Fig 1.
(A) Milling process with longitudinal cutting head. (B) Ripping process with transverse cutting Head.
Fig 2.
Mesh cell structure of Cutting head.
Fig 3.
Calculation principle for the pick arrangement meshing method.
Fig 4.
Meshes on the cutting head.
Fig 5.
Traversal algorithm block diagram of pick arrangement.
Fig 6.
Traversal algorithm block diagram of pick arrangement.
Fig 7.
TMR filtering results of cutting head with different helices.
(A) 13898 traversal results of 2 helices. (B) 2786 traversal results of 3 helices. (C) 742 traversal results of 4 helices. (D) 11904 traversal results of 2 helices. (E) 1880 traversal results of 3 helices. (F) 512 traversal results of 4 helices. (G) 8100 traversal results of 2 helices. (H) 1038 traversal results of 3 helices. (I) 257 traversal results of 4 helices. (J) 2369 traversal results of 2 helices. (K) 374 traversal results of 3 helices. (L) 66 traversal results of 4 helices.
Fig 8.
The relationship between CV of mesh cell area and TMR.
Fig 9.
The relationship between TMR and ss/ds.
Fig 10.
Pick rotation coefficient on different cutting sections.
Fig 11.
The influence of swing speed and rotation speed on the average value of pick rotation coefficient.
Fig 12.
Relationship between CV of cutting load and TMR of each cutting head.
(A) 2-helices cutting head. (B) 3-helices cutting head. (C) 4-helices cutting head.
Table 1.
Helix angle and cutting line spacing of 3-helices cutting head.
Table 2.
Initial traversal results.
Table 3.
Recalculated results without interference.
Fig 13.
Cutting load CV and cutting thickness.
Fig 14.
3D model of CH51 cutting head.
Fig 15.
The adjacent helix spacing and the adjacent pick tip distance of CH51 cutting head.
Fig 16.
TMR indicators of the CH51 cutting head.
Fig 17.
Rock cutting model with a longitudinal cutting head.
Table 4.
Cutting depth with various cutting head moving speed.
Fig 18.
Cutting volume of each pick for one rotation.
Fig 19.
Rotation coefficient of each pick.
Fig 20.
Cutting speed of each pick.
Fig 21.
Pick failure model for the longitudinal cutting head.
Fig 22.
Calculation results of specific energy.
Fig 23.
Cutting test parameters determined via drilling depth and cutting thickness.
Fig 24.
Artificial rock wall cutting test with EBZ260W roadheader.
Fig 25.
Picks of rock cutting test.
Fig 26.
Pick consumption of CH51 cutting head.
Fig 27.
Comparison of pick consumption.
Fig 28.
Typical geometry of chips.
Fig 29.
The ratio of chip width to chip thickness.
Table 5.
Results of each cutting step.
Fig 30.
Rock cutting specific energy.
Fig 31.
Specific energy relationship between on-site test and simulation result.