Comparative analysis reveals performance differences in jaw crushers with tension and compression drive systems, indicating optimal configurations.
This study presents a comparative analysis of two double-toggle drive systems for jaw crushers that are tension based and compression based (this refers to the way in which the connecting rod is mechanically stressed within the drive mechanism), with the objective of identifying the optimal configuration from both kinematic and functional perspectives. Jaw crushers play a critical role in the extractive industry, and their performance is strongly influenced by the geometry and positioning of the drive mechanism. A theoretical approach based on mathematical modeling and numerical simulation was applied to a real constructive model (SMD-117), assessing variations in the linear velocity of the moving links as a function of mechanism placement. The study employed Mathcad 15, Roberts Animator, and GIM (Graphical Interactive Mechanisms) 2025.4 software to perform calculations and simulate motion. Results revealed a sinusoidal velocity pattern with significant differences between the two systems: the tension-based drive achieves peak velocities at the beginning of the angular variation interval, while the compression-based system reaches its maximum toward the end. Link C consistently exhibits higher velocities than link E, indicating increased mechanical stress. Polar graphic analysis identified critical velocity angles, and simulations confirmed the model’s validity with a maximum error of just 1.79%. The findings emphasize the importance of selecting an appropriate drive system to enhance performance, durability, and energy efficiency, offering concrete recommendations for equipment design and operation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Moșneguțu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: