Optimizing Pin Diameter and Column Thickness for Hydraulic Press Design

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the design considerations for a 50-ton hydraulic press, specifically focusing on the optimization of pin diameter and column thickness in relation to hole stresses and material selection. Participants explore theoretical and practical aspects of hydraulic press design, including structural integrity, material properties, and design methodologies.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Experimental/applied

Main Points Raised

  • One participant highlights the discrepancy between their stress analysis results and those observed in commercial hydraulic presses, questioning whether manufacturers adequately account for hole stresses.
  • Another participant suggests considering plastic design to allow for some yielding in the material, which could help distribute stress and reduce peak loads on the holes.
  • A participant mentions the use of induction hardened, high tensile hydraulic rods for pins and discusses the implications of hole deformation on load distribution.
  • Concerns are raised about the stability of presses using four vertical bars due to potential misalignment, advocating for a design with a single channel for vertical support.
  • One participant proposes reducing the number of holes in the vertical columns by using fewer, strategically placed holes in the bed to maintain stability while optimizing design.
  • Another participant emphasizes the importance of understanding plastic design better, noting that their academic training has focused more on keeping materials below yield strength.
  • There is a suggestion to use collars in lighter columns to distribute pin loads more effectively, potentially reducing the number of required collars.
  • A question is raised regarding the optimization of pin diameter and column thickness, indicating a need for further analysis in this area.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the optimal design approach, particularly regarding the number of pins and holes required for effective load distribution. There is no consensus on the best method for addressing hole stresses or the use of plastic design principles, indicating an ongoing debate.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding of plastic design and the implications of material yielding, as well as the need for further exploration of optimal pin diameter and column thickness.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to mechanical engineering students, professionals involved in hydraulic press design, and those exploring structural optimization in engineering applications.

Turbine
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Hi guys,

Working on a 50-ton hydraulic press design using a standard H-frame design, like this:

bva-imp5506-hydraulics-press.jpg


I'm working on the design of the vertical members. Similar to the photo above, the verticals have 1.25" diameter holes drilled for pins that support the horizontal bed. The problem: while determining the size of steel to use, I'm finding that the hole stresses require a much thicker steel than what I see being used in commercial machines.

Specifically, in order to support the maximum 50-ton load, that equates to 25,000 lbf per vertical support. If I use two 1.25" pins per side (4 total) to support the horizontal bed, that works out to 12,500 lbf of force per hole.

I've modeled a 1"x4" A36 flat bar at some length with 1.25" dia. holes space 5" apart. The base is fixed, there is a bearing force of 12,500 lbf per hole (so 25,000 lbf total), and a reaction force of 25,000 lbf along the top of the bar. Running SolidWorks Simulation, I get the following:

img1.JPG
img2.JPG


The max stress is in the top hole, 27,600 psi. While this is OK, if I use, say, 1/2" plate, it yields. Commercial units I've seen use 1/2" or less. Many only use a single pin per side. I just don't get it. Am I doing something wrong here? Are the manufactures not taking into account the hole stresses? Are they not as important as I'm suspecting?

Any feedback would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Plastic design can greatly reduce the mass of a design since it takes a small amount of the material safely past the yield point. Maybe you should consider plastic deformation of the hole. Allowing some yield will limit the peak stress as the force is then spread over a greater area.

I use induction hardened, high tensile hydraulic rod for the pins. Since pins must be slightly smaller than the holes there needs to be a pear shaped deformation of the holes to bear the full load on the surface of the pin.

The bed is usually made from channel, so the pin is against, and deforms the flat flange. That is not good for the bed channel's web, or the pin. For heavier presses, the bed needs to have holes through thicker plate or collars.

The presses that use 4 vertical bars tend to be a bit unstable as the misalignment of the head and bed can eject the tool or work piece. It is better to use a single channel for the vertical on either side. Select or fabricate channel with a heavy flange.

Vertical hole separation of 5” gives you 5” steps. You might consider drilling less holes in the vertical columns. By drilling two holes, one above the other in the bed, say 3” apart, you can then use less holes, say 6” apart, in the vertical, to get 3” steps. My last press design used three holes in the bed to give a “vernier” choice of bed height and so better utilisation of the ram length without unstable packing.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Turbine
Baluncore said:
Plastic design can greatly reduce the mass of a design since it takes a small amount of the material safely past the yield point. Maybe you should consider plastic deformation of the hole. Allowing some yield will limit the peak stress as the force is then spread over a greater area.

Excellent information! Thank you very much. I am working on this as a senior capstone project for mechanical engineering. We're taught so much to keep things below yield, not much has been discussed in my courses about designing in the plastic region. I discussed this with one of my professors today, who is a licensed PE, and he did agree. Although for the purpose of this project, they may not want us to produce a design that is yielding. I'm still working on clarification there.

C-channel was looked at for the vertical members (and is preferred), but standard C-channel is tapered and the hole stresses required the change to use flat bar. With some allowable yielding, that would certainly open back up the possibility to use C-channel, or plate bent to such a shape. Obviously the commercial units work, so I don't doubt the design. We just need to produce a justifiable design.

Use of a single pin per side would also be preferred, but again, with the hole stresses simulated, distributing the loads over two pins per side was needed to prevent yielding. I'll continue to dive into understanding plastic design better. If you know of any specific resources that may help, please let me know. Thank you!
 
Turbine said:
Use of a single pin per side would also be preferred, but again, with the hole stresses simulated, distributing the loads over two pins per side was needed to prevent yielding.
I think you misunderstood my suggestion. I suggest only one pin per side, but two possible holes, in the bed, one above the other. That halves the number of holes needed in the columns for the same bed position step size.
If the holes in lighter columns were fitted with collars to spread the pin load, halving the number of collars would be a saving worth taking.

For shear, the cross-section area of the pin rises with the square of the diameter, but the pin bearing area only rises linearly with diameter, and with column thickness. Have you solved for optimum pin diameter and therefore column thickness?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
7K
Replies
1
Views
10K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K