1,000-Hour Wear Test: Hardfacing Wear Plate vs. 40 Wear Resistant Steel Plate

Test Background

During the production process of the mineral processing workshop, the discharge chutes of crushing equipment and conveyor transfer points are in direct contact with ore materials. These components are continuously subjected to impact and abrasion, resulting in rapid wear of protective liners. Frequent replacement not only increases maintenance costs but also affects production continuity.

To scientifically evaluate the performance and advantages of Hardfacing Wear Plate [https://www.wodonplate.com/chromium-carbide-wear-plate/] under severe working conditions, a comparative wear test was carried out. Hardfacing wear plates were installed at selected high-wear positions, while 40 steel plates of the same specification were installed at corresponding positions as the comparison group.

Both materials operated simultaneously under identical working conditions and during the same operating period. Their wear resistance, structural stability, and overall performance were evaluated to provide reliable data for future wear component selection, maintenance optimization, and production cost reduction.

Group

Material

Dimensions

Initial Thickness

Quantity & Installation Locations

Test Group

Chromium Carbide Overlay Wear Plate

480 times 390 times 20 mm

20 mm

10 plates in total: 6 plates installed inside the apron feeder, 2 plates installed at 1# Secondary Crusher, and 2 plates installed at the head discharge chute of 13# belt conveyor.

Control Group

40 Wear-Resistant Steel Plate

480 times 390 times 40 mm

40 mm

Installed at the same locations as the test group: 6 plates inside the apron feeder, 2 plates at 1# Secondary Crusher, and 2 plates at the head discharge chute of 13# belt conveyor. Total: 10 plates.

Test Equipment

The test was conducted on the following production equipment in the mineral processing workshop:

Apron Feeder

1# Secondary Crusher

13# Belt Conveyor

These machines are core production equipment operating continuously under normal production conditions.

The conveyed material consisted of high-hardness ore, generating continuous impact and abrasion on both groups of wear plates throughout the test period. Therefore, both materials were exposed to the same operating environment, ensuring the consistency and reliability of the comparison.

Test Procedure

Installation

On December 3, 2025, the maintenance team simultaneously completed the installation of the Hardfacing Wear Plate (test group) and the 40 Steel Plate (comparison group).

All plates were installed in accordance with the standard maintenance procedure. The wear plates were securely fixed to the equipment surfaces without installation gaps to eliminate any influence caused by installation differences and to ensure the accuracy of the experimental results.

Operation Monitoring

After installation, all equipment resumed normal production.

During the test period, routine inspections were carried out according to the workshop maintenance schedule. Each inspection included:

Surface condition of both wear plates

Plate deformation

Cracks

Loosening

Plate detachment

Meanwhile, the cumulative operating hours of the equipment were recorded through the daily production reports to ensure that both groups operated for exactly the same duration.

Inspection and Measurement

On January 27, 2026, during the scheduled equipment maintenance shutdown, both groups of wear plates were inspected simultaneously.

A 0.01 mm precision vernier caliper was used to measure the remaining thickness of the wear plates at the corresponding positions on:

1# Secondary Crusher

Apron Feeder

13# Belt Conveyor Discharge

For each plate, measurements were taken at 3 to 5 representative wear points, and the average value was used as the final measured thickness.

Photographs were also taken to document the wear condition of both materials for future reference.

Image: https://ecdn6.globalso.com/upload/p/6275/image_other/2026-07/on-site-photographs.jpg

Test Results and Analysis

Operating Time

As of January 27, 2026, the equipment had accumulated 995.75 operating hours, which is close to 1,000 hours of continuous production.

Both groups experienced the same operating conditions and operating duration, making the comparison highly representative and reliable.

Visual Inspection Results

Hardfacing Wear Plate (Test Group)

According to the on-site inspection, all hardfacing wear plates remained in good condition throughout the test.

No abnormalities such as:

Surface damage

Cracks

Plate detachment

Deformation

were observed.

Even at the 13# belt conveyor discharge, which experiences the most severe impact and abrasion, no obvious wear marks were visible.

The results indicate excellent structural stability, impact resistance, and suitability for the harsh operating conditions of the mineral processing workshop.

40 Steel Plate (Comparison Group)

The visual inspection revealed several signs of deterioration.

Some 40 steel plates showed:

Slight edge deformation

Obvious scratches

Impact dents on the 1# Secondary Crusher

Partial loosening on the Apron Feeder

Compared with the hardfacing wear plates, the 40 steel plates exhibited lower structural stability and weaker resistance to continuous impact.

Installation Location
Test Group (Chromium Carbide Overlay Wear Plate)
Control Group (40 Wear-Resistant Steel Plate)

Initial Thickness (mm)

Measured Thickness (mm)

Wear Loss (mm)

Initial Thickness (mm)

Measured Thickness (mm)

Wear Loss (mm)

Inside the Apron Feeder

20

18

2

40

36

4

1# Secondary Crusher

20

19

1

40

35

5

Head Discharge Chute of 13# Belt Conveyor

20

13

7

40

20.5

19.5

Overall Average

20

16.7

3.3

40

30.5

9.5

Performance Analysis

Wear Resistance

After nearly 1,000 hours of continuous operation under identical working conditions:

The Hardfacing Wear Plate showed an average wear of 3.33 mm, corresponding to a wear rate of 0.00333 mm/h.

The 40 Steel Plate showed an average wear of 9.50 mm, corresponding to a wear rate of 0.0095 mm/h.

The wear rate of the 40 steel plate was approximately 2.88 times that of the hardfacing wear plate.

The performance difference was particularly evident at the 13# belt conveyor discharge, where abrasion was most severe.

These results demonstrate that the hardfacing wear plate provides superior resistance to abrasion and impact under continuous ore handling conditions.

Structural Stability

Throughout the entire test period, the hardfacing wear plates remained securely installed without cracking, deformation, or loosening.

In contrast, the 40 steel plates exhibited edge deformation, surface dents, and localized loosening during operation.

These observations indicate that the hardfacing wear plate maintains better structural stability under long-term heavy-duty service, reducing the risk of equipment downtime caused by wear component failure.

Media Contact
Company Name: Tianjin Wodon Wear Resistant Material Co., Ltd.
Email:Send Email [https://www.abnewswire.com/email_contact_us.php?pr=1000hour-wear-test-hardfacing-wear-plate-vs-40-wear-resistant-steel-plate]
Address:No.2, Wuwei Rd, Hexiwu Industrial Zone, Wuqing Dist
City: Tianjin
Country: China
Website: https://www.wodonplate.com/

Legal Disclaimer: Information contained on this page is provided by an independent third-party content provider. ABNewswire makes no warranties or responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you are affiliated with this article or have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article and would like it to be removed, please contact retract@swscontact.com



This release was published on openPR.