| Literature DB >> 30708994 |
Wenfu Wei1, Yijun Song2, Zefeng Yang3, Guoqiang Gao4, Pan Xu5, Ming Lu6, Chuanjun Tu7, Mingli Chen8, Guangning Wu9.
Abstract
Carbon composite is widely used in various fields, including the aerospace industry, electrical engineering, transportation engineering, etc. For electrified railways, the pantograph strip utilizes carbon composite as the current collector, which might bear multiple impacts from electrical, mechanical, or thermal aspects, from unwanted arcing, rain, and other diverse operation conditions. In this paper, a thermal shock damage experiment on the carbon composite of a pantograph strip was carried out. The thermal shock processes were realized by the adoption of muffle furnace heating and water cooling. The effect of thermal shock processes on carbon strip porosity, compressive strength, electrical resistivity, and surface topography were studied. In order to verify the mechanism of thermal shock damage to the pantograph strip, the porosity of the pantograph strip is discussed in detail. The results showed that the thermal shock process increased the porosity of the carbon strip and caused reductions in compressive strength and electrical resistivity. The multiple thermal shock processes caused irreversible damage to the pantograph strip, which was attributed to the spillover and scouring of large quantities of water vapor in the pores.Entities:
Keywords: carbon composite; compressive strength; electrical resistivity; porosity; thermal shock
Year: 2019 PMID: 30708994 PMCID: PMC6384854 DOI: 10.3390/ma12030435
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Material composition proportions and the thermal expansion coefficients of samples.
| Components | Graphite Powder | Resin Adhesive | Petroleum Coke | Mid-Temperature Pitch |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thermal Expansion Coefficient (K−1) | 5.5 × 10−6 | 1 × 10−5 | 2.6 × 10−6 | 5.5 × 10−4 |
| Proportion | 30–60% | 8–10% | 8–32% | 15–35% |
Figure 1Schematic diagram of the experiment setup.
The measured results of the Archimedes drainage method.
| Thermal Shock Temperature (°C) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 20 | 256 | 104 | 264 |
| 100 | 256 | 104 | 264 |
| 200 | 256 | 106 | 268 |
| 300 | 256 | 109 | 274 |
| 350 | 256 | 111 | 278 |
| 400 | 256 | 115 | 285 |
Figure 2Different types of micropore (a) before temperature increase and (b) after temperature increase.
Figure 3The variation of porosity with thermal shock temperature after a single thermal shock.
Figure 4The variation of compressive strength with thermal shock temperature after a single thermal shock.
Figure 5The variation of electrical resistivity with thermal shock temperature after a single thermal shock.
Figure 6The surface morphology of the pantograph strip after repeated thermal shock.