B, C, D, and E, the test operation time for each route is correspondingly equal.

[0027] This invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks under various scenarios, which has the following beneficial effects: It simulates diverse outdoor working conditions. The outdoor scenarios are designed to be 35-100 meters long and 15-50 meters wide, simulating actual road conditions such as open sand and gravel, concrete crushed stone, gravel surfaces, and concrete surfaces, covering different terrains, slopes, and hardness levels to more comprehensively simulate the actual working environment. Furthermore, this invention uses commercially available engineering machinery vehicles as testing devices, equipped with the rubber tracks to be tested. Under simulated real-world engineering machinery road conditions, driving routes, and operating habits, various loads and damage are applied to the rubber tracks to accurately reflect the actual usage of the rubber tracks.

[0028] First, by conducting long-term, high-intensity tests on rubber tracks in this environment, the obtained test data is more comprehensive, in-depth, accurate, and closer to real-world conditions, enabling accurate evaluation of its performance under various complex working conditions. This helps to better understand the characteristics of rubber track products and provides strong support for the design and optimization of rubber track products.

[0029] Secondly, this invention simulates five routes for engineering machinery in actual operation. The machinery operates along these routes under harsh road conditions, and through cyclical route simulation, it can realistically reproduce the performance of rubber tracks in actual working conditions. Simultaneously, it can simulate road surfaces of varying hardness. Taking test route A as an example, it can simulate cross-regional operations during customer use, thus more accurately reproducing the performance of rubber tracks under actual operating conditions.

[0030] Third, this invention simulates the actual working conditions of engineering machinery transporting materials such as sand and stones, in order to comprehensively evaluate the performance of rubber tracks during actual transport. Through these comprehensive simulation tests, more accurate, practical, and reliable data support is provided for the design, manufacturing, and use of rubber tracks.

[0031] Fourth, during testing, this invention allows for real-time monitoring and recording of key indicators of the rubber track, such as its wear resistance, crack resistance, and service life. Simultaneously, it can also assess performance indicators like walking stability and operating noise under different scenarios, enabling a more comprehensive evaluation of its overall performance.

[0032] This innovative scenario testing method allows for more accurate prediction of rubber track performance in real-world applications, providing customers with a more reliable basis for product selection. Furthermore, this method helps identify and address potential problems during the product development phase, thereby enhancing the quality and competitiveness of the designed and manufactured rubber track products.

[0033] The rubber track scenario testing method disclosed in this invention is an innovative and practical performance evaluation tool. It will provide strong technical support for the research and development, production and marketing of rubber track products, and promote the technological progress and industrial upgrading of rubber track production in the construction machinery industry.

[0034] The performance of the rubber tracks used for testing in this invention conforms to GB / T 20786-2015, JLL-TD-GL-05 Rubber Compound Rapid Inspection Standard, and JLL-TD-GL-06 Rubber Compound Routine Inspection Standard; and the appearance of the rubber tracks produced by the inventor conforms to the Finished Product Quality Inspection Internal Control Standard, and the width, pitch, number of sections, track, etc. are compatible with the test vehicle model. Attached Figure Description

[0035] Figure 1 The present invention provides a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios, including schematic diagrams of five different routes.

[0036] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of route A for the scenario testing method of the present invention;

[0037] Figure 3This is a schematic diagram of route B in the scenario testing method of the present invention;

[0038] Figure 4 1 is a schematic diagram of route C of the scenario testing method of the present invention;

[0039] Figure 5 1 is a schematic diagram of route D of the scenario testing method of the present invention;

[0040] Figure 6 1 is a schematic diagram of route E of the scenario testing method of the present invention;

[0041] Figure 7 This is a side view schematic diagram of a test rubber track installed on engineering machinery for scene testing, according to an embodiment of the present invention.

[0042] Figure 8 ,for Figure 7 Enlarged schematic diagram of the middle H section;

[0043] Figure 9 The diagram shows the fixed-point measurement sample locations used to test the performance of the rubber track under test in this invention: three locations X, Y, and Z are evenly and symmetrically distributed; that is, a diagram showing six measurement samples set at the three locations X, Y, and Z of the rubber track, including their corresponding inner and outer sides.

[0044] Figure 10 The fitting curve of the tread height change in the overall wear test of the rubber track in Embodiment 1 of the present invention; that is, the fitting curve of the tread height wear rate after 250.3 hours of test operation in Embodiment 1; the line connecting the square black dots in the figure represents the outer side of the rubber track, and the line connecting the round black dots represents the inner side;

[0045] Figure 11 The actual tread height change curve measured by the fixed-point wear test of the rubber track in Embodiment 1 of the present invention; that is, the tread height change curve of the fixed-point wear test after 250.3 hours of test operation in Embodiment 1; the dashed line in the figure shows the average value on the outer side, and the solid line shows the average value on the inner side;

[0046] Figure 12 The fitting curve of the tread height change in the overall wear test of the rubber track in Example 2 of the present invention; that is, the fitting curve of the tread height wear rate after 250.3 hours of test operation in Example 2;

[0047] Figure 13 The actual tread height change curve measured by the fixed-point wear test of the rubber track in Example 2 of the present invention; that is, the tread height change curve of the fixed-point wear test after 250.3 hours of test operation in Example 2;

[0048] Explanation: In the diagram, 1. Tread groove, which is the tread groove on the rubber track; 2. Inner side of the rubber track, which is the side of the rubber track closest to the construction machinery body; 3. Outer side of the rubber track, which is the side of the rubber track away from the construction machinery body; 4. Construction machinery, the construction machinery used to test the performance of the rubber track; 5. Rubber track; 6. Center point of the tread groove, the center position within the tread groove on the rubber track; In the diagram, X, Y, and Z are three points located on the inner and outer sides of the rubber track, respectively, used to test the performance of the rubber track.

[0049] Appendix Figure 9 In the test, X, Y, and Z are three sample locations set on the inner and outer sides of the test rubber track for fixed-point wear testing.

[0050] Appendix Figure 10 To be continued Figure 13 In the diagram, starting from left to right, the curve located at the bottom near the horizontal axis is the inner side, and the other curve located at the top is the outer side. The inner side represents the test data line for the tread height on the inner side of the rubber track, and the outer side represents the test data line for the tread height on the outer side of the rubber track. Detailed Implementation

[0051] The present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and specific embodiments. The present invention is not limited to the embodiments.

[0052] like Figure 1-9 As shown, this invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. The method uses the rubber track, a walking component of engineering machinery, as the test object. The rubber track is installed on the engineering machinery device, and various walking routes, operations, and driving habits are simulated on working surfaces with different terrains, slopes, and hardness levels to test the rubber track. The method includes the following steps: The engineering machinery equipped with the test object rubber track is subjected to the following cyclical tests under different terrain, slope, and hardness level road surface conditions. In each cyclical test, all operations on each route are completed sequentially according to routes A, B, C, D, and E.

[0053] Route A: Press " "On shape-controlled engineering machinery, one rubber track remains stationary and moves one revolution clockwise; immediately, the other track is then kept stationary and moves one revolution counterclockwise; this completes one revolution." "The shape circle is counted once."

[0054] Route B consists of four parts: B1, B2, B3, and B4.

[0055] B1: Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves one revolution clockwise.

[0056] B2: Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves one revolution counterclockwise.

[0057] B3: Keep one rubber track on the construction machinery stationary while rotating the other rubber track clockwise one full rotation. Then, reverse the operation and keep one rubber track stationary while rotating the other rubber track counterclockwise one full rotation. One full rotation clockwise and one full rotation counterclockwise constitute one cycle.

[0058] B4: Control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move and rotate simultaneously. Specifically, one track rotates clockwise and the other rotates counterclockwise. After controlling the operation to rotate counterclockwise once, immediately rotate clockwise once as one cycle.

[0059] like Figure 4 As shown, Route C: Set the test road route as a "W" shaped curve with a turning angle of approximately 120-130°; control the two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery to move simultaneously and complete a back-and-forth journey along the "W" shaped curve route as one round.

[0060] like Figure 5 As shown, Route D: The test road route is set as a right-angled "W" shaped bend, with the bend angle controlled between 88-92 degrees, preferably 90 degrees. Figure 5 As shown; controlling the two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery to move simultaneously and complete a back-and-forth journey along a right-angled "W" shaped bend is considered one cycle.

[0061] like Figure 6 As shown, Route E: Set the test road route as a straight line, travel uphill on the way there and downhill on the way back, control the two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery to move simultaneously, and complete the round trip as 1 round.

[0062] After completing the above full test, it constitutes one cycle. Then, the surface cracks and wear of the test rubber track are recorded and analyzed periodically.

[0063] The preferred control for the cyclic test is 1-5 cycles per day; the surface cracks include cracks on the inner and outer sides of the rubber track tread and cracks on the wheel side; the degree of wear can characterize the wear resistance of the rubber track in actual use, and the wear test includes fixed-point wear test and overall wear test.

[0064] The preferred cyclic test is that each cyclic test is repeated 8-12 times for route A; for route B, B1 and B2 are each repeated 8-12 times, and B3 and B4 are each repeated 8-12 times for rotational movement; and for routes C, D, and E, each is repeated 8-12 times.

[0065] The engineering rubber track performance scenario testing method of the present invention controls the testing time of each cycle test to be completed in the order of routes A, B, C, D, and E, with route A accounting for 10-25% of the total test time, route B accounting for 50-55% of the total test time, and routes C, D, and E accounting for 30-35% of the total test time.

[0066] The present invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks. The overall wear test involves periodically selecting multiple different sample locations on two simultaneously tested tracks, measuring the tread height corresponding to the test time period, and ensuring that the number of samples at different locations is no less than 50% of the total number of sections on the entire rubber track. The arithmetic mean of the tread height corresponding to each test time period is calculated, and then a curve showing the change in tread height of the tested rubber track is fitted based on the arithmetic mean of the tread height corresponding to the time period. The method also includes statistically analyzing the number of surface cracks and the changes in crack length on the rubber track.

[0067] The present invention discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks. In its fixed-point wear test, three evenly distributed and symmetrical X, Y, and Z locations on the rubber track are selected as fixed-point measurement sample locations, and these locations are clearly marked. The test duration is recorded daily, and the tread height corresponding to the measured sample locations and test duration is calculated, with the arithmetic mean calculated. An actual tread height variation curve is plotted based on the test duration and its corresponding arithmetic mean. This curve is used to evaluate the accuracy, predictive ability, and trend consistency of the fitted curve for the overall wear test tread height variation.

[0068] Furthermore, the X, Y, and Z positions all include both the inner and outer sides of the rubber track. The measurement values ​​are taken at the center point 6 of the tread grooves on the inner and outer sides of the rubber track, corresponding to the X, Y, and Z positions, as the measurement reference point. The test data are shown in Tables 4 and 8.

[0069] The aforementioned method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks involves controlling any two test rubber tracks to complete all operations on each route in the order of routes A, B, C, D, and E during each cycle of testing, ensuring that the test operation time for each route is equal.

[0070] To improve the accuracy of scenario testing methods for engineering rubber tracks or to provide strong support for research and development, two different specifications or formulations of rubber tracks can be fitted onto a single test piece of engineering machinery to evaluate the performance of different designs in practical applications. To ensure the accuracy and comparability of rubber track performance testing, during actual operation, the running trajectory and scenario testing time of each test track must be identical or substantially identical; that is, each track undergoing scenario testing must be able to complete the operation of each route in the sequence of A, B, C, D, and E. Alternatively, two engineering rubber tracks on a single test piece of machinery can be of the same specification, model, material composition and ratio, and functional requirements to test the impact of driving habits on the performance of rubber tracks simultaneously fitted on both sides of the same machinery under actual working conditions.

[0071] The engineering rubber track performance scenario testing method of this invention requires that, during the engineering rubber track performance scenario testing, the tested engineering rubber track be tested sequentially along routes A, B, C, D, and E in each cycle of testing. The testing time for each route should be controlled as follows: route A accounts for 10-25% of the total testing time, route B accounts for 50-55%, and routes C, D, and E account for 30-35%. In other words, to ensure testing accuracy and comparability, each rubber track undergoing scenario testing must have the same time, route, and testing scenario for each step along the above test routes. For example, after one round of testing, the test surface must be standardized and prepared to match the state of the previous round of rubber track testing.

[0072] The following is a detailed description of the scenario performance testing of the commercially available engineering rubber track prepared by the inventor company. All performance characteristics of the rubber track comply with GB / T 20786-2015, meaning that all performance characteristics of the tested rubber track meet the requirements of the aforementioned standard. Any aspects not described in the following examples are the same as those described in the above embodiments.

[0073] The following examples use two rubber tracks selected from the commercially available rubber track products manufactured by the inventor company. The two tracks have the same product specifications and are both engineering rubber tracks used in construction machinery. However, the two rubber tracks were tested in different scenarios using different rubber formulations to compare the impact of different formulation designs on the actual application performance of the products.

[0074] The rubber track used in the following examples has the following specifications: 450 / 86 / 56;

[0075] The test involved a type of construction machinery, a loader from a certain company under the Shanhe Group, with an empty weight of approximately 4400-4500 kg, a loading / unloading bucket capacity of approximately 1200 kg, and a total load capacity of approximately 5600-5700 kg when fully loaded.

[0076] The test location is the inventor's company's outdoor test area, with the effective length of the test area controlled to be between 35-100m and the width between 15-50m.

[0077] The test road surface is a concrete / gravel road surface.

[0078] The testing specifications all adopt the methods described above in this invention; the recording range / reporting interval is once a day; the daily running time is at least 6-10 hours; that is, after the rubber track runs on the test engineering machinery for 28 days in the actual scenario test, the corresponding data are measured regularly; the daily scenario test operation time should be kept as consistent as possible, and the total actual scenario test time is 250.3 hours.

[0079] Any aspects not described in the following embodiments are the same as those described in the above embodiments. Example

[0080] The engineering rubber track used in this embodiment, designated as Rubber Track JLLA, comprises the following components: 15-90 parts natural rubber, 5-25 parts styrene-butadiene rubber, 50-70 parts carbon black, 5-30 parts silica, 1-3 parts tear-resistant resin, 1-2.5 parts sulfur, and 1-1.5 parts accelerator. All components mentioned in this embodiment are commercially available and prepared according to the inventor's product preparation method.

[0081] like Figure 1-9 As shown, this embodiment discloses a method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios. The method uses the rubber track, a walking component of engineering machinery, as the test object. The rubber track is installed on the engineering machinery device, and various walking routes, operations, and driving habits are simulated on working surfaces with different terrains, slopes, and hardness levels to test the rubber track. The method includes the following steps: The engineering machinery equipped with the test object rubber track is subjected to the following cyclical tests under different terrain, slope, and hardness level road surface conditions. In each cyclical test, all operations on each route are completed sequentially according to routes A, B, C, D, and E.

[0082] like Figure 2 As shown, Route A: Press " "On shape-controlled engineering machinery, one rubber track remains stationary and moves clockwise for one revolution; immediately, the other track is then controlled to remain stationary and move counterclockwise for one revolution; this completes one revolution." "The shape circle is counted once, and the operation is completed 10 times in total; the operation time in this scenario accounts for 25% of the total time during the test period, which is approximately 62.5 hours;

[0083] like Figure 3As shown, route B consists of four parts: B1, B2, B3, and B4. During the test period, this scenario accounted for 45% of the total time, approximately 112.6 hours. Among these, B1-B4 comprise four segments, each with a relatively short duration.

[0084] B1: Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves clockwise 10 times.

[0085] B2: Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves counterclockwise 10 times.

[0086] B3: Keep one rubber track on the construction machinery stationary while rotating the other rubber track clockwise once. Then, reverse the operation and keep one rubber track stationary while rotating the other rubber track counterclockwise once. One clockwise rotation and one counterclockwise rotation constitute one cycle. Perform 10 cycles.

[0087] B4: Control the simultaneous movement and rotation of two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery. Specifically, one track rotates clockwise and the other rotates counterclockwise. After rotating counterclockwise once, immediately rotate clockwise once as one cycle. Repeat this process 10 times.

[0088] like Figure 4 As shown; Route C: Set the test road route as a "W" shaped bend with a bend angle of about 120-130°; Control the two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery to move simultaneously and complete the back-and-forth movement according to the "W" shaped bend route as 1 time, repeat 10 times, and the operation time of this scenario accounts for 10% of the total time during the test period, which is about 25 hours.

[0089] like Figure 5 As shown, Route D: The test road route is set as a right-angle "W" shaped bend with a turning angle of 90°; control the two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery to move simultaneously and complete the back-and-forth movement according to the right-angle "W" shaped bend road route as 1 time, repeat 10 times, and the operation time of this scenario accounts for 10% of the total time during the test period, which is about 25 hours.

[0090] like Figure 6 As shown, Route E: Set the test road route as a straight line, walk uphill when coming and downhill when returning, control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move simultaneously, complete the round trip as 1 time, repeat 10 times, the operation time of this scenario accounts for 10% of the total time in the test cycle, that is, about 25 hours.

[0091] After completing the above full test, it constitutes one cycle. Then, the surface cracks and wear of the tested rubber track are recorded and analyzed periodically.

[0092] The cyclic test frequency is 1-5 cycles per day; the surface cracks include the inner and outer cracks on the rubber track tread side and the wheel side cracks; the wear degree can characterize the wear resistance of the rubber track in actual use, and the wear test includes fixed-point wear test and overall wear test.

[0093] The overall wear test involves periodically selecting multiple different sample locations on two simultaneously tested tracks, measuring the tread height of the rubber track corresponding to the test time period, and ensuring that the number of samples at different locations is no less than 50% of the total number of sections of the entire rubber track. The arithmetic mean of the tread height corresponding to each test time period is calculated, and then the change curve of the test rubber track tread height is calculated by fitting the arithmetic mean of the tread height of the rubber track corresponding to the time period; and the number of surface cracks and the change in crack length of the rubber track are statistically analyzed.

[0094] The fixed-point wear test involves selecting three evenly distributed and symmetrical locations (X, Y, and Z) on the rubber track as fixed-point measurement sample locations, and marking these locations accordingly. The test duration and the corresponding tread height at each measured sample location for each test duration are recorded daily, and the arithmetic mean is calculated. An actual tread height variation curve is plotted based on the test duration and its corresponding arithmetic mean to evaluate the accuracy, predictive ability, and trend consistency of the fitted curve for the overall wear test tread height variation. Specifically, the X, Y, and Z locations include both the inner and outer sides of the rubber track. The measurement reference point is the center point (6) of the tread grooves on the inner and outer sides of the rubber track corresponding to the X, Y, and Z locations.

[0095] 1. Overall wear test,

[0096] (1) The pattern height after 250.3 hours of testing, that is, the engineering rubber track JLLA prepared by the inventor company according to the above composition and preparation method, the test was terminated after 250.3 hours of test running according to the above scenario test method steps, and the data was measured at two points on the inside and outside of 28 different positions of the rubber track of the test object.

[0097] Table 1. Tread height of rubber track after 250.3 hours of JLLA testing

[0098]

[0099] Note that the pattern height data in the table above represents the results of the test. Figure 7 , 8As shown, the center point 6 of the tread groove 1 on the rubber track 5 is located at the same position. The center point 6 of the tread groove 1 on the rubber track 5 refers to the data values ​​of the center point 6 of the tread groove 1 located on the inner side 2 and outer side 3 of the rubber track 5. The tread height after testing represents the height value of the center point 6 of the tread groove 1 after 250.3 hours of scene testing. Figure 8 As shown.

[0100] The row in the table above indicates the location of the selected rubber track sample for the test object, and the number should not be less than 50% of the total number of track segments.

[0101] Table 2. Overall Wear Test: Pattern Height Variation - JLLA

[0102]

[0103] Note: Table 2 above shows the overall wear test results using the above-mentioned engineering rubber track performance scenario test method of this invention. It characterizes the periodic decrease trend and percentage decrease of the tread height at the inner side 2 and outer side 3 of 28 different sample locations on the JLLA rubber track. Note: After approximately 250.3 hours of scenario performance testing, the rubber track tread height decreased by an average of 4.28 mm on the inner side, a decrease of 17.14%; and by 2.88 mm on the outer side, a decrease of 11.52%. The overall tread height decreased by an average of 3.58 mm, a decrease of 14.33%.

[0104] (2) Surface crack test, i.e., the surface crack statistics after 250.3h of testing according to the engineering rubber track performance scenario test method of the present invention.

[0105] Table 3. Statistics of surface cracks after testing

[0106]

[0107] Note: ① The data in Table 3 above only counts cracks with a length exceeding 10mm, while "×" in the table represents all cracks on the entire tread surface or the entire wheel side at the sample location;

[0108] ② Number of surface cracks: Patterned surface: inner side, 17; outer side, 16; total 33; wheel side: total 7. This means the total number of cracks on the inner and outer sides of the patterned surface and the wheel side is 40.

[0109] The data above shows that the rubber track product prepared according to the above component composition ratio in this embodiment has superior wear resistance.

[0110] 2. Fixed-point wear test,

[0111] The fixed-point wear test involves selecting three evenly distributed and symmetrical X, Y, and Z positions on the rubber track of the test object, measuring the height of the tread grooves three times consecutively, taking the median value, and then using the arithmetic mean of the measurement data at the three X, Y, and Z positions to obtain the actual tread height change curve. The measurement time interval is once a day, and the daily running time is 6-10 hours, that is, the actual tread height is recorded approximately every 6-10 hours to characterize the actual wear trend.

[0112] The test period is 28 days, meaning the data obtained within 250.3 hours of the above-mentioned operation test over a total test period of 28 days is used for explanation; as shown in Table 4 below.

[0113]

[0114] The data obtained through fixed-point wear testing within the aforementioned operational test duration, and the actual pattern height change trend curve represented by the data, are used to evaluate the accuracy, predictive ability, and trend consistency of the overall wear test pattern height change fitting curve.

[0115] Based on the above data and instructions Figure 10 , 11 It can be seen that the data deviation between the actual pattern height change curve of the fixed-point wear test in this embodiment 1 and the pattern height change fitting curve of the overall wear test is small, and the overall measurement process is within a controllable range.

[0116] The engineering rubber track used in this embodiment is designated as Rubber Track JLLB, prepared by the inventor's company. Its main components include: 100 parts natural rubber, 50-80 parts carbon black, 1-3 parts sulfur, and 1-1.3 parts accelerator. All components mentioned in this embodiment are commercially available and prepared according to the inventor's company's product preparation method. This Embodiment 2 was tested concurrently with Embodiment 1, and the specific implementation method is the same as described in Embodiment 1.

[0117] 1. Overall wear test,

[0118] (1) The pattern height after 250.3 hours of testing, that is, the engineering rubber track JLLB prepared by the inventor company according to the above composition and preparation method, the test was terminated after 250.3 hours of test running according to the above scenario test method steps, and the data was measured at two points on the inside and outside of 28 different positions of the rubber track of the test object.

[0119] Table 5. Tread height of rubber tracks after 250.3 hours of JLLB testing.

[0120]

[0121] Note that the pattern height data in Table 5 above represents the results after testing. Figure 7 , 8 As shown, the center point 6 of the tread groove 1 on the rubber track 5 is located at the same position. The center point 6 of the tread groove 1 on the rubber track 5 refers to the data values ​​of the center point 6 of the tread groove 1 located on the inner side 2 and outer side 3 of the rubber track 5. The tread height after testing represents the height value of the center point 6 of the tread groove 1 after 250.3 hours of scene testing. Figure 8 As shown.

[0122] The row in Table 5 above indicates the location of the selected rubber track sample for the test object, and the number should not be less than 50% of the total number of track segments.

[0123] Table 6. Overall Wear Test: Pattern Height Variation - JLLB

[0124]

[0125] Note: Table 6 above shows the overall wear test results using the above-mentioned engineering rubber track performance scenario test method of this invention. It characterizes the periodic decrease trend and percentage decrease of the tread height at the inner side 2 and outer side 3 of the 28 different sample locations on the JLLB rubber track. Note: After approximately 250.3 hours of scenario performance testing, the rubber track tread height decreased by an average of 5.28 mm on the inner side, a decrease of 21.12%; and by 4.41 mm on the outer side, a decrease of 17.64%. The overall average tread height decreased by 4.85 mm, a decrease of 19.38%.

[0126] (2) Surface crack test, i.e., the surface crack statistics after 250.3h of testing according to the engineering rubber track performance scenario test method of the present invention.

[0127] Table 7. Statistics of surface cracks after testing

[0128]

[0129] Note: ① The data in Table 7 above only counts cracks with a length exceeding 10mm, while "×" in the table represents all cracks on the entire tread surface or the entire wheel side at the sample location;

[0130] ② Number of surface cracks: Patterned surface: inner side, 17; outer side, 18, total 35; wheel side: total 9. This means the total number of cracks on the inner and outer sides of the patterned surface and the wheel side is 44.

[0131] The data above shows that the rubber track product prepared according to the above component composition ratio in Example 2 is inferior to that in Example 1 in terms of wear resistance and crack resistance.

[0132] 2. Fixed-point wear test,

[0133] The fixed-point wear test involves selecting three evenly distributed and symmetrical X, Y, and Z positions on the rubber track of the test object, measuring the height of the tread grooves three times consecutively, taking the median value, and then using the arithmetic mean of the measurement data at the three X, Y, and Z positions to obtain the actual tread height change curve. The measurement time interval is once a day, and the daily running time is 6-10 hours, that is, the actual tread height is recorded approximately every 6-10 hours to characterize the actual wear trend.

[0134] The test period is 28 days, meaning the data obtained from the above-mentioned operations was tested for 28 days; as shown in Table 8 below.

[0135]

[0136] The data obtained through fixed-point wear testing within the aforementioned operational test duration, and the actual pattern height change trend curve represented by the data, are used to evaluate the accuracy, predictive ability, and trend consistency of the overall wear test pattern height change fitting curve.

[0137] Based on the above data and the attached diagram in the instruction manual. Figure 12 , 13 It can be seen that the data deviation between the actual pattern height change curve of the fixed-point wear test in this embodiment 2 and the pattern height change fitting curve of the overall wear test is small, and the overall measurement process is within a controllable range.

[0138] Note that the test methods for the performance parameters in the above test reports can be referenced to relevant national or industry standards. As can be seen from the test data above, the engineering rubber track performance scenario test method disclosed in this invention realistically simulates the actual working environment of engineering machinery, enabling a more accurate evaluation or prediction of product performance. This invention conducts long-term, high-intensity tests on rubber tracks in a scenario environment to obtain more comprehensive and in-depth data, accurately evaluating their performance under various complex working conditions. This will help to better understand the characteristics of rubber tracks and provide more accurate and reliable data support for optimizing the design, manufacturing, and use of rubber tracks.

Claims

1. A method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks in various scenarios, using engineering machinery rubber tracks as the test object, installing the rubber tracks on engineering machinery devices, and simulating various walking routes and driving behaviors on working surfaces with different terrains, slopes, and hardness levels to test the rubber tracks; characterized in that... The method includes the following steps: The engineering machinery equipped with the rubber tracks of the test object is subjected to the following cyclic test under different terrain, slope and softness road surface conditions. In each cyclic test, all operations of each route are completed in the order of route A, B, C, D and E. Route A: Keep one rubber track on the construction machinery stationary and move it clockwise one revolution; then keep the other track stationary and move it counterclockwise one revolution; complete one revolution. "Shape circle, counts as 1 time;" Route B consists of four parts: B1, B2, B3, and B4. B1. Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves clockwise one revolution. B2. Control the construction machinery so that one rubber track remains stationary while the other rubber track moves counterclockwise one revolution. B3. Keep one rubber track on the construction machinery stationary while rotating the other rubber track clockwise once. Conversely, keep one rubber track stationary while rotating the other rubber track counterclockwise once. One clockwise rotation and one counterclockwise rotation complete one cycle. B4. Control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move and rotate simultaneously, with one track rotating clockwise and the other counterclockwise. Control the operation to rotate counterclockwise once and then clockwise once, which counts as one cycle. Route C: Set the test road route as a "W" shaped curve. The turning angle of the "W" shaped curve is controlled at 120-130°. Control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move simultaneously and complete the back-and-forth movement according to the "W" shaped curve route. This counts as 1 time. Route D: Set the test road route as a right-angled "W" shaped bend with a turning angle of 88-92°; control the two rubber tracks on the engineering machinery to move simultaneously and complete the back-and-forth movement according to the right-angled "W" shaped bend road line, which counts as 1 time; Route E: Set the test road route as a straight line, and move uphill on the way there and downhill on the way back. Control the two rubber tracks on the construction machinery to move simultaneously. Complete the round trip as 1 time. After completing one full cycle of the above test, the surface cracks and wear of the rubber track are recorded and analyzed.

2. The method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks according to claim 1, characterized in that, The cyclic test frequency is 1-5 cycles per day; the surface cracks include the inner and outer cracks on the rubber track tread side and the wheel side cracks; the wear degree characterizes the wear resistance of the rubber track in actual use, and the wear degree test includes fixed-point wear test and overall wear test.

3. The method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks according to claim 1, characterized in that, The cyclic test is a series of tests, in which route A is repeated 8-12 times; route B, in which B1 and B2 are each repeated 8-12 times, and B3 and B4 are each repeated 8-12 times; routes C, D, and E are each repeated 8-12 times.

4. The method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks according to claim 2, characterized in that, The overall wear test measures the height of the tread grooves of the rubber track before and after wear, and calculates the rate of change of wear of the tread groove height of the test object's rubber track. It also involves selecting multiple different locations on different rubber tracks to measure their tread height, calculating the average value, and ensuring that the number of samples at different locations on different rubber tracks is not less than 50% of the total number of sections of the entire rubber track, and then calculating the average value.

5. The method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks according to claim 2, characterized in that, Fixed-point wear testing involves selecting three evenly distributed and symmetrical X, Y, and Z locations on the rubber track as fixed-point wear measurement sample locations, and marking these locations accordingly. The test duration is recorded daily, and the tread height corresponding to the measured sample locations and test duration is calculated, with the arithmetic mean calculated. Based on the test duration and its corresponding arithmetic mean, an actual tread height variation curve is plotted to evaluate the accuracy, predictive ability, and trend consistency of the tread height variation fitting curve of the overall wear test.

6. The method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks according to claim 5, characterized in that, The X, Y, and Z positions all include the inner and outer sides of the rubber track. The measurement values ​​are taken from the center points of the tread grooves on the inner and outer sides of the rubber track corresponding to the X, Y, and Z positions as the measurement reference points.

7. The method for testing the performance of engineering rubber tracks according to claim 1, characterized in that, Control any two test rubber tracks of the test objects, and in each cycle of testing, when each track completes all operations of each route in the order of route A, B, C, D, E, the test operation time for each route is correspondingly equal.

Images