The present invention belongs to the group of pneumatically operated impact machines used in construction, mining, and other industries. During the operation these machines can be handled manually or by a mechanical arm.
Pneumatic hammers are known and widely used for a long time. A considerable amount of US patents reflects the plurality of structures and design features of these hammers. The U.S. Pat. No. 513,941 issued in 1894 and U.S. Pat. No. 813,109A issued in 1906 represent examples of early designs of pneumatic hammers. The U.S. Pat. No. 5,419,403 issued in 1993 and U.S. Pat. No. 6,192,997 issued in 2001 represent some examples of later designs of these hammers. In spite of the significant variety of pneumatic hammers, all of them comprise the following basic units and components: a tubular housing, an air distributing mechanism, a striker (piston), a tool holder, and a tool (chisel, compactor, etc.). The main components of the air distributing mechanism are located inside of the rear end of the tubular housing or attached to it. Under the action of compressed air, the striker reciprocates inside of the tubular housing. The tool holder is rigidly attached to the front end of the tubular housing and it is movably accommodating the tool. During the operation of the pneumatic hammer, the striker cyclically performs forward and backward strokes. At the end of its forward stroke the striker imparts a blow to the tool transferring to it a certain amount of kinetic energy and enabling the tool to interact with the target medium. It should be emphasized that normally the tubular housing is not subjected to blows of the striker at the end of its forward strokes. The motion of the striker during its backward stroke is usually slowed down by a pneumatic cushion in order to minimize or prevent the blows of the striker to the internal components that are located in the rear part of the tubular housing. The productivity rate or the efficiency of a pneumatic hammer is reflected by the measure of distortion or deformation of the target medium during a single cycle. The distortion or deformation of the medium is proportional to the amount of kinetic energy that the tool cyclically obtains as a result of the striker's blows. Thus, the performance of a pneumatic hammer is characterized by the amount of kinetic energy that the tool is cyclically receiving during the working process. The kinetic energy of the tool depends on the amount of kinetic energy of the striker before the impact (the impact energy of the striker) and on the degree of energy transfer from the striker to the tool in the process of the collision. The kinetic energy of the striker equals to the product of multiplying of the compressed air pressure force applied to the striker by the length of its stroke. The air pressure force depends on the nominal air pressure of the source of compressed air and the diameter of the striker (or internal diameter of the tubular housing). Normally, the nominal pressure of the compressed air is predetermined by industrial norms and represents a given factor for the pneumatic hammers. The diameter or cross-sectional area of the striker, its length, and the length of the stroke are variable parameters that are assigned during the development and design processes according to certain design considerations. The sum of the length of the striker and its stroke represents a part of the length of the tubular housing and represents the effective length of the tubular housing. In each pneumatic hammer the sum of the lengths of the striker and its stroke has a certain value. Actually, the striker reciprocates in the limits of the effective length of the tubular housing. When the internal diameter of the tubular housing and its effective length are predetermined, it is possible to control the amount of the kinetic energy of the striker before the collision (the impact energy) just by changing the length of the striker. So, the shorter the striker the longer is its stroke and consequently, the higher is its impact energy (and vice versa). The degree of energy transfer from the striker to the tool is proportional to the mass ratio between the striker and the tool. So, a shorter striker has a smaller mass that resulting in a lower degree of energy transfer from the striker to the tool. The ultimate goal of the development of a pneumatic hammer is to achieve the possible maximum kinetic energy of the tool. This goal is achievable if it could be determined such a value of the length of the striker and, consequently, of its stroke that would result in the maximum energy of the tool. This is a problem of optimization that requires an appropriate analytical approach to the dynamics of the working process of the hammer.
The author of the current invention carried out the analytical investigation that is focused on determining the optimal value of the length of the striker and its stroke with respect to maximum value of the kinetic energy that the tool obtains as a result of the impact of the striker. This investigation revealed the existence of the optimal values of the striker and its stroke with respect to maximum energy of the tool. Based on this investigation, the mathematical formulas for calculating the optimal values of the length of the striker and its stroke are derived. These optimal values basically depend on the geometric characteristics of the tubular housing, the striker, and the tool. This investigation and its results are not published, however they are available from the author by demand. The existence of the optimal values of the lengths of the striker and its stroke that cause the possible highest performance efficiency of the pneumatic hammer were unknown. And, consequently, there were no objective criteria to evaluate the performance efficiency of a hammer. The comparison of the actual length of the striker and its stroke of a hammer with the calculated optimal values of these parameters provides an objective evaluation of the efficiency of this hammer. The analysis of these formulas shows that the optimal length of the striker is considerably less than 50% of the effective length of the tubular housing, while the optimal length of the stroke considerably exceeds 50% of the mentioned effective length. Thus, the optimal length of the stroke is longer than the optimal length of the striker. The length of the striker in the existing pneumatic hammers is essentially longer than 50% of the effective length of the tubular housing and is considerably longer than the length of its stroke. Usually, in the existing hammers the stroke is much less than 50% of the effective length of the tubular housing. The carried out by the author analytical investigations show that the values of the basic parameters of all existing pneumatic hammers considerably differ from the appropriate optimal values. This is causing a significant deficiency in the performance of the existing pneumatic hammers. Appropriate calculations show that for the existing pneumatic hammers the amount of kinetic energy of their tools is about 2.5 times less than the possible maximum value of kinetic energy if the same hammers would have the optimal values of their parameters. It should be emphasized that if an optimized hammer and an existing hammer would have the same kinetic energy of their tools, the optimized hammer would have a significantly reduced diameter of the striker. As a result of this the weight of the optimized hammer would be essentially smaller and the upward compressed air force, that the operator should overcome during each forward stroke of the striker, would be significantly reduced. All this indicates that the optimization of pneumatic hammers has many positive outcomes.
The optimization of the existing pneumatic hammers cannot be achieved by simply reassigning the lengths of their strikers and their strokes. As it is mentioned above, in the vast majority, if not all, of the existing pneumatic hammers the length of the stroke is significantly shorter than the length of the striker. The vast majority of the existing air distributing mechanisms imposes limits on the increase of the stroke of the striker. In addition to this, as it was mentioned above, in an optimized hammer the length of the striker is considerably less than the length of its stroke. This also makes it impossible to optimize the existing hammers without appropriate structural changes. This can be illustrated by considering the following hypothetical example where the striker is shorter than the stroke. Usually, during the forward stroke, the striker overlaps the radial exhaust passage in the tubular housing. However, at the end of the forward stroke before imparting a blow, the striker passes this passage, and does not overlap it for a very short instance. So, this passage becomes open to the atmosphere letting the compressed air to escape. Immediately after imparting the blow to the tool the striker begins its backward stroke, being forced by the compressed air that is redirected to the front end of the striker by the air distributing mechanism. The striker starts to move backward and again overlaps the exhaust passage. If the striker is shorter than the stroke, this passage will become open to the atmosphere as soon as the striker will pass it during its backward stroke. Since the striker is shorter than the stroke, this will happen much before than the striker will approach to the end of its backward stroke. The compressed air will escape to the atmosphere before the backward stroke is completed, and, as a result of this, the operation of the hammer will be terminated.
In comparison with other air distributing mechanisms that support limited strokes of the striker, the U.S. Pat. No. 7,273,113 B2, issued on Sep. 25, 2007 to the author of the current application, presents a soil penetrating impact machine with an air distributing mechanism that supports practically unlimited strokes of the striker. A hammer with this kind of an air distributing mechanism is suitable for optimization. However, this air distributing mechanism also has the same problem associated with the early opening of the exhaust passage during the backward stroke in case when the striker is shorter than the stroke and, consequently, the backward stroke could not be completed.
Thus, in order to optimize the parameters of the pneumatic hammers with respect to maximum kinetic energy of their tools it is necessary to develop completely new pneumatically operated impact machines. A possible embodiment of an optimized hammer is presented in the current application.
In the light of the proposed optimization, it becomes clear that the efficiency of the performance of the existing pneumatic hammers is very low in comparison with the achievable efficiency of the same hammers if their parameters would be optimized. This represents a severe disadvantage of the existing pneumatic hammers.
The other disadvantage of existing pneumatic hammers is associated with ergonomic aspects of their operation. One of these disadvantages is the heavy weight of the pneumatic hammers causing physical difficulties to the operators. In cases of using the hammers to destroy asphalt or concrete the operator has to reposition the hammer from point to point several times in a very short period of time. Each time the hammer should be lifted and moved to a new position. When the operator tries to lift the hammer, the compressed air supply to the hammer is automatically cut off and the operator continues to apply a physical effort that should overcome the weight of the hammer and the resistance of the jammed tool in the distorted medium.
The next disadvantage is related to the need of overcoming by the operator the air pressure force that tends to push up the hammer during the forward stroke of the striker. The operator can apply to the hammer just a part of his or her weight that is usually insufficient to prevent the hammer from its upward motion during the forward stroke of the striker. As a result of this the actual length of the displacement of the striker during its forward stroke becomes equal to the difference between the length of the full stroke and the length of the displacement of the tubular housing. Thus, the striker performs a reduced stroke and gains a decreased amount of kinetic energy. In addition to this, during the forward stroke of the striker the tool moves upward together with the tubular housing and is gaining a certain amount of upward velocity before the impact. As a result of all of this the tool obtains a decreased amount of kinetic after the impact. Also it is important to emphasize that the physical stress associated with the need to overcome the air pressure force, that is lifting the hammer, is tiresome for the operator. One more disadvantage is associated with the difficulties of releasing the tool from a severe jam by the distorted medium. It becomes stressful and frustrating to release the tool from this kind of a jam.
The current invention offers an optimized pneumatic hammer that is free from all these disadvantages.
This invention represents an optimized pneumatic hammer that is characterized by maximum kinetic energy of its tool.
The author of the current invention carried out an analytical investigation of the dynamics of the motion of the striker during its forward stroke including the interaction between the striker and the tool at their collision. The goal of this investigation was to determine the optimal values of the length of the striker and its stroke with respect to maximum value of kinetic energy that could be obtained by the tool as a result of the impact. This investigation revealed the existence of the optimal values of the length of the striker and its stroke at which the tool receives the maximum kinetic energy as a result of the striker's blow. Based on this investigation, the mathematical formulas for calculating the optimal values of the striker and its stroke are derived. These formulas include the following parameters of a pneumatic hammer: the part of the length of the tubular housing in which the striker reciprocates (the effective length of the tubular housing), the diameters of the striker and the tool, and the length of the tool. These formulas allow calculating the optimal values of the parameters for any pneumatic hammer. The optimal length of the striker and the optimal length of its stroke are interrelated values since the sum of these two lengths equals to the effective length of the tubular housing. The analysis of the above mentioned formulas indicates that the optimal value of the striker's length is always less than the half of the effective length of the tubular housing, and, consequently, the optimal length of the stroke always exceeds the half of the mentioned effective length. Actually, calculations based on some realistic values of the parameters of the pneumatic hammers and their tools show that the optimal values of the length of the striker are closer to about 25% while the optimal values of the stroke are closer to about 75% of the effective length of the tubular housing.
The existence of the optimal values of the considered parameters of the hammers was not known, and there were no objective criteria to evaluate the performance of the hammers. The results of the analytical investigation of the hammers allow comparing the efficiency of the existing pneumatic hammers with the achievable efficiency of their optimized counterparts. The appropriate calculations show that the amount of the kinetic energy that the tool could obtain due to the optimization is about 2.5 times higher than in an existing pneumatic hammer having the same basic parameters such as the effective length of the tubular housing, its inside diameter, and having the same tool. The significant increase in the efficiency of pneumatic hammers may open new beneficial directions in the development and application of pneumatically operated hammers.
The existing pneumatic hammers, as it was explained above, cannot be optimized by reassigning of the lengths of their strikers and strokes. The optimization of pneumatic hammers can be achieved by development appropriate new systems. The invention offers a possible embodiment of an optimized pneumatic hammer that is characterized by the maximum kinetic energy of its tool.
Another aspect of the invention is that the optimized pneumatic hammer is capable to work in two modes of operation: in the regular and in the retracting modes of operation. During the regular mode of operation the striker imparts blows to the tool enabling the tool to interact with the target medium. The retracting mode of operation is used in case of a severe jam of the tool. During this mode of operation the striker at the end of its forward stroke does not touch the tool while at the end of its backward stroke the striker is imparting a blow to a rear internal component that is rigidly secured to the tubular housing. The retracting mode of operation is very helpful when it is needed to release the severely jammed tool from the target medium.
The next aspect of the invention is associated with the possibility of decreasing the weight of the hammer by reducing the inside diameter of the tubular body which in the same time will reduce the upward air pressure force that the operator should overcome during the forward stroke of the striker in regular mode of operation. This possibility is based on the high level of kinetic energy of the optimized pneumatic hammers. An optimized hammer that provides the tool with the same amount of kinetic energy as the existing hammer will have a smaller inside diameter of the tubular housing and its length will be shorter. All this will result in decreasing of the weight of the hammer and in the same time in reducing of the upward air pressure force that will make the working process less tiresome for the operator.
It should be mentioned that the hammer according to this invention does not have an automatically operating shut off valve that interrupts the compressed air supply when the operator tries to lift and reposition the hammer. If the hammer would continue to operate during its repositioning, the upward pressure force would help to lift the hammer and to release the tool from light jams. Obviously, that this is easily achievable in the existing hammers. It may be assumed that the spring loaded shut off valves were incorporated in the existing manually handled pneumatic hammers in order to save some compressed air when the operator is lifting the hammer for repositioning. And it is very possible that historically the first hammers did not have this spring loaded shut off valve. And it seems to be justifiable to spend some compressed air in order to help the operator to reposition the hammer.
All these aspects of the invention will become apparent from the detailed description of the illustrated embodiment.
A pneumatic hammer can be handled by a mechanical arm or by handles and can operate in vertical, horizontal, and inclined positions. All this does not have any influence on the structure of the optimized pneumatic hammer offered in the current patent application. This is the reason why the proposed embodiment is shown in the horizontal position and without handles or an attachment for a mechanical arm.
Tubular housing assembly 110 is comprising a tubular housing 111, a longitudinal air conduit 112, and means (not shown) for handling the hammer by the operator or by the mechanical arm. Compressed air flow splitter assembly 120 is comprising a splitter body (splitter) 121, a switching valve 122, an air pressure regulator 123 with a pressure gauge 141, fittings 124, 125, 126, and 127, an air hose 129, and a group of bolts 128. Switching valve 122 with one of its ends is secured to fitting 124 and with the other end (not shown) by means of a quick connector to an air hose that is connected to the source of compressed air. Air control valve chest assembly 130 is comprising a control valve chest 131 and double stepped air control valve (air control valve) 132. As shown in the
The assembly process of the optimized pneumatic hammer may be accomplished in the following steps. Control valve chest 131 should be securely screwed into the rear (left) end of tubular housing 111 and thread-locking means should be applied. After that, radial holes 213, 214, and 268 should be drilled in tubular housing 111 along one line. In the next setup, tubular housing 111 should be rotated a half of a turn and radial holes 261 and 266 should be drilled. Then the nest should be milled in the wall of tubular housing 111 for accommodating exhaust valve chest 161 that should be rigidly secured to tubular housing 111. After that, longitudinal conduit 112 that represents an angular structural shape, should be rigidly attached to the lateral surface of tubular housing 111 creating an air passage 241 that connects radial holes 213, 214, and 268.
After that, striker assembly 150 should be put together and inserted into tubular housing 111 from its front (right) end. Then air control valve 132 is inserted into air control valve chest 131. A threaded bar partially screwed into threaded hole 232 of air control valve 132 can be used to assist the assembly. The next step is connecting air pressure regulator 123 with pressure gauge 141 to splitter 121 using fittings 124, 125, 126, 127, and air hose 129. Then switching valve 122 should be secured to fitting 124. After that, splitter 121 should be secured by means of bolts 128 to the rear end of air control valve chest 131. The next step is completing exhaust control assembly 160 by inserting exhaust valve 163 into exhaust valve chest 161 and by pressing into exhaust control chest 161 plug 164 and then securing it with set screw 162. The next step is pressing leading bushing 182 into tool holder housing 181 that should be secured to the right (front) end of tubular housing 111 by means of a threading connection. And then the rear (left) part of tool 183 (the shank) is inserted into leading bushing 182, after that washer 189 and coil spring 184 are put on tool 183. The last step of the assembly is to screw in spring holding sleeve 185 into tool holder housing 181. In order to prevent self loosening of spring holder sleeve 185, some conventional means such as set screws and other could be used (not shown in the drawing).
The air distributing system of the present invention comprises two separate lines of compressed air that differ by the level of the air pressure in these lines. These lines receive compressed air simultaneously from the same source of compressed air; however one line is directly connected to the source of compressed air and, consequently, is pressurized by the nominal (high) pressure, while the other line receives the compressed air through an air pressure regulator that reduces the nominal (high) pressure to a lower level. The compressed air at the nominal (high) pressure is cyclically applied to the left (rear) end of striker assembly 150 for performing its forward stroke, while the compressed air at the reduced (low) pressure is cyclically applied to the right (front) end of striker assembly 150 for performing its backward stroke.
According to the current invention, optimized pneumatic hammer 100 is designed to work in two modes of operation: the regular and the retracting modes of operation. The regular mode of operation represents the conventional hammer's working process that is characterized by the interaction between its tool 183 and the target medium. The retracting mode of operation is used in case when tool 183 is severely jammed in the medium. By appropriate adjustments of the pressure in the reduced (low) pressure line, optimized pneumatic hammer 100 is set to the desired mode of operation. The value of the nominal (high) pressure of industrial compressors is 100-110 psi. By adjusting the air pressure in the reduced (low) pressure line to about 25-35 psi, optimized pneumatic hammer 100 will work in the regular mode of operation; while by adjusting the pressure in this line to about 60-80 psi, this hammer will work in the retracting mode of operation. It should be noted that the mentioned above levels of air pressure for these two modes of operation are approximate, and in each case the operator by applying fine tuning to air pressure regulator 123 will achieve the desired performance of the hammer. The adjustments of the pressure in the reduced (low) pressure line by adjusting knob 291 of air pressure regulator 123 take just a few seconds and can be done while the hammer is working or not. There are no limits on switching over from one mode operation to another.
During the regular mode of operation the air pressure in the reduced (low) pressure line is adjusted by the operator to the required level. In this mode of operation striker assembly 150 is cyclically imparting blows to tool 183 that interacts with the target medium. The motion of striker assembly 150 during its backward stroke is restricted by an air cushion in order to minimize or prevent the impact to the rear (left) internal component that is rigidly secured to e tubular housing 111.
Let us consider the basic principles of the functioning of the air distributing mechanism during the regular mode of operation. The compressed air through relatively small cross-sectional area ducts enters into a cylindrical space inside tubular housing 111 behind striker assembly 150 that has a relatively large cross-sectional area. This space represents rear chamber 212 (
As it is seen from
Thus, when switching valve 122 becomes open, the compressed air at nominal (high) pressure enters into ring space 234 constantly pushing air control valve 132 to the left (rear) while in the same time the compressed air at reduced (low) pressure enters into cavity 232 and is constantly pushing this valve to the right (front). Since the positions of movable components of optimized pneumatic hammer 100 before the opening of switching valve 122 are unpredictable, we have to consider the possible options of interaction of the movable components with the air flows before the normal working process begins. Assume that striker assembly 150 is at the end of its forward stroke. This is the only case when exhaust passage 261 could become open to the atmosphere (this will be explained below). In this case, the air pressure in rear chamber 212 abruptly drops and air control valve 132 under the action of the compressed air at the reduced (low) pressure in cavity 232 moves to its extreme right (front) position, practically without any resistance, since the nominal (high) pressure line is connected to the atmosphere through rear chamber 212 and exhaust passage 261. When air control valve 132 is in its extreme right (front) position and rear chamber 212 is open to the atmosphere, the compressed air at reduced (low) pressure enters into front chamber 251 initiating a normal backward stroke of striker assembly 150, and the working process starts. We considered a situation where striker assembly 150 is at the end of its forward stroke causing rear chamber 212 to communicate with the atmosphere. In all other positions of striker assembly 150, rear chamber 212 is not open to the atmosphere and the air pressure inside of this chamber is considerably higher than in the reduced (low) pressure line. As a result of this, the air pressure force pushing air control valve 132 to the left (rear) considerably exceeds the air pressure force at the reduced (low) pressure that constantly pushes this valve to the right (front). So, air control valve 132 moves to its extreme left (rear) position. In this case, front chamber 251 becomes open to the atmosphere, while striker assembly 150 under the air pressure in rear chamber 212 is forced to complete its forward stroke, and the working process starts. A detailed description of the air flows for the considered situations is presented below. Thus, regardless of the positions of the movable components of the hammer, the working process will start upon opening of switching valve 122.
Let us consider a cycle of the working process of optimized pneumatic hammer 100 for the case where air control valve 132 is in its extreme left (rear) position, as it is shown in
During the retracting mode of operation the reduced (low) pressure is adjusted to about 60-80 psi. In this mode of operation striker assembly 150 does not complete a full forward stroke and does not touch tool 183, however it imparts a blow to the right (front) end of air control valve chest 131 at the end of its backward stroke.
Referring to
As it was mentioned above, the author of the current invention performed the appropriate analytical investigations of the working process of a pneumatic hammer with the goal to determine the optimal values of the lengths of the striker and its stroke with respect to maximum kinetic energy that the tool will possess after the blow of the striker. This investigation allowed obtaining mathematical formulas for calculating the optimal length of the striker and its forward stroke. These formulas are respectively presented in
Lopt is the optimal value of the length of the striker,
Sopt is the optimal value of the length of the forward stroke of the striker during the regular mode of operation,
L is the effective length of the tubular housing of the hammer that is equal to the distance between the limits in which the striker reciprocates (actually, the effective length of the tubular housing represents a part of this housing in which the striker reciprocates and it is equal to the sum of the length of the striker and the length of its forward stroke),
D is the diameter of the striker,
d is the diameter of the tool,
l is the length of the tool.