Research Article

Advances in Mechanical Engineering

2018, Vol. 10(3) 1–10
Ó The Author(s) 2018
Newly structured design and finite DOI: 10.1177/1687814018767704
journals.sagepub.com/home/ade
element analysis of bionic nonsmooth
surface sealing ring of cone bit

Yi Zhou1 and Yinghuan Liu2

Abstract
The seal is a critical component of a cone bit, whose performance can be reduced because of its large contact area. To
reduce stress within the seal, a bionic nonsmooth surface seal was designed and the structural parameters of sealing
rings with spherical and conical teeth were determined. The sealing performances of the sealing rings with spherical and
conical teeth were analyzed and compared using finite element analysis. Comparisons were made between the sealing
performances of the newly designed rings and currently available sealing rings. Finite element analysis was performed
based on a constitutive model of the rubber material used and contact theory. The stress, strain, and contact pressure
distributions were analyzed. Uneven stress, strain, and contact pressure distributions with high values occurred on the
sealing ring with spherical teeth. The sealing ring with conical teeth was selected because of its improved sealing perfor-
mance. Compared with currently available sealing rings, the stress and contact pressure distributions of the newly
designed sealing ring were both uniform and reasonable, and the stress and contact pressure levels were reduced.

Keywords
Bionic nonsmooth surface seal, structural design, finite element analysis

Date received: 27 January 2017; accepted: 5 March 2018

Handling Editor: ZW Zhong

Introduction different living environments in the land, sea, or sky.

Millions of cone bits are consumed globally every year.
Serious bit failures can cause significant economic losses
and have led to numerous safety incidents. According
to field data, one of the main causes of cone bit failure
is early bearing failure, which accounts for approxi-
mately 80% of cone bit failures. Seal failures lead to
bearing wear and cause approximately 30% of bearing
failures.1–6 The main cause of seal failure is the high
frictional force and associated heat that results from the
seal’s large contact area. Seal failure can be very serious,
particularly under high temperature and pressure condi-
tions. Therefore, studies to determine a new type of seal
structure that combines a smaller contact area with
excellent sealing performance are necessary.
Nonsmooth biological surfaces exist in nature, and a
variety of surface forms have evolved to adapt to
Bionic nonsmooth surfaces are suitable for use in con-
tact interfaces with relative motion because of their
drag reduction, anti-adhesion, and wear resistance
characteristics. Bionic nonsmooth surfaces have been
applied extensively in oil exploration, machinery, and
various other fields.7
1
School of Mechanical Engineering, Southwest Petroleum University,
Chengdu, China
2
Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security Bureau, Chengdu,
China
Corresponding author:
Yi Zhou, School of Mechanical Engineering, Southwest Petroleum
University, No. 8 Xindu Avenue, Xindu District, Chengdu 610500,
Sichuan, China.
Email: zhouyi_zz@126.com

Creative Commons CC BY: This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License
(http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without
further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/
open-access-at-sage).
2 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Figure 1. Bionic nonsmooth surface seal structure: (a) cone bit and (b) seal.
1: tooth claw; 2: cone; 3: steel ball; 4: pin; 5: bearing; 6: bionic nonsmooth surface seal.

Ren et al.8,9 studied the drag reduction performance Constitutive model of the rubber material
of the bionic nonsmooth surface of a bulldozer blade
Rubber is a hyperelastic material with characteristics
that was based on the geometric nonsmooth structures
that include high deformation, nonlinearity, high elasti-
of insects such as cockroaches and ants. Compared
city, isotropicity, and incompressibility.23 A constitutive
with traditional smooth surface blades, the drag of the
model is thus essential for FEA of rubber components.
blade with the nonsmooth surface was reduced by
To define the hyperelastic material behavior, a constitu-
13.02%. In 2009, Gao et al.10 researched bit design
tive relationship and experimental data are required to
based on bionic nonsmooth theory and developed a
determine the material’s parameters. Constitutive mod-
bionic diamond bit. The operating speed and lifetime of
els of rubber include the neo-Hookean strain energy
this bionic bit were improved by 44% and 74%, respec-
function, the exponential-hyperbolic rule, the Mooney–
tively, compared with the conventional bit perfor-
Rivlin (M-R) model, the Klosenr–Segal model, and the
mance. In 2009, Lu et al.11 researched the mechanical
Ogden–Tschoegl model. The M-R model has been
properties and microstructure of a bionic nonsmooth
widely used in many research studies,20–22 and so this
stainless steel surface and found that the residual stress,
model was used here. The model function can be
wear resistance, and other mechanical properties of the
expressed as24
surface were improved significantly. Limited research
has been carried out to date on bionic nonsmooth sur- X
N
1 pffiffiffiffi 2
face seals for cone bits.12–22 The aims of this work were W= Cij ðI1  3Þi ðI2  3Þi + k I3  1 ð1Þ
2
to design a new type of bionic seal, to analyze the stress, i + j1

strain, and contact pressure distributions of the seal

where Cij is a material parameter that is determined
through finite element analysis (FEA), and to study the
experimentally, k is the volume modulus, and I1 , I2 , and
sealing performance of the proposed seal and establish
I3 are the first, second, and third invariable strain val-
its potential advantages and reliability compared with
ues, respectively. I1 , I2 , and I3 can be calculated using
existing seals.
the principal stretch ratios, where l1 , l2 , and l3 are
defined as the extension ratios along the three principal
stress directions
Structural design
Figure 1 shows the proposed bionic nonsmooth surface I1 = l21 + l22 + l23 ð2Þ
seal structure in a chamber located between the roller
and the bearing. The bulges on the inner and outer rings I2 = ðl1 l2 Þ2 + ðl2 l3 Þ2 + ðl1 l3 Þ2 ð3Þ
are similar in shape (i.e. spherical and conical) to ani-
I3 = ðl1 l2 l3 Þ3 ð4Þ
mal teeth and are arranged in a staggered manner to
improve the strength and toughness of the seal. Selected In the uniaxial stress state, l1 , l2 , and l3 can be
dimensions of the two types of teeth are shown in expressed as
Figure 2.
Zhou and Liu 3

Figure 2. Selected dimensions of the two types of teeth: (a) seal ring structure, (b) sealing ring with spherical teeth, and (c) sealing
ring with conical teeth.

Table 1. Material parameters.

Parts Elastic modulus (Pa) Poisson’s ratio Mooney–Rivlin parameters (Pa)

Bearing 2 3 1011 0.3

Cone 2 3 1011 0.3
Seal ring 6 3 106 0.499 C10 = 7:26683106
C01 =  4:587 3 106
C11 = 3:353 3 106
C20 =  2:187 3 106
C02 = 0:6986 3 106

pffiffiffiffiffi
l1 = lm , l2 = l3 = 1= l1
where lm is the principal stretch ratio along the loading
direction and l2 and l3 denote the principal stretch
ratios in the vertical loading direction.
We use five parameters to obtain the quadratic
shown in equation (6)
W = C10 ðI1  3Þ + C01 ðI2  3Þ + C11 ðI1  3ÞðI2  3Þ
+ C20 ðI1  3Þ2 + C02 ðI2  3Þ2
A five-parameter equation is used in our study. The
stress–strain relationship of the material can be
obtained from the results of compression experi-
ments.25 The material parameters are given in Table 1.
ð5Þ FEA
Finite element model
Geometric model. Because the force and the structure of
the new seal design are both axisymmetric, a two-
dimensional (2D) axisymmetric model is used. The
cone and the bearing are both steel components and
thus their deformation can be ignored.
ð6Þ
Unit properties. Because the cone and the bearing are
steel components, a 2D eight-node PLANE 183 unit
(eight-node 183) was chosen. A 2D eight-node hypere-
lastic element (Hyper 74) is chosen for the sealing ring
because it is made of rubber.
4 Advances in Mechanical Engineering
Grid division. Because the stress analysis of the rubber
ring is the most important aspect of the analysis, its
mesh is small and dense at a mesh size of 0.2 mm, while
the mesh sizes of the cone and the bearing are larger at
0.5 mm. The mesh shapes are triangular and quadrilat-
eral. The higher quadrilateral grid stability produces
more accurate analytical results and thus, a quadrilat-
eral mesh is chosen.
Basic theory of the contact problem. Correct analysis of a
contact problem is important. From a mechanical per-
spective, a contact problem is a complex problem with
highly nonlinear boundary conditions, and it is neces-
sary to track the motions of multiple objects accurately
before contact and interaction occur between these
objects. After contact occurs, an appropriate and effi-
cient contact method must be used. The contact prob-
lem is usually solved using a combination of direct
contact methods, a Lagrange multiplier, and a penalty
function. The contact problem of the proposed seal
structure includes factors such as high deformation,
material nonlinearity, and geometrical nonlinearity.
The basic idea of the penalty function is to connect
the constraint conditions with the objective function
using a penalty factor. The penalty function does not
change the order of the system equation, and the posi-
tive symmetry of the stiffness matrix cannot be chan-
ged, which means that the penalty function is easier to
solve. The penalty function method is applied to deter-
mine the design parameters.
The penalty function is given as follows. In a region
Gc where contact violation exists, the potential energy
is penalized in proportion to the magnitude of the con-
straint violation using a penalty function P, which is
expressed as
ð ð
1 1
P = vn Gc gn dGc + vt Gc gt2 dGc
2
ð7Þ
2 2
where v is a penalty parameter, g is a gap function, and
the subscripts n and t indicate the normal and tangen-
tial directions, respectively.
The cone and bearing are made from steel, and the
sealing ring is made from rubber. Therefore, the contact
is a rigid-flexible type contact. The contact structure is
axially symmetrical. Two contact pairs exist between (1)
the sealing ring and the cone bore and (2) the sealing
ring and the bearing. A penalty function equation is
used.26
Loads and boundary conditions. Because the section widths
of the sealing rings with the spherical and conical teeth
are the same, their displacements are also the same.
The simulation can thus be separated into the following
steps: (1) a full displacement constraint is applied to the
bearing; (2) a radical displacement constraint is applied
to the cone, where the displacement is equal to the dif-
ference between the width of the uncompressed seal
ring and the width of the compressed seal ring, which is
21.05 mm and in the opposite direction to the x-axis;
and (3) a working pressure of 0.7 MPa26 is applied to
the cone. The resulting finite element models are shown
in Figure 3(a) and (b).
Results and discussion
Stress
Stress distribution. The stress distribution of the seal-
ing ring with conical teeth is more uniform than that of
the sealing ring with spherical teeth. The lifetime of the
sealing ring is extended by having a more uniform
stress distribution. As shown in Figure 4(a), the maxi-
mum stress in the sealing ring with spherical teeth is
mainly concentrated in the central zone. Because the
stress is generated at the point of contact with the seal-
ing surface, the stress gradually spreads from the seal-
ing surface to the middle zone. When the maximum
stress occurs at the center of the sealing ring, the sealing
ring suffers extensive deformation and significant dam-
age will be caused. As shown in Figure 4(b), the stress
at the center of the sealing ring with conical teeth is
smaller than that at the sealing surface, and the high
stress is concentrated at the four corners, which are
regarded as the main sealing surfaces. Compared with
the sealing ring with spherical teeth, the stress distribu-
tion in the sealing ring with conical teeth is more uni-
form and the deformation is thus smaller.
Stress value. According to the design criteria, the
maximum stress must be greater than or equal to the
pressure of the medium to meet the sealing require-
ments, otherwise, it will lead to leakage.27 Therefore,
the maximum stresses of the sealing rings with the two
different kinds of teeth are 3.32 and 7.1 MPa, which are
both greater than the medium pressure of 1 MPa and
thus, meet the sealing performance requirements. The
stress at the middle of the sealing ring with spherical
teeth (3.32 MPa) is greater than that at the center of the
sealing ring with conical teeth (3.16 MPa). This indi-
cates that the compression deformation of the sealing
ring with conical teeth is smaller.
Strain
Strain distribution. The strain and stress distributions
of the sealing rings are similar. The strain distribution
of the sealing ring with conical teeth is more uniform
than that of the ring with spherical teeth. Figure 5(a)
shows that the maximum strain of the sealing ring with
spherical teeth also appears at the center of the sealing
ring. At the point where the stress is the highest, the
strain is also at its highest. These results also confirm
the accuracy of the simulations. When a load
Zhou and Liu 5

Figure 3. Finite element models: (a) spherical teeth of the newly designed ring, (b) conical teeth of the newly designed ring, (c)
double metal seal (current ring type), and (d) single metal seal (current ring type).

Figure 4. Von Mises stress distributions of the seal rings with (a) spherical teeth and (b) conical teeth.

displacement was applied, compression and deforma-
tion occurred preferentially at the contact surfaces of
the sealing ring teeth and then transferred from the
contact surfaces to the center of the ring. When the
stress and strain at the center of the sealing ring are at
a maximum, the compression deformation is high.
Figure 5(b) shows that the maximum strain also
appears at the corner of the sealing ring with conical
teeth. Unlike the sealing ring with spherical teeth, the
maximum stress in the ring with conical teeth is not
centered, so the deformation of the sealing ring with
conical teeth is smaller.
Strain value. The maximum strain (0.17) at the center
of the sealing ring with spherical teeth is higher than
that (0.15) of the ring with conical teeth. Therefore, the
compression deformation of the sealing ring with coni-
cal teeth is lower.
Contact pressure
Contact pressure distribution. The contact pressure dis-
tribution of the sealing ring with conical teeth is more
uniform and reasonable than that of the ring with sphe-
rical teeth. Figure 6(a) shows that the maximum con-
tact pressure for the spherical teeth occurs at the center
6 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Figure 5. Von Mises strain distributions of the seal rings with (a) spherical teeth and (b) conical teeth.

Figure 6. Contact pressure distributions of the seal rings with (a) spherical teeth and (b) conical teeth.

of the seal surface, whereas the minimum pressure
appears on both sides of the sealing surface. Low lat-
eral pressure can ease the entry of mud particles into
the spaces between the cone and the bearing, which
then leads to wear. Figure 6(b) shows that the maxi-
mum contact pressure for the conical teeth appears on
both sides of the sealing surface, which can thus pre-
vent the entry of mud and achieve a reliable seal.
Contact pressure. The maximum contact pressures of
the sealing rings with spherical and conical teeth are
3.54 and 9.13 MPa, respectively. These values are both
higher than the load pressure (1 MPa) and can thus
meet the seal requirements. The contact pressure
(3.54 MPa) at the center of the sealing surface of the
sealing ring with spherical teeth is higher than that
(2.03 MPa) of the ring with conical teeth. This result
shows that the compression deformation of the sealing
ring with conical teeth is lower, and thus the sealing
ring with conical teeth is selected.
Comparison with other seals
In recent years, double and single metal seals have been
the most widely used seals, so we have compared the
sealing performance of our newly proposed seal with
the performances of these two sealing rings.
Material model
The rubber material used for the three seals is the same;
therefore, a five-parameter M-R model was used to
describe the constitutive model of the rubber materials,
as mentioned in our previous study (see section
‘‘Constitutive model of the rubber material’’). The
roller, the bearing, and the metal rings are all rigid
Zhou and Liu
metal elements. Metals can be treated as linear elastic,
ideal elastic–plastic, and isotropic materials. The metal
characteristics can be defined using an elastic modulus
(2 3 1011 Pa) and Poisson’s ratio (0.3).
Finite element model
Figure 3(c) shows the finite element model of the dou-
ble metal seal, its working principle, and the finite ele-
ment model building process that was described in our
previous studies.26 Here, we compare the results for the
double metal seal with those for the newly designed
seal.
Figure 3(d) shows the finite element model of a sin-
gle metal seal. The single metal seal is composed of
moving and floating metal rings and an O-ring. The
moving ring and the roller are connected. The sealing
surface is located at the contact point between the float-
ing and moving metal rings and is also called a dynamic
sealing surface. When the bit rotates, the moving ring
and the cone rotate together, and the floating ring is
driven to rotate; however, the speed of the floating ring
is much lower than that of the moving ring. A rubber
O-ring is placed and compressed between the floating
metal ring and the bearing. The O-ring provides an
axial and radial seal that prevents mud particles from
entering the seal, and also prevents lubricating grease
leakage. The finite element model of the single metal
seal is similar to that of the double metal seal with the
addition of the contact pairs and the loading. Three
contact pairs exist between (1) the rubber ring and the
bearing, (2) the floating metal ring and the rubber ring,
and (3) the floating and moving metal rings. The load-
ing includes the following steps: (1) a full constraint is
applied to the moving metal ring, (2) a radial constraint
is applied to the floating metal ring, (3) the bearing
moves axially downward and a radial constraint is
applied to the bearing, and (4) the working pressure dif-
ference is applied at the top of the floating metal ring.
Results and discussion
From the above analysis, we know that the strain and
stress distributions are the same, so we simply analyze
the stress and the contact pressure, and the strain is not
studied here.
Stress. (1) Compared with the other two seals, the stress
distribution in the new seal is the most uniform.
According to the results of previous studies,26 Figure
7(a) shows that the stress distribution that occurs on
the seal surface between two metal rings is uneven; the
maximum stress (24 MPa) occurs on the inside of the
sealing surface (near the bearing), while the minimum
stress (0 MPa) occurs on the outside of the sealing
7
surface (near the cone). The stress distribution of the
two rubber rings is nonuniform; the maximum stress
occurs at the center, which indicates that the rubber
rings are overcompressed.26 Higher stress yields a
greater deformation and thus leads to a more serious
failure. Figure 7(b) shows that the stress distribution of
the single metal seal is the same as that of the double
metal seal. While the seal forms are different, the stress
distributions of the single and double metal seals are
the same, and the stress trend has not changed funda-
mentally. From field-usage data, we know that the life-
time of a metal seal is short (in general, the lifetime
ranges from more than 10 h to a few tens of hours), so
the performance of the metal seal is not ideal. It is
therefore important to study the new seal. Figure 7(c)
shows that, compared with the two metal seals, the
stress distribution of the new seal is more uniform. The
maximum stresses in the new seal occur on the seal sur-
faces (i.e. on the surfaces between the ring and the cone
and between the ring and the bearing), and the stress at
the center is small, which indicates that the deforma-
tion is small. (2) Compared with the metal seals, the
maximum stress in the new seal has the lowest value.
The maximum stresses of the double metal seal, the sin-
gle metal seal, and the new seal are 24, 14.6, and
7.2 MPa, respectively. Because the maximum stress in
the new seal is the lowest, the stresses in the other areas
of the seal also have the lowest values.
Contact pressure. (1) Compared with the other two seals,
the contact pressure distribution of the new seal is both
the most uniform and the most reasonable. Figure 8(a)
shows that, according to the results of previous studies,
the maximum pressure occurs on the inside of the metal
seal surface (near the bearing), while the minimum
pressure occurs on the exterior of the metal seal surface
(near the cone), because any mud enters the sealing sur-
face from the cone side, while grease enters the sealing
surface from the bearing side. This pressure distribu-
tion allows mud particles to enter the seal surface more
easily, but it also makes it difficult for the grease to
enter the sealing surface to provide good lubrication.26
Figure 8(b) shows that the pressure distribution on the
rubber ring of the single metal seal is the same as that
on the corresponding ring of the double metal seal.
This pressure distribution is still unable to prevent mud
from entering the seal surface. The pressure trends of
the two metal seals have thus not been changed funda-
mentally. Figure 8(c) shows that the maximum pressure
occurs in the corner, while the pressure values in other
areas are essentially identical, and this pressure distri-
bution is thus the most uniform. The pressure distribu-
tion is reasonable, which means that the maximum
pressure on the outside of the seal surface can prevent
mud from entering the seal surface. (2) Compared with
8 Advances in Mechanical Engineering

Figure 7. Stress comparison of the different seals: (a) double metal seal, (b) single metal seal, and (c) newly designed seal.

Figure 8. Contact pressure comparison of the different seals: (a) double metal seal, (b) single metal seal, and (c) newly designed
seal.
Zhou and Liu
the other two seals, the maximum contact pressure of
the new seal is the lowest. The maximum contact pres-
sures of the double metal seal, the single metal seal,
and the new seal are 24.8, 13, and 9.13 MPa, respec-
tively, which are greater than the downhole pressure
(0.3–0.7 MPa). Lower contact pressure leads to reduced
wear.
To date, there has only been limited work on bionic
nonsmooth surface seals, which means that the newly
proposed and innovative structural design is likely to
have good application prospects.
Conclusion
1. A bionic nonsmooth surface seal has been
designed. Spherical and conical teeth are present
within the inner and outer diameters of the seal-
ing ring. Their structural parameters have been
determined, including the inner and outer dia-
meters, cross-sectional widths, height, number
of teeth required, radius of the spherical teeth,
cone angle, and fillet radius of the conical teeth.
2. The sealing performances of the sealing rings with
the spherical and conical teeth have been analyzed
and compared via FEA. Uneven and irrational
distributions and high values of stress, strain, and
contact pressure occur in the sealing ring with
spherical teeth and, thus, the sealing ring with
conical teeth was selected as the new seal.
3. Compared with other metal-type seals, the stress
and contact pressure distributions in the new seal
are the most uniform and reasonable. The stress
and contact pressure values are also the lowest,
and this leads to a desirable sealing performance.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial sup-
port for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article: This work was supported financially by the Education
Key Laboratory of Southwest Petroleum University
(OGE201403-07).
References
1. Liu J and Luo W. The new development direction of
high speed–cone bit. Petrol Machine 1995; 23: 50–53.
2. Pearce DE. A new rock bit bearing provides superior
cone retention. In: SPE/IADC drilling conference, Hous-
ton, TX, 27 February–2 March 1990. Richardson, TX:
Society of Petroleum Engineers.
3. Kelly J and Joseph L. Forecasting the life of rock–bit
journal bearings. SPE Dril Eng 1990; 5: 165–170.
9
4. Huang ZQ, Li Q, Zhou Y, et al. Experimental research
on the surface strengthening technology of roller cone bit
bearing based on the failure analysis. Eng Fail Anal 2013;
29: 12–26.
5. Huang ZQ, Wang XF, Tu XF, et al. The failure analysis
of three roller bit sliding bearing. J Southwest Petrol Inst
2008; 3: 136–138.
6. Fear MJ and Torogood JL. Optimization of rock-bit life
based on bearing failure criteria. SPE Dril Conference
1992; 3: 163–167.
7. Fang FB, Song PY and Gao J. Prospect of bionics appli-
cation in mechanical seal. Chem Machine 2011; 38:
651–654.
8. Ren LQ, Tong J and Zhang SJ. Reducing sliding resis-
tance of soil against bulldozing plates by unsmoothed
bionics surfaces. J Terramechanics 1995; 32: 303–309.
9. Ren LQ, Han ZW and Li JJ. Effect of non-smooth char-
acteristics on bionic bulldozer blades in resistance reduc-
tion against soil. J Terramechanics 2003; 39: 221–230.
10. Gao K, Sun YH and Gao RF. Application and prospect
of bionic non-smooth theory in drilling engineering. Pet-
rol Explor Develop 2009; 36: 519–522.
11. Lu JZ, Yang CJ and Zhang L. Mechanical properties and
microstructure of bionic non-smooth stainless steel sur-
face by laser multiple processing. J Bionic Eng 2009; 6:
180–185.
12. Page NM and Embury PD. Rotary drill bit with lip seal in
roller cone bit. US6357540 Patent, 2002.
13. Huang Z. Study on the roller bit bearing seal. Master The-
sis, Southwest Petroleum Institute, Chengdu, China,
1992.
14. Chen JQ. Study on radial seal of the roller bit bearing.
Lubricat Seal 1995; 3: 17–27.
15. Luo W and Chen JQ. Ways to improve the radial sealing
performance of roller bit bearing. Oil Field Equip 1994; 5:
1.
16. Luo W, He QX and Liu J. The research and design of
roller bit metal floating seal. Petrol Machine 1994; 22:
16–19.
17. Luo W and Guo HL. Experimental study of the metal
floating seal of the high speed roller bit. Petrol Machine
1991; 10: 23–28.
18. Sun J, Chi KW, Feng ML, et al. Performance analysis of
floating end face seal structure. Oil Field Equip 2006; 35:
14–18.
19. Zhang BS, Chen JQ and Liu ZY. The improvement of
SEMS2 single metal floating seal of the cone bit. Petrol
Machine 2010; 38: 5–7.
20. Xiao X, Chen B, Sun CM, et al. Analysis of the structure
optimization of the double metal seal of the high speed
roller bit bearing. Petrol Machine 2014; 10: 30–33.
21. Zhang BS, Chen JQ and Jiang LP. The sealing mechan-
ism of the single metal floating seal of the cone bit. Petrol
Machine 2003; 2: 1–4.
22. Deng MK. Finite element simulation analysis of single
metal sealing ring of the cone bit. Standard Qual Petrol
Chem Industr China 2013; 20: 124–125.
23. Kim JJ and Kim HY. Shape design of an engine mount
by a method of parameter optimization. Comput Struct
1997; 65: 725–731.
10
24. Rivlin RS and Sawyers KN. Strain-energy function for
elastomers. Trans Soc Rheol 1976; 20: 545–557.
25. Wu KS, Yuan XS, Zhang Y, et al. Reasonable selection
of packer elements constitutive model for acrylonitrile-
butadiene rubbers. J Southwest Petro University 2007; 29:
141–145.
Advances in Mechanical Engineering
26. Zhou Y, Huang ZQ, Tan L, et al. Cone bit bearing seal
failure analysis based on the finite element analysis. Eng
Fail Anal 2014; 45: 292–299.
27. Han CJ, Zhang H and Zhang J. Structural design and
sealing performance analysis of biomimetic sealing ring.
Appl Bionics Biomech 2015; 2015: 358417.