Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Experimental testing and numerical simulation reveal how saw gin lint clearance affects fiber damage.
To thoroughly analyze the stress conditions of cotton fibers during the cleaning process of saw gin lint and the mechanism by which the structural clearance between the saw-toothed cylinder and the trash knife affects fiber damage, thereby improving the quality of lint, this study employs a combination of experimental testing and numerical simulation. On one hand, based on the YG001 type electronic single fiber strength tester, uniaxial tensile tests were conducted to obtain the breaking strength of cotton fibers, establish the statistical regularity of fiber mechanical properties, and calculate the breaking stress of a single cotton fiber. On the other hand, finite element simulation software was utilized to simulate the cleaning process of cotton fibers, investigating the impact of different clearances between the saw-toothed cylinder and the trash knife on stress concentration and breakage damage of cotton fibers. The results indicate that as the clearance between the saw-toothed cylinder and the trash knife decreases, the time of maximum stress occurrence in cotton fibers is advanced, the breakage time is gradually earlier, and the duration of breakage is prolonged, leading to increased internal damage and higher short fiber content in cotton fibers, which in turn degrades the quality of lint to a certain extent. Combining the simulation results with the analysis of cleaning efficiency, it was found that when the structural clearance is 1.2 mm, the damage to cotton fibers is minimized and the cleaning efficiency is maximized. Therefore, the finite element simulation results of this study are of significant reference value for the selection and optimization of process parameters of saw gin lint cleaning machines in actual cotton processing production, and they contribute to improving the quality of lint in real production.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: