Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
To characterize the dynamic behavior of the hydraulic system of a ground coal-bunker cleaning device under variable operating conditions, a mechanical–hydraulic co-simulation model was established by coupling ADAMS and AMESim. A pipeline pressure-drop model accounting for distributed frictional, local, and coiling-induced losses was developed based on the Darcy–Weisbach equation. The effects of the number of rod sections, hydraulic-hose length, valve-group actuation interval, and the equivalent hose-coiling state were evaluated. Increasing the rod sections from 1 to 30 raised the steady-state pressure of the lead-screw lifting motor by 42.0%, reduced its flow rate by 26.9%, and increased the pressure settling time by 167.2%. Increasing the hose length from 5 to 20 m reduced cylinder pressure from 25.20 to 11.30 bar and the pressure synchronization coefficient from 0.966 to 0.775. A 0.5 s valve-group interval reduced the composite disturbance by approximately 54%. At the representative flow rate of 22.59 L/min, the calculated total pressure loss increased from 0.664 MPa for the one-layer state to 0.742 MPa for the nine-layer state, an increase of approximately 11.7%, while frictional loss remained the dominant component. For different working conditions, finite-range sensitivity comparisons identified reflected inertia and load torque, hydraulic capacitance and distributed flow resistance, temporal overlap of branch flow demand, and distributed pipeline friction as the response-specific drivers of the four investigated operating scenarios. The model and results can provide a basis for optimizing actuation timing, hose layout, and operating strategies for coal-bunker cleaning devices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: