Sealing performance analysis method and design method for sealing structure of high-pressure common rail pump
By analyzing the load and failure modes of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure, key design parameters were selected, and stress distribution was calculated using response surface methodology and finite element modeling. The design parameters were then optimized, which solved the problem of easy failure of the high-pressure pump sealing structure under high pressure and improved the sealing performance and service life.
Patent Information
- Authority / Receiving Office
- CN · China
- Patent Type
- Applications(China)
- Current Assignee / Owner
- NAVAL UNIV OF ENG PLA
- Filing Date
- 2026-02-05
- Publication Date
- 2026-05-12
AI Technical Summary
In existing technologies, high-pressure pump sealing structures are prone to sealing failure under higher pressures, and there is a lack of effective methods for analyzing sealing performance, resulting in a reduced service life of the sealing structure.
By analyzing the load and failure modes of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure, key design parameters were screened, and stress distribution was calculated using response surface methodology and finite element model. A sealing performance analysis method was established, and design parameters were optimized to improve sealing performance.
Accurate analysis and optimization of the high-pressure pump sealing structure were achieved, improving sealing performance and structural reliability, and extending the service life of the sealing structure.
Smart Images
Figure CN122021040A_ABST
Abstract
Description
Technical Field
[0001] This application relates to the field of diesel engine fuel supply technology, for example to a method for analyzing and designing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure. Background Technology
[0002] As a core component of the fuel supply system, the high-pressure common rail pump plays a crucial role in the operation of the common rail system and the diesel engine as a whole. The operating pressure of the high-pressure pump is one of its key performance parameters, significantly affecting fuel atomization quality, combustion efficiency, and the diesel engine's power performance, emissions performance, and reliability. In existing domestic technology, the maximum operating pressure of the high-pressure pump typically does not exceed 180 MPa. Increasing it to over 200 MPa can easily lead to fatigue failure of the high-pressure pump's fuel supply components after a certain period of operation, causing high-pressure seal failure, plunger assembly fatigue fracture, and other malfunctions. These problems can range from significantly reducing fuel flow and efficiency to completely rendering the high-pressure pump inoperable.
[0003] To address the issue of high-pressure pump sealing structures prone to sealing failure under higher pressures, domestic manufacturers currently primarily address this by altering the tightening torque of the sealing structure, i.e., adjusting the assembly preload to achieve sealing performance at higher pressures. However, while simply increasing the assembly preload can meet the sealing requirements at higher pressures, it also leads to higher stress levels in the sealing structure, making it more susceptible to fatigue failure and reducing its service life. Furthermore, the exact relationship between tightening torque / preload and the sealing performance of high-pressure pump sealing structures is unclear. In practical engineering, only by changing the tightening torque and conducting tests to observe and measure the leakage rate of the high-pressure pump's sealing structure and the operating time before significant leakage occurs can this be addressed.
[0004] Therefore, the sealing performance of a high-pressure pump sealing structure is not only highly related to the assembly preload, but also closely related to the design parameters of the sealing structure. However, existing technologies lack comprehensive methods for analyzing the sealing performance of high-pressure sealing structures, and research on the influence of sealing structures on sealing performance is extremely scarce, making it impossible to accurately analyze the sealing performance of high-pressure sealing structures.
[0005] It should be noted that the information disclosed in the background section above is only used to enhance the understanding of the background of this application. Summary of the Invention
[0006] To provide a basic understanding of some aspects of the disclosed embodiments, a brief summary is given below. This summary is not intended as a general commentary, nor is it intended to identify key / important components or describe the scope of protection of these embodiments, but rather as a prelude to the detailed description that follows.
[0007] The high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure sealing performance analysis method and design method provided in this disclosure can solve the problem of not being able to accurately analyze the sealing performance of high-pressure sealing structures.
[0008] This disclosure provides a method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure, the method including: Analyze the load conditions and failure modes of the sealing structure of the high-pressure common rail pump; Based on the load and failure mode analysis results, the key design parameters of the sealing structure are selected. Design response surface methodology experiments, and design experiments for the key design parameters; Establish a finite element model of the stress field of the sealed structure and calculate the stress distribution under different combinations of design parameters; Record the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface under different combinations of design parameters; Based on the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure, the influence of design parameters on sealing performance is analyzed, and parameter optimization is performed.
[0009] This disclosure provides a design method for the sealing structure of a high-pressure common rail pump. By using the above-mentioned method for analyzing the sealing performance of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure, the optimal combination of design parameters is determined to improve sealing performance and structural reliability.
[0010] The high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure sealing performance analysis method and design method provided in this disclosure can achieve the following technical effects: This disclosure identifies key design parameters such as preload, contact surface cone angle, boss thickness, and sealing ring diameter by analyzing the load and failure modes of the sealing structure. Subsequently, response surface methodology (RSM) tests are conducted using Box-Behnken design, and a stress field finite element model is established to systematically calculate the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface under different parameter combinations. Through RSM analysis, a quantitative mathematical model relating these two key indicators to the design parameters is constructed. Finally, by maximizing the minimum contact pressure and minimizing the maximum equivalent stress as optimization objectives, the key parameters of the sealing structure are synergistically optimized, thereby enabling accurate analysis of the sealing performance of high-pressure sealing structures.
[0011] The above general description and the description below are exemplary and illustrative only and are not intended to limit this application. Attached Figure Description
[0012] One or more embodiments are illustrated by way of example with reference to the accompanying drawings. These illustrations and drawings do not constitute a limitation on the embodiments. Elements having the same reference numerals in the drawings are shown as similar elements. The drawings are not to be scaled. And wherein: Figure 1This is a flowchart illustrating a method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure according to an embodiment of this disclosure. Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating another method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure provided in this embodiment. Figure 3 This is a cross-sectional view of a high-pressure pump model provided in an embodiment of this disclosure; Figure 4 This is a structural and simplified stress analysis diagram of a valve seat-plunger sleeve assembly provided in an embodiment of this disclosure; Figure 5 This is a finite element model provided in the embodiments of this disclosure; Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of a finite element calculation result provided in an embodiment of this disclosure; Figures 7 to 12 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of the maximum equivalent stress of the sealing outer ring to various parameters provided in an embodiment of this disclosure; Figures 13 to 18 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of the minimum contact pressure of the sealing outer ring to various parameters according to an embodiment of the present disclosure; Figure 19 This is a schematic diagram of the maximum equivalent stress response surface equation and fitting parameters of a sealing structure provided in this embodiment of the present disclosure; Figure 20 This is a schematic diagram of the minimum contact pressure response surface equation expression and fitting parameters of a sealing structure provided in this embodiment; Figure 21 This is an optimized maximum equivalent stress cloud diagram of the sealing contact surface provided in an embodiment of the present disclosure; Figure 22 This is a schematic diagram of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing performance analysis device provided in an embodiment of this disclosure. Detailed Implementation
[0013] To provide a more detailed understanding of the features and technical content of the embodiments of this disclosure, the implementation of the embodiments of this disclosure will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings. The accompanying drawings are for illustrative purposes only and are not intended to limit the embodiments of this disclosure. In the following technical description, for ease of explanation, several details are used to provide a full understanding of the disclosed embodiments. However, one or more embodiments may still be implemented without these details. In other cases, well-known structures and devices may be simplified in their depiction to simplify the drawings.
[0014] The terms "first," "second," etc., used in the embodiments of this disclosure are used to distinguish similar objects and are not necessarily used to describe a specific order or sequence. It should be understood that such data can be interchanged where appropriate for the embodiments of this disclosure described herein. Furthermore, the terms "comprising" and "having," and any variations thereof, are intended to cover non-exclusive inclusion.
[0015] Unless otherwise stated, the term "multiple" means two or more.
[0016] In this embodiment of the disclosure, the character " / " indicates that the objects before and after it are in an "or" relationship. For example, A / B means: A or B.
[0017] The term "and / or" describes an association between objects, indicating that three relationships can exist. For example, A and / or B means: A or B, or A and B.
[0018] The term "correspondence" can refer to an association or binding relationship. The correspondence between A and B means that there is an association or binding relationship between A and B.
[0019] To address the aforementioned issues, this disclosure provides a method for analyzing and designing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure.
[0020] The following description, in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, illustrates a method for analyzing the sealing performance and designing a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure according to an embodiment of this disclosure.
[0021] Figure 1 This is a flowchart illustrating a method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure, as provided in an embodiment of this disclosure.
[0022] Combination Figure 1 As shown, the method for analyzing the sealing performance of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure includes: S101, Analyze the load conditions and failure modes of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure; S102, Based on the load and failure mode analysis results, select the key design parameters of the sealing structure; S103, Design response surface methodology experiments, and design experiments for key design parameters; S104, Establish a finite element model of the stress field of the sealed structure and calculate the stress distribution under different combinations of design parameters; S105 records the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface under different combinations of design parameters; S106, based on the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure, analyzes the influence of design parameters on sealing performance and optimizes the parameters.
[0023] In some embodiments, the above-mentioned key design parameters include: The radius of the rounded corner of the sealing surface edge, the cone angle α of the contact surface edge, the thickness h of the sealing surface boss, the diameter D of the sealing ring, and the bolt preload F.
[0024] In some embodiments, the above response surface test is a four-factor, three-level Box-Behnken design, wherein the four factors include preload F, cone angle α, boss thickness h, and ring diameter D.
[0025] In some embodiments, the value of the preload F includes 30kN, 50kN, and 70kN; The cone angle α can be 90°, 120°, or 150°. The thickness h of the boss can be 0.2mm, 0.3mm, or 0.4mm. The diameter D of the ring belt can be 19.2 mm, 20.0 mm, or 20.8 mm.
[0026] In some embodiments, the minimum contact pressure is used as an evaluation index for sealing performance, and the maximum equivalent stress is used as an evaluation index for structural reliability.
[0027] In some embodiments, Figure 1 The methods may also include: The functional relationship between the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface and the design parameters is obtained by response surface analysis, and the parameters are optimized based on the functional relationship.
[0028] In some embodiments, the objectives of the above optimization are to maximize the minimum contact pressure and minimize the maximum equivalent stress.
[0029] In some embodiments, the response surface equation for the maximum equivalent stress is:
[0030] in, For the maximum equivalent stress on the sealing surface, For preload, The cone angle at the edge of the contact surface. The thickness of the boss at the edge of the sealing surface. This refers to the diameter of the sealing ring.
[0031] In some embodiments, the response surface equation for the minimum contact pressure is: in, Minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface. For preload, The cone angle at the edge of the contact surface. The thickness of the boss at the edge of the sealing surface. This refers to the diameter of the sealing ring.
[0032] Figure 2 This is a flowchart illustrating another method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure provided in this embodiment. Figure 3 This is a cross-sectional view of a high-pressure pump model provided in an embodiment of this disclosure. Figure 4 This is a structural and simplified stress analysis diagram of a valve seat-plunger sleeve assembly provided in an embodiment of this disclosure. Figure 5 This is a finite element model provided in the embodiments of this disclosure. Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of finite element calculation results (plunger sleeve, valve seat-plunger sleeve sealing surface contact pressure cloud diagram) provided in an embodiment of this disclosure. Figures 7 to 12 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of the maximum equivalent stress of the sealing outer ring to various parameters, provided in an embodiment of this disclosure. Figures 13 to 18 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of the minimum contact pressure of the sealing outer ring to various parameters, provided by an embodiment of this disclosure. Figure 19 This is a schematic diagram illustrating the maximum equivalent stress response surface equation and fitting parameters of a sealing structure according to an embodiment of this disclosure. Figure 20 This is a schematic diagram of the minimum contact pressure response surface equation expression and fitting parameters for a sealing structure provided in this embodiment. Figure 21 Maximum equivalent stress cloud diagram of the optimized sealing contact surface.
[0033] Specifically, Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R² to α and F. Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R2 to h and F. Figure 9 This is a schematic diagram of the response surfaces of R2 to D and F. Figure 10 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R² to α and H. Figure 11 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R² to α and D. Figure 12 This is a schematic diagram of the response surfaces of R² to D and H. Figure 13 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R² to α and F. Figure 14 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R2 to h and F. Figure 15 This is a schematic diagram of the response surfaces of R2 to D and F. Figure 16 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R² to α and H. Figure 17 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R² to α and D. Figure 18 This is a schematic diagram of the response surface of R2 to D and H.
[0034] The following is combined Figures 2 to 21 ,right Figure 1 The methods described in the text will be further described.
[0035] In view of the limitations of existing technologies in increasing the working pressure of high-pressure pump sealing structures by increasing the contact surface clamping force, which can easily lead to crushing and fatigue failure of the sealing structure, the lack of a suitable method for evaluating the sealing performance of high-pressure common rail pump sealing structures, and the unclear influence of key design parameters of the sealing structure on sealing performance, no suitable method for predicting and optimizing the sealing performance of diesel engine high-pressure common rail pump sealing structures has been proposed in the existing technologies. In view of the above-mentioned technical status, the present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and implementation examples.
[0036] A method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump seal structure, the method comprising the following steps: Step 1: Analyze the load conditions (stress conditions) and failure modes of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure of the diesel engine; The sealing structure of a high-pressure pump mainly consists of an assembly composed of a plunger sleeve and a valve seat, including the pressing surface between the joints and the surrounding area. The load and stress conditions include the fuel pressure on the surfaces of the plunger sleeve and valve seat, the bolt preload on the valve seat-plunger sleeve assembly, and the contact relationship (surface roughness, etc.) between the sealing surfaces. A cross-sectional view of the high-pressure pump model in this invention example is shown below. Figure 3 As shown, the structure and brief stress analysis of the valve seat-plunger sleeve assembly are as follows: Figure 4 As shown; The main failure modes of high-pressure sealing structures are crushing, local material detachment, and fatigue failure. All of these failure modes can be addressed by optimizing the key design parameters of the sealing structure. Step 2: Based on the load and stress analysis results of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure and the analysis results of the main failure modes, select the key design parameters of the sealing structure. Key design parameters for the high-pressure pump sealing structure include the radius of the sealing surface edge fillet, the cone angle of the contact surface edge, the thickness of the sealing surface boss, the diameter of the sealing ring, and the bolt preload (sealing surface clamping force). A schematic diagram of the key design parameters for the high-pressure pump sealing structure in the example can be found here. Figure 4 Right image; Step 3: Design response surface experiments for the five design parameters selected in Step 2; Based on preliminary research, the five design parameters in this case study have a relatively low impact on the sealing performance of the sealing structure. Therefore, in this case study, only four factors—cone angle α of the contact surface, thickness h of the boss, diameter D of the sealing surface ring, and bolt preload F—are designed for response surface experiments. To shorten the experimental time and improve experimental efficiency, a four-factor, three-level Box-Behnken response surface design method was adopted for response surface experiments. In the response surface methodology test, the preload F was set at values of 30 kN, 50 kN, and 70 kN. In the response surface methodology, the cone angle α ranges from 90°, 120°, to 150°. In the response surface methodology, the thickness h of the boss is taken in the range of 0.2 mm, 0.3 mm, and 0.4 mm. In the response surface methodology, the diameter D of the sealing ring was taken in the range of 19.2 mm, 20 mm, and 20.8 mm. Step four: Following the response surface test matrix designed in step three, and based on the load and force analysis results from step one, establish a finite element model of the stress field of the high-pressure pump sealing structure, appropriately simplifying structures such as chamfers and fillets. After meshing, perform calculations to obtain the stress distribution of the sealing structure under different design parameter interactions. The finite element model established in this case is as follows: Figure 5 As shown.
[0037] Step 5: After solving the finite element calculation model, combine the experimental design matrix designed in Step 3 and record the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface under different design parameters according to Table 1. The minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface is the key indicator used to evaluate the sealing performance in this invention. In engineering, the contact pressure of the sealing structure needs to be greater than a certain value in order to withstand the pressure of high-pressure fuel. Therefore, the minimum contact pressure is a key factor in evaluating the sealing performance. The higher the minimum contact pressure, the better the sealing performance. The maximum equivalent stress is used in this invention to evaluate the reliability of the sealing structure. If the maximum equivalent stress is greater than the yield strength, the sealing surface is prone to crushing, leading to structural failure. Moreover, the greater the maximum equivalent stress, the more prone the sealing structure is to fatigue failure and the shorter the fatigue life. Step 6: Based on the test record table in Step 5, conduct an analysis of the impact of the sealing structure design parameters on the sealing performance, complete the response surface analysis of the key design parameters of the sealing structure, give the quantitative impact law of each design parameter on the sealing performance, and optimize the key design parameters based on the law. Response surface methodology was used to calculate the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing structure under different design parameters as shown in Table 1. Then, regression fitting was performed on the calculation results to obtain the functional expressions of the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing structure as a function of the design parameters. Table 1 Key Parameters of Sealing Structure Box-Behnken Test Design Table and Finite Element Calculation Results
[0038] Optimization design, that is, given optimization criteria, calculate the optimal combination of design parameters based on the obtained functional relationship, that is, the optimal solution of the four design parameters F, α, h, and D when the sealing performance is optimal; The optimization criteria, in the case of this invention, are to maximize the minimum contact pressure on the sealing surface of the sealing structure and minimize the maximum equivalent stress. The four design parameters of the sealing structure are: bolt preload F, sealing surface edge cone angle α, sealing surface boss thickness h, and sealing surface ring diameter D. The maximum equivalent stress of the sealing structure is also considered. The response surface equation is:
[0039] In the formula: —Maximum equivalent stress on the sealing surface, MPa; —Preload, kN; —Cone angle of the contact surface edge, °; —Thickness of the sealing surface edge boss, mm; —Diameter of the sealing ring, mm; Fitting parameters are as follows Figure 19 As shown; The four design parameters of the sealing structure—bolt preload F, sealing surface edge cone angle α, sealing surface boss thickness h, and sealing surface ring diameter D—affect sealing performance (minimum contact pressure). The response surface equation is:
[0040] In the formula: —Minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface, MPa; —Preload, kN; —Cone angle of the contact surface edge, °; —Thickness of the sealing surface edge boss, mm; —Diameter of the sealing ring, mm.
[0041] Fitting parameters are as follows Figure 20 As shown.
[0042] It is important to note that the above response surface model was obtained using the Box-Behnken Response Surface Design (BBD) method, as it offers significant advantages over other experimental design methods. Compared to full factorial design, it significantly reduces the number of experimental points, making it suitable for fitting quadratic polynomial models, while full factorial design requires more points to obtain the same information. Compared to central composite design (CCD), BBD avoids point experiments outside the factor range, reducing experimental risk, and distributes experimental points evenly within the experimental space, resulting in better model fitting. Compared to Latin square design, BBD is more flexible, not only able to screen experimental factors but also able to directly fit quadratic models. Therefore, BBD design has comprehensive advantages in terms of the number of experiments, safety, and model fitting ability, making it very suitable for multi-factor response optimization problems. Considering the practical problems of high-pressure common rail pumps, such as the numerous key design parameters, the cumbersome steps of modifying finite element models, and the high computational requirements, it can be seen that using BBD can provide a good solution, enabling the determination of the interaction effects between multiple parameters on the response variable with a smaller number of experimental points.
[0043] Response surface methodology (BBD) describes the relationship between factors and the response variable using a quadratic polynomial model. This relationship can be expressed as follows:
[0044] In the formula: —Response variable; —Constant term; —First-order effect coefficient; —Second-order effect coefficient; — Interaction effect coefficient; —Number of factors; Based on this model, the maximum equivalent stress on the sealing surface of the valve seat-plunger sleeve assembly can be obtained by performing regression analysis on the experimental data. and minimum contact pressure The constants and coefficients in the response surface model for key design parameters; The above is a detailed technical solution of the present invention. The above embodiments are only illustrative of the principles and effects of the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. The present invention provides the numerical relationship between the key design parameters of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure and the maximum equivalent stress and fatigue life of the key parts of the sealing structure, which can be used for the subsequent improvement and development of the high-pressure pump sealing structure in the case. The technical route proposed by the present invention can also be widely used in other high-pressure common rail pump sealing structures and hydraulic components that need to be improved and developed, so as to improve the working pressure and durability of the high-pressure pump sealing structure.
[0045] An analytical method for the sealing performance of high-pressure common rail pump sealing structures is proposed—using minimum contact pressure as the evaluation criterion for sealing performance. Compared with the traditional method of using leakage as the evaluation criterion for sealing performance, minimum contact pressure is easier to obtain through theoretical calculation and is easier to use as a design criterion and optimization target in the design stage. Under the same working conditions, while ensuring the sealing performance of the sealing structure (minimum contact pressure greater than 1.5 times the sealing pressure), the stress level of the sealing structure is significantly reduced. Figure 6 and Figure 21 The images show the stress distribution cloud diagrams of the sealing surface before and after optimization. It can be seen that the maximum equivalent stress is reduced by about 35% after optimization. A response surface equation for the maximum equivalent stress of the sealing surface of the sealing structure based on key design parameters is proposed. This equation can be used to predict the maximum equivalent stress of the sealing structure under different key parameter interactions, and guide the multi-parameter integrated improvement design of the case model. A response surface equation for the sealing performance of a sealing structure based on key design parameters is proposed. This equation can be used to evaluate the sealing effect of a sealing structure under the interaction of different key design parameters and to guide the multi-parameter comprehensive improvement and optimization of case model. In the process of developing high-load-bearing improvement of high-pressure pump sealing structure, compared with technical routes such as increasing tightening torque, the technical process proposed in this invention is more effective. By improving structural parameters, it can ensure that the high-pressure sealing structure maintains high-pressure sealing performance over a longer period of time.
[0046] like Figure 22 As shown in the illustration, this disclosure also provides a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure sealing performance analysis device 2200, including a processor 2204 and a memory 2201. Optionally, the system may further include a communication interface 2202 and a bus 2203. The processor 2204, communication interface 2202, and memory 2201 can communicate with each other via the bus 2203. The communication interface 2202 can be used for information transmission. The processor 304 can call logical instructions in the memory 2201 to execute the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure sealing performance analysis method of the above embodiment.
[0047] Furthermore, the logic instructions in the aforementioned memory 2201 can be implemented as software functional units and, when sold or used as independent products, can be stored in a computer-readable storage medium.
[0048] The memory 2201, as a computer-readable storage medium, can be used to store software programs and computer-executable programs, such as the program instructions / modules corresponding to the methods in the embodiments of this disclosure. The processor 2204 executes functional applications and data processing by running the program instructions / modules stored in the memory 2201, thereby implementing the high-pressure common rail pump sealing performance analysis method in the above embodiments.
[0049] The memory 2201 may include a program storage area and a data storage area. The program storage area may store the operating system and applications required for at least one function; the data storage area may store data created based on the use of the terminal device. Furthermore, the memory 2201 may include high-speed random access memory and may also include non-volatile memory.
[0050] This disclosure provides a computer-readable storage medium storing computer-executable instructions, which are configured as a method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure.
[0051] The aforementioned computer-readable storage medium may be a transient computer-readable storage medium or a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium.
[0052] The technical solutions of this disclosure can be embodied in the form of a software product. This computer software product is stored in a storage medium and includes one or more instructions to cause a computer device (which may be a personal computer, server, or network device, etc.) to execute all or part of the steps of the methods of this disclosure. The aforementioned storage medium can be a non-transitory storage medium, including: a USB flash drive, a portable hard drive, a read-only memory (ROM), a random access memory (RAM), a magnetic disk, or an optical disk, and other media capable of storing program code; it can also be a transient storage medium.
[0053] The foregoing description and accompanying drawings fully illustrate embodiments of the present disclosure to enable those skilled in the art to practice them. Other embodiments may include structural, logical, electrical, procedural, and other changes. The embodiments represent only possible variations. Individual components and functions are optional unless explicitly required, and the order of operation may vary. Parts and features of some embodiments may be included in or replace parts and features of other embodiments. As used in the description of the embodiments, the singular forms “a,” “an,” and “the” are intended to equally include the plural forms unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. Similarly, the term “and / or” as used herein means including one or more of the associated listed items and all possible combinations thereof. Additionally, when used in this application, the terms “comprise” and its variations “comprises” and / or “comprising” refer to the presence of stated features, integrals, steps, operations, elements, and / or components, but do not preclude the presence or addition of one or more other features, integrals, steps, operations, elements, components, and / or groups thereof. Unless otherwise specified, an element defined by the phrase "comprising a..." does not exclude the presence of other identical elements in the process, method, or apparatus that includes the element. In this document, each embodiment may focus on describing the differences from other embodiments, and similar or identical parts between embodiments can be referred to mutually. For methods, products, etc., disclosed in the embodiments, if they correspond to the method section disclosed in the embodiments, then the relevant parts can be referred to the description of the method section.
[0054] Those skilled in the art will recognize that the units and algorithm steps of the various examples described in conjunction with the embodiments disclosed herein can be implemented in electronic hardware, or a combination of computer software and electronic hardware. Whether these functions are implemented in hardware or software depends on the specific application and design constraints of the technical solution. Those skilled in the art can use different methods to implement the described functions for each specific application, but such implementation should not be considered beyond the scope of the embodiments of this disclosure. Those skilled in the art will clearly understand that, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the specific working processes of the systems, devices, and units described above can be referred to the corresponding processes in the foregoing method embodiments, and will not be repeated here.
[0055] The methods and products (including but not limited to devices and equipment) disclosed in the embodiments herein can be implemented in other ways. For example, the device embodiments described above are merely illustrative. For instance, the division of units may be merely a logical functional division, and in actual implementation, there may be other division methods. For example, multiple units or components may be combined or integrated into another system, or some features may be ignored or not executed. In addition, the mutual coupling or direct coupling or communication connection shown or discussed may be through some interfaces, and the indirect coupling or communication connection of devices or units may be electrical, mechanical, or other forms. Units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate, and components shown as units may or may not be physical units, that is, they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple network units. Some or all of the units can be selected to implement this embodiment according to actual needs. In addition, the functional units in the embodiments of this disclosure may be integrated into one processing unit, or each unit may exist physically separately, or two or more units may be integrated into one unit.
[0056] The flowcharts and block diagrams in the accompanying drawings illustrate the architecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementations of systems, methods, and computer program products according to embodiments of the present disclosure. In this regard, each block in a flowchart or block diagram may represent a module, segment, or portion of code, which contains one or more executable instructions for implementing a specified logical function. In some alternative implementations, the functions marked in the blocks may occur in a different order than that shown in the drawings. For example, two consecutive blocks may actually be executed substantially in parallel, and they may sometimes be executed in reverse order, depending on the functions involved. In the descriptions corresponding to the flowcharts and block diagrams in the accompanying drawings, the operations or steps corresponding to different blocks may also occur in a different order than disclosed in the description, and sometimes there is no specific order between different operations or steps. For example, two consecutive operations or steps may actually be executed substantially in parallel, and they may sometimes be executed in reverse order, depending on the functions involved. Each block in a block diagram and / or flowchart, and combinations of blocks in a block diagram and / or flowchart, can be implemented using a dedicated hardware-based system that performs the specified function or action, or using a combination of dedicated hardware and computer instructions.
[0057] Various embodiments of the systems and techniques described above herein can be implemented in digital electronic circuit systems, integrated circuit systems, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGAs), application-specific integrated circuits (ASICs), application-specific standard products (ASSPs), systems-on-a-chip (SoCs), payload-programmable logic devices (CPLDs), computer hardware, firmware, software, and / or combinations thereof. These various embodiments may include implementations in one or more computer programs that can be executed and / or interpreted on a programmable system including at least one programmable processor, which may be a dedicated or general-purpose programmable processor, capable of receiving data and instructions from a storage system, at least one input device, and at least one output device, and transmitting data and instructions to the storage system, the at least one input device, and the at least one output device.
[0058] The program code used to implement the methods of this disclosure may be written in any combination of one or more programming languages. This program code may be provided to a processor or controller of a general-purpose computer, special-purpose computer, or other programmable data processing apparatus, such that when executed by the processor or controller, the program code causes the functions / operations specified in the flowcharts and / or block diagrams to be implemented. The program code may be executed entirely on a machine, partially on a machine, as a standalone software package partially on a machine and partially on a remote machine, or entirely on a remote machine or server.
[0059] In the context of this disclosure, a machine-readable medium can be a tangible medium that may contain or store a program for use by or in conjunction with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. A machine-readable medium can be a machine-readable signal medium or a machine-readable storage medium. Machine-readable media can be, but is not limited to, electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or semiconductor systems, apparatus, or devices, or any suitable combination of the foregoing. More specific examples of machine-readable storage media include electrical connections based on one or more wires, portable computer disks, hard disks, random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), optical fibers, portable compact disk read-only memory (CD-ROM), optical storage devices, magnetic storage devices, or any suitable combination of the foregoing.
[0060] To provide interaction with a user, the systems and techniques described herein can be implemented on a computer having: a display device (e.g., a CRT (cathode ray tube) or LCD (liquid crystal display) monitor) for displaying information to the user; and a keyboard and pointing device (e.g., a mouse or trackball) through which the user provides input to the computer. Other types of devices can also be used to provide interaction with the user; for example, feedback provided to the user can be any form of sensory feedback (e.g., visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback); and input from the user can be received in any form (including sound input, voice input, or tactile input).
[0061] The systems and technologies described herein can be implemented in computing systems that include back-end components (e.g., as a data server), or computing systems that include middleware components (e.g., an application server), or computing systems that include front-end components (e.g., a user computer with a graphical user interface or web browser through which a user can interact with implementations of the systems and technologies described herein), or any combination of such back-end, middleware, or front-end components. The components of the system can be interconnected via digital data communication of any form or medium (e.g., a communication network). Examples of communication networks include local area networks (LANs), wide area networks (WANs), and the Internet.
[0062] Computer systems can include clients and servers. Clients and servers are generally located far apart and typically interact via communication networks. Client-server relationships are created by computer programs running on the respective computers and having a client-server relationship with each other. Servers can be cloud servers, servers in distributed systems, or servers incorporating blockchain technology.
[0063] It should be understood that the various forms of processes shown above can be used to rearrange, add, or delete steps. For example, the steps described in this disclosure can be executed in parallel, sequentially, or in different orders, as long as the desired result of the technical solution of this disclosure can be achieved, and this is not limited herein.
[0064] The specific embodiments described above do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection of this disclosure. Those skilled in the art should understand that various modifications, combinations, sub-combinations, and substitutions can be made according to design requirements and other factors. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, and improvements made within the spirit and principles of this disclosure should be included within the scope of protection of this disclosure.
Claims
1. A method for analyzing the sealing performance of a high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure, characterized in that, The method includes: Analyze the load conditions and failure modes of the sealing structure of the high-pressure common rail pump; Based on the load and failure mode analysis results, the key design parameters of the sealing structure are selected. Design response surface methodology experiments, and design experiments for the key design parameters; Establish a finite element model of the stress field of the sealed structure and calculate the stress distribution under different combinations of design parameters; Record the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface under different combinations of design parameters; Based on the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure, the influence of design parameters on sealing performance is analyzed, and parameter optimization is performed.
2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The key design parameters include: The radius of the rounded corner of the sealing surface edge, the cone angle α of the contact surface edge, the thickness h of the sealing surface boss, the diameter D of the sealing ring, and the bolt preload F.
3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The response surface methodology is a four-factor, three-level Box-Behnken design, where the four factors include preload F, cone angle α, boss thickness h, and ring diameter D.
4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that, The preload force F can be 30kN, 50kN, or 70kN. The cone angle α can be 90°, 120°, or 150°. The thickness h of the boss can be 0.2mm, 0.3mm, or 0.4mm. The diameter D of the ring belt can be 19.2 mm, 20.0 mm, or 20.8 mm.
5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The minimum contact pressure is used as an evaluation index for sealing performance, and the maximum equivalent stress is used as an evaluation index for structural reliability.
6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The method further includes: The functional relationship between the maximum equivalent stress and minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface and the design parameters is obtained by response surface analysis, and the parameters are optimized based on the functional relationship.
7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that, The optimization objectives are to maximize the minimum contact pressure and minimize the maximum equivalent stress.
8. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that, The response surface equation for the maximum equivalent stress is: ， in, For the maximum equivalent stress on the sealing surface, For preload, The cone angle at the edge of the contact surface. The thickness of the boss at the edge of the sealing surface. This refers to the diameter of the sealing ring.
9. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that, The response surface equation for the minimum contact pressure is: ， in, Minimum contact pressure of the sealing surface. For preload, The cone angle at the edge of the contact surface. The thickness of the boss at the edge of the sealing surface. This refers to the diameter of the sealing ring.
10. A design method for a sealing structure of a high-pressure common rail pump, characterized in that, The sealing performance analysis method of the high-pressure common rail pump sealing structure as described in any one of claims 1 to 9 is used to determine the optimal combination of design parameters in order to improve sealing performance and structural reliability.