Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Application of water jet description on the de-scaling process

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The paper is dealing with application of theoretical equations derived for rock disintegration onto materials with similar behavior—thick scales on hot metal rolling slabs. Penetration of water jet through a hot, rock-like material (e.g. scale) and work of the steam bubbles emerging from the water jet on the boundary between the scale layer and the hot metal material are described by a set of appropriate equations. The model is applied on the fan jets used for de-scaling process, and it provides both the qualitative and the quantitative results. These results make possible to determine the depth of penetration of water jet into the material of the scales and calculate the sizes of pieces of the disintegrated scales. Both mechanisms of water jet acting on scales, mechanical penetration to a certain depth in the material and the formation of steam bubbles inside the material, create mechanical stresses in the material of scales, especially the tensile and the shear ones. Pieces of scales are separated due to exceeding the limits of the stress and strain in the material of scales. The presented analytical equations describing the process in a simple way yield the quick and apprehensible calculation of applicable results. It is an alternative to solution of a rather complicated set of differential equations describing the mass and heat flow. The proposed theoretical base runs with technical factors and properties that can be obtained from tables or analogies with other materials or processes. The typical water pressure range of rolling mills is 16–24 MPa, the equivalent diameter of the applied water nozzle is 2 mm, the average traverse speed of the rolling slab is set to 1 m s−1, and the mean stand-off distance of the nozzle from the steel slab surface is 150 mm. Calculated depth of penetration into scales is ranging from 5 to 18 mm for these parameters, while the real thickness of scales lies between 1 and 7 mm. Simultaneously, the calculated length of the peeled layer in the direction of the jet movement ranges from 30 to 70 mm and the cutting width determined from the jet shape and the stand-off distance is 80–120 mm. Therefore, the calculated size of the scale debris is 30 × 80 mm for layers thicker than 5 mm and 70 × 120 mm for the ones thinner than 2 mm. These theoretical values correspond with sizes of real scale debris picked at the rolling mill.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Leach SJ, Walker GL (1966) Some aspects of rock cutting by high speed water jets. Philos T R Soc A 260:295–310

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Crow SC (1973) A theory of hydraulic rock cutting. Int J Rock Mech Min 10:567–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rehbinder G (1980) A theory about cutting rock with water jet. Rock Mech 12:247–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Mellor M (1972) Some general relationships for idealized jet cutting. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Jet Cutting Technology, BHRA, Coventry, England, paper A2, pp 25-36

  5. Yanaida K (1974) Flow characteristics of water jets. In: Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Jet Cutting Technology, BHRA, Cambridge, England, paper A2, pp 19-32

  6. Mazurkiewicz M (1977) Some aspects of intensification of material machining by high-pressure water jet. Transactions of the Technological Institute of Machine Manufacturing at the Polytechnic in Wroclaw No. 19, Monograph series No. 2, Wroclaw, Poland

  7. Hashish M, duPlessis MP (1978) Theoretical and experimental investigation of continuous jet penetration of solids. J Eng Ind - T ASME 100:88–94

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Hashish M, duPlessis MP (1979) Prediction equation relating high velocity jet cutting performance to stand-off distance and multipasses. J Eng Ind - T ASME 101:311–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Pasche E (1981) Das Schneidverhalten von Hochstdruck-wasserstrahlen zur Unterstutzung Mechanischer Loser-vorgange. Glückauf-Forschungshefte 42:32–38

    Google Scholar 

  10. Nikonov GP, Kuzmitch IA, Goldin JA (1986) Disintegration of rock materials by high-pressure water jets. Nedra, Moscow, USSR

    Google Scholar 

  11. Summers DA, Blaine JG (1994) A fundamental test for parameter evaluation. In: Rakowski Z (ed) Geomechanics 93. Rotterdam, Balkema, Netherlands, pp 321–325

    Google Scholar 

  12. Hlaváč L (1992) Physical description of high energy liquid jet interaction with material. In: Rakowski Z (ed) Geomechanics 91. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 341–346

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hlaváč LM, Sochor T (1995) Modelling of rock excavation by high energy water jet. In: Rossmanith HP (ed) Mechanics of jointed and faulted rock. Balkema, Rotterdam, pp 847–852

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hlaváč LM (1998) JETCUT—software for prediction of high-energy waterjet efficiency. In: Louis H (ed) Jetting technology. Prof. Eng. Pub. Ltd., Bury St Edmunds & London, pp 25–37

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hlaváč LM (1999) Theoretical and experimental investigation of a high energy waterjet efficiency on thermally treated rocks. In: Hashish M (ed) Proceedings of the 10th American Waterjet Conference. WJTA, Houston, Texas, pp 497–506

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hlaváč LM, Hlaváčová IM, Kušnerová M, Mádr V (2001) Research of waterjet interaction with submerged rock materials. In: Hashish M (ed) Proceedings of the 2001 WJTA American Waterjet Conference. WJTA, St. Louis, Missouri, pp 617–624

    Google Scholar 

  17. Paul S, Hoogstrate AM, van Luttervelt CA, Kals HJJ (1998) Analytical and experimental modeling of abrasive water jet cutting of ductile materials. J Mater Process Tech 73:189–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen FL, Wang J, Lemma E, Siores E (2003) Striation formation mechanisms on the jet cutting surface. J Mater Process Tech 141:213–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Deam RT, Lemma E, Ahmed DH (2004) Modelling of the abrasive water jet cutting process. Wear 257:877–891

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Orbanic H, Junkar M (2008) Analysis of striation formation mechanism in abrasive water jet cutting. Wear 265:821–830

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hlaváč LM (2009) Investigation of the abrasive water jet trajectory curvature inside the kerf. J Mater Process Tech 209:4154–4161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Srinivasu DS, Axinte DA, Shipway PH, Folkes J (2009) Influence of kinematic operating parameters on kerf geometry in abrasive waterjet machining of silicon carbide ceramics. Int J Mach Tool Manu 49:1077–1088

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hlaváč LM, Strnadel B, Kaličinský J, Gembalová L (2012) The model of product distortion in AWJ cutting. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 62:157–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Kong MC, Anwar S, Billingham J, Axinte DA (2012) Mathematical modelling of abrasive waterjet footprints for arbitrarily moving jets: part I—single straight paths. Int J Mach Tool Manu 53:58–68

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Anwar S, Axinte DA, Becker AA (2013) Finite element modelling of abrasive waterjet milled footprints. J Mater Process Tech 213:180–193

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Anwar S, Axinte DA, Becker AA (2013) Finite element modelling of overlapping abrasive waterjet milled footprints. Wear 303:426–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Billingham J, Miron CB, Axinte DA, Kong MC (2013) Mathematical modelling of abrasive waterjet footprints for arbitrarily moving jets: part II—overlapped single and multiple straight paths. Int J Mach Tool Manu 68:30–39

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Kumar N, Shukla M (2012) Finite element analysis of multi-particle impact on erosion in abrasive water jet machining of titanium alloy. J Comput Appl Math 236:4600–4610

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  29. Narayanan C, Balz R, Weiss DA, Heiniger KC (2013) Modelling of abrasive particle energy in water jet machining. J Mater Process Tech 213:2201–2210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Aydin G, Karakutr I, Aydiner K (2012) Performance of abrasive waterjet in granite cutting: influence of the textural properties. J Mater Civil Eng 24:944–949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Karakutr I, Aydin G, Aydiner K (2012) An experimental study on the depth of cut of granite in abrasive waterjet cutting. Mater Manuf Process 27:538–544

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Lu YY, Tang JR, Ge ZL, Xia BW, Liu Y (2013) Hard rock drilling technique with abrasive water jet assistance. Int J Rock Mech Min 60:47–56

    Google Scholar 

  33. Chillman A, Ramulu M, Hashish M (2010) Waterjet and water-air jet surface processing of a titanium alloy: a parametric evaluation. J Manuf Sci E-T ASME 132:Article Number 011012

  34. Azhari A, Schindler C, Kerscher E (2012) Improving surface hardness of austenitic stainless steel using waterjet peening process. Int J Adv Manuf Tech 63:1035–1046

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. den Dunnen S, Kraaij G, Biskup C, Kerkhoffs GMMJ, Tuijthof GJM (2013) Pure waterjet drilling of articular bone: an in vitro feasibility study. Stroj Vestn-J Mech E 59:425–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Moyo D, Anandjiwala RD (2013) Studies on waterjet impact forces in the hydroentanglement process. Text Res J 83:1717–1727

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Ozcelik Y, Ciccu R, Bortolussi A (2013) Effect of working parameters on excavation rate and specific energy on surface treatment with pure water jet. J Test Eval 41:104–115

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sitek L., Bodnárová L, Válek J, Zeleňák M, Klich J, Foldyna J, Novotný M (2013) Effects of water jet on heat-affected concretes. In: Juozapaitis A, Vainiunas P, Zavadskas EK (eds) Modern building materials, structures and techniques, book series: Procedia Engineering 57:1036-1044

  39. Vijay MM (1998) Design and development of a prototype pulsed waterjet machine for the removal of hard coatings. In: Louis H (ed) Proceedings 14th International Conference on Jetting Technology, BHR Group Conference Series Publication 32. Professional Engineering Publishing, London, pp 39–57

    Google Scholar 

  40. Foldyna J, Sitek L, Švehla B, Švehla S (2004) Utilization of ultrasound to enhance high-speed water jet effects. Ultrason Sonochem 11:131–137

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Hlaváč LM, Bodnárová L, Janurová E, Sitek L (2012) Comparison of continuous and pulsing water jets for repair actions on road and bridge concrete. Balt J Road Bridge E 7:53–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Dehkhoda S, Hood M (2013) An experimental study of surface and sub-surface damage in pulsed water-jet breakage of rocks. Int J Rock Mech Min 63:138–147

    Google Scholar 

  43. Bollaert EFR, Schleiss AJ (2005) Physically based model for evaluation of rock scour due to high-velocity jet impact. J Hydraul E 131:153–165

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lopatnikov SL, Gillespie JW, Morand C, Lumpkin R, Dignam J (2012) The new test method for high velocity water jet impact. Exp Mech 52:1475–1481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Hsu CY, Liang CC, Teng TL, Nguyen AT (2013) A numerical study on high-speed water jet impact. Ocean Eng 72:98–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Shim YM, Sharma RN, Richards PJ (2013) Proper orthogonal decomposition analysis of the flow field in a plane jet. Exp Therm Fluid Sci 51:37–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Libor M. Hlaváč.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hlaváč, L.M. Application of water jet description on the de-scaling process. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 80, 721–735 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7020-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-015-7020-7

Keywords

Navigation