首页> 外文期刊>Soil & Tillage Research >Energy-based comparison between a dynamic cone penetrometer and a motor-operated static cone penetrometer.
【24h】

Energy-based comparison between a dynamic cone penetrometer and a motor-operated static cone penetrometer.

机译:动态锥形渗透仪和电动静态锥形渗透仪之间基于能量的比较。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Dynamic cone penetrometers (DCP) have been available for many years. However, there is still an uncertainty between the simplified Dutch Formula and the complete one. As a continual approach to assess both formulae, this study provides an energy-based comparison between a DCP and a motor-operated static cone penetrometer (SCP). The results yielded by SCP were regarded as reference. Through the designed experiment, we observed that both formulae considerably extenuated the energy loss arisen from strikes, which was equivalent to an overestimation of the calculated penetration force. Since the overestimation is greater than the uncertainty between both formulae, a better analytical model is required. Regarding the energy loss, the shaft vibration should also be taken into account for correcting each formula.Digital Object Identifier http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2011.06.005
机译:动态圆锥渗透仪(DCP)已经问世多年。但是,简化的荷兰公式与完整公式之间仍然存在不确定性。作为评估这两个公式的一种连续方法,本研究提供了DCP与电动静态锥形渗透仪(SCP)之间基于能量的比较。 SCP产生的结果被视为参考。通过设计的实验,我们观察到两个公式都大大减轻了打击产生的能量损失,这相当于对计算出的穿透力的高估。由于高估大于两个公式之间的不确定性,因此需要更好的分析模型。关于能量损失,还应考虑轴振动以校正每个公式。数字对象标识符http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2011.06.005

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号