ZHANG Yu-qian, YU Qi, HU Zhi-cheng, CHEN Long, YANG Wen-cai, ZHANG Hai-dong. Optimization design of axial-flow suction seeder based on response surface methodology and CFD[J]. Journal of Chinese Agricultural Mechanization, 2024, 45(8): 14-19. DOI: 10.13733/j.jcam.issn.2095-5553.2024.08.003
Citation: ZHANG Yu-qian, YU Qi, HU Zhi-cheng, CHEN Long, YANG Wen-cai, ZHANG Hai-dong. Optimization design of axial-flow suction seeder based on response surface methodology and CFD[J]. Journal of Chinese Agricultural Mechanization, 2024, 45(8): 14-19. DOI: 10.13733/j.jcam.issn.2095-5553.2024.08.003

Optimization design of axial-flow suction seeder based on response surface methodology and CFD

  • In order to improve the negative pressure at the inlet of the axial flow air suction seeder and thus improve the efficiency of seed suction, the response surface method and CFD software were employed to carry out the experimental design, numerical simulation of the structural parameters of the seeder and regression analysis, to obtain the perfect combination of parameters of the seeder structure. In this paper, the central composite design(CCD) was implemented to design the experiments on the structural parameters of the seeder and to establish 15 sets of experimental models, the numerical calculations were carried out on the inlet pressure values of the type-holes of the experimental models by using the FLUENT software, and the resulting data set was imported into the Design-Expert software and predicted and optimized by the response surface method, and the optimal parameter combinations obtained were as follows: the fan speed was 2 393 r/min, the number of fan blades was 11, and the number of type-holes was 15, at which time, the negative pressure at the inlet of the type-holes was 210. 07 Pa predicted by the objective function. In order to verify the accuracy of the predicted value of the objective function of the response surface method, numerical simulation tests and bench tests are carried out. The results show that the objective function values of numerical simulation method and response surface method are basically the same, while the error between the bench method and numerical simulation method is 6. 2%.
  • loading

Catalog

    Turn off MathJax
    Article Contents

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return