SOME ASPECTS OF MASS FLOW CONTROL OF SHOTS IN PNEUMATIC SYSTEMS

Nadkarni V .S.* and Sharma M . C ** .

*New A m i r Iron Works, Indore (M.P), INDIA
*+M .A. C .T. (Regional Engineering College), Bhopal, INDIA

ABSTRACT

Mass flow control of s h o t s is an important factor to attain required and

consistant peening intensity. Irregular mass flow of shots in pneumatic
systems may give r i s e to different residua1 s t r e s s pattern i n t h e work
pieces of same material and shape, though peened to the same Almen
intensity. Experimental investigations were c a r r i e d out to corelate shot
s i z e , nozzle bore and shot feed opening to mixing chamber ( o r i f i c e
d i a m e t e r ) , which could provide uniform s h o t flow a t different pressure and
a i r inlet v a l v e opening in manual operated pressure systems. Different
designs of mixing chambers were compared. In tubelar mixing chambers,
concentric tube type mixing chamber gave b e t t e r performance. Similarly
individual orifice plate system was found more convenient than adjustable
opening t y p e feed valve. Results showed that in pressure peening system
for uniform flow of s h o t s , orifice diameter must be about 0.7 times t h e
nozzle throat diameter. While in syphonic and gravity feed systems t h i s
proportion can be s t i l l l a r g e r . Syphonic systems worked well with orifice
diameter 1 . 2 5 times t h e nozzle diameter.

KEY WORDS

Pressure peening nozzle, mixing chamber, syphonic nozzle, mass flow, shot
feed valve.
INTRODUCTION
In pneumatic pressure peening for attaining a required and consistant peening
intensity one has to select a p r o p e r t h r o a t diameter nozzle and orifice s i z e
o r shot feed opening to mixing chamber for a given shot size. Again to
ensure uniform shot flow a t an a i r s u p p l y p r e s s u r e t h e r e must be correct
ratio of compressed a i r volume and s h o t mass falling through orifice into
mixing chamber. In manual control peening, operator is f i r s t setting a i r
volume such that a uniform flow of shot stream is attained and then peening
is c a r r i e d out.
A s r e g a r d s peening operations with low tolerance in intensity for instance
l i k e in a i r c r a f t and space i n d u s t r y , r e q u i r e s expensive metering units for
mass flow control [I,21 . However t h e r e a r e o t h e r machine p a r t s where 1 2 5
to 300% coverage (peening for 1 . 2 5 to 3 times t h e saturation time) o r even
higher coverage is recommended with h i g h e r tolerance in intensity. Present
investigation r e f e r s to manual operated p r e s s u r e peening plants used for such
applications only where uncontrolled method of feeding t h e shots v i a t h e
orifice is used.

EXPERIMENTAL WORK

Syphonic nozzles for s h o t and b a l l peening were developed a s shown in

Fig.1. In t h e present investigation an attempt was made to corelate orifice
diameter, nozzle bore and shot s i z e for uniform flow of s h o t s . As regards
 &J
Shot Peening Nozzle
d = Nozzle bore
= Inlet diameter a t
convergence

a t divergent end

= Diameter of mixi-

= Orifice diamet
= Length of m i

Schematic view and nomenclature

of important diameters of
syphonic nozzles.

Ball Peening
Nozzle

Fig. 1 : Schematic and Detailed

views of Syphonic Nozzles.
- .
pressure peening orifice diameter plays an important role while in syphonic
system i t s s i z e did not have any effect on mass flow. Since here shot
suction into mixing chamber is proportional to the magnitude of vacuum
created b y sudden expansion of high pressure a i r into i t . Thus required
quantity of shots could only be aspired into mixing chamber through orifice.
The number of orifices could be placed arround the mixing chamber
depending upon t h e space available or even one orifice could be accomodated
of which diameter equal to 1.25 times nozzle bore was found satisfactory.
A s reported elsewhere [ 3 ] the mixing chamber length, diameter of nozzle and
orifice diameter a l l of equal size ( 5 m m ) also gave satisfactory results in
case of syphonic system. Fig. 1 shows a detailed views of syphonic nozzles
developed for the present investigation and performance of these nozzles
were found satisfactory.

Different Models of Mixing Chambers

Fig. 2 shows different models of mixing chamber/shot feed valve for
pressure peening system. For comparative evaluation of these models mass
flow and a r c height/kinetic energy of shots were measured at different
compressed a i r pressure. Observations for mass flow of successful mixing
chamber a r e tabulated on the next page.

Observation for Single Tube Type Shot Feed Valve(Mixing Chamber)

Schematic view of t h i s design is as shown in Fig.Z(a). Three models of

this design were made where orifice diameter was varied as follows:

i) Orifice diameter do = nozzle bore d = 6 mm

ii) Orifice diameter do = 0.75 d = 4 m m
iii] Orifice diameter do = 0.5 d = 3 mm
Nozzle s i z e used f o r mass flow study was about 6 times the shot size.
First model gave clogging of shots at a l l a i r ressures.
nonuniform flow of shots but better flow than E r s t .
Second model
Third model with d"""
.5d gave still better mixing of compressed a i r and shots, however flowOof
shots through nozzle was s t i l l nonuniform. Therefore single tube type design
was discarded and inorder to stabilize the flow concentric tube shot feed
valve was proposed a s shown in Fig. 2 ( b ) and detailed drawing at Fig.Z(f)
This design do not allow direct entry of shots into mixing chamber. The
pressure peening set up developed was reported elsewhere.

Effect of Clearance Between Two Concentric Tubes

In o r d e r to account for resistance to flow of shots between two concentric
tubes, first the clearance between two concentric tubes was kept lesser than
orifice diameter. For 0.6 mm shots and 4 m m orifice diameter, the
clearance was kept 3 mm, i.e. 0.75 times orifice diameter of shots.
However t h e clearance upto 3 mm did not allow proper flow of shots. Then
clearance was made more than orifice diameter say 1 . 5 times the orifice
diameter, then shot flow was found to be uniform. Thus i t was concluded
that clearance must be higher than orifice diameter to overcome t h e tube
curvature resistance. Losses in mass flow due to rubber hose pipe length
and nozzle was also noted a t Table 1. Using nozzle bore 6.0 mm shots S-
230, orifice dia 4 mm, a i r valve opening half:-
 L , t-
J J
I c f > I

Single tube t y p e Concentric tube t y p e Concentric tube t y p e

Fig. 2 ( a ) with longer outer tube with s p a l l e r outer
Fig. 2 ( b )

Individual Orifice Ad justable orifice opening

plate type type
Fig.Z(d) Fig. 2 ( e )

Pressure peentng nozzle

profile

Fig. 2 ( f ) : Two views of concentric tube t y p e mixing chamber

Fig. 2: Different models o f , mixing chamber ( s h o t feed valve)

 Table - 1
...............................................................................
Pressye Losses in Pipe line gm/sec Losses due to nozzle
Kg/cm S-230 s h o t s , Glass bead 0.25mm S-230 s h o t s Glass bead 0.25mm

Observations for Mass Flow

For 6 m m nozzle, a i r inlet valve opening - h a l f , s h o t s S-230.

Table-2 : Mass flow of s h o t s with t h e nozzle a t working height i n gms/sec

Thus practically t h e r e was no effect of outer tube length which could b e

kept of suitable s i z e s o a s to accomodate blow off cock. The saturation
curves for full and half open a i r inlet v a l v e with 6 m m nozzle, 4 mm orifice
diameter, 8 cm stand off and S-230 shots was plotted a s shown in Fig. 3.

A1men
'A '
Peening
Intensity

---.r Exposure time [ s e c s . )

Fig.3 : Saturation curve with 4 m m orifice for f u l l and half open a i r i n l e t
valves .-
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In p r e s s u r e peening system with manual control, t h e concentric tube t y p e

s h o t feed v a l v e (mixing chamber) w i t h o r i f i c e diameter 0.667 time nozzle
b o r e g a v e uniform flow of s h o t s . It gave h i g h e r a r c h e i g h t with lesser
s a t u r a t i o n t i m e a s compared t o o r i f i c e diameter of 0.5 times t h e nozzle bore.

The clearance between the two concentric tubes should b e equal t o 1.5 times
the o r i f i c e diameter and always more than 3 m m to p r o v i d e uniform flow of
shots.

Half opening of i n l e t a i r v a l v e gave h i g h e r a r c height and velocity of s h o t s

compared t o f u l l opening of a i r i n l e t v a l v e . Saturation time for half opening
of a i r i n l e t v a l v e was l e s s e r compared to full opening for same work piece
material .

Thus mass flow control is an important a s p e c t and manual control is

difficult. Therefore automation in t h i s regard can provide b e t t e r controlled
peening.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Authors a r e thankful t o M.P. Council of Science and Technology, Bhopal

( I n d i a ) for providing r e s e a r c h grants for t h e project "Impact Treatments and
Newer Areas of Applications". This peening system was developed out of
t h i s grant.
REFERENCE
I
1.
n---Lrr.r3
u~ n
~uaaila
D
.u .,
P Dn:l/or
u
UQAAGL
A
n . .,
l t C m t r o l l e d Shot PeenLqg,
P
Cemplete
Plants and Examples of Applications", Proc. ICSP-3, p .63.

2. Champaigne J a c k , llMeasurement and Control of Shot Peening and Blast

Cleaning Process" .
3. Nadkarni V . S . , Sharma M.C., and Sharma S.G., "Syphonic Nozzle
System f o r Glass Bead Peening of Aluminium P a r t s w Proc. Int. Conf.
IITT on Titanium and Aluminium, P a r i s 27-28 Feb. 1990.