Performance evaluation method and system for composite material maintenance consumables, storage medium and computer equipment

Abstract

The invention discloses a performance evaluation method and system for composite material maintenance consumables, a storage medium and computer equipment, and the method comprises the steps: obtaining a plurality of preset features, and preparing a differentiated test piece integrated with the plurality of preset features; identifying a plurality of process factors influencing the maintenance performance of the composite material maintenance consumables, setting a plurality of process levels for each process factor, and determining a parameter combination set through an orthogonal combination mode; for each composite material maintenance consumable to be evaluated, according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, performing a maintenance test on the differentiated test piece according to a preset maintenance operation instruction to obtain a maintenance test piece after each maintenance test, and recording a performance index of a target area corresponding to each preset feature on each maintenance test piece, calculating a total performance score of the composite material maintenance consumables based on the performance indexes of the target areas; and obtaining performance evaluation results of the multiple composite material maintenance consumables according to the total performance scores.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of consumable performance evaluation technology, and in particular to a performance evaluation method and system for composite material repair consumables, a storage medium, and a computer device. Background Technology

[0002] In recent years, with the deepening of the national strategy for self-reliance and control of the aviation industry chain, the localization of composite material maintenance consumables has become a key link in ensuring the security of the aviation maintenance supply chain and improving independent maintenance capabilities. Domestically produced consumables have achieved a leap from "preliminary usability" to "excellent performance," but the supporting, scientific, and unified performance evaluation standards and specifications are still incomplete. Especially against the backdrop of the upcoming mass operation of domestically produced aircraft such as the C919 and the increasing uncertainty in the international supply chain, establishing an efficient and reliable consumable performance evaluation method to screen out domestically produced consumables with superior performance under complex operating conditions is of extremely urgent practical significance.

[0003] Currently, the industry commonly uses standard flat laminates as test specimens for consumable evaluation. This method has significant limitations: First, the test specimens are "insensitive" to differences in consumable performance due to their smooth surfaces and uniform thickness. This means that consumables with slightly lower performance may be misjudged as acceptable due to their structural "tolerance," while high-performance consumables may fail to demonstrate their advantages. Second, it cannot simulate real-world maintenance challenges. Complex areas on aircraft components (such as surfaces with small radii of curvature, steps, and thickness transition zones) are high-risk areas for maintenance failures. Flat laminate test specimens cannot effectively reproduce these scenarios, thus failing to expose key shortcomings in consumables regarding sealing and pressure transmission uniformity. Finally, the evaluation dimensions are limited and inefficient. Traditional methods focus primarily on overall average quality, neglecting performance degradation in key local areas. Furthermore, testing the impact of fluctuations in process parameters requires comprehensive experiments, resulting in large-scale and costly experiments. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of this, this application provides a performance evaluation method and system for composite material maintenance consumables, a storage medium, and a computer device. By designing and integrating specialized test pieces with multiple sensitive geometric features and defect characteristics, maintenance challenges are proactively created to maximize the performance differences between different consumables. Combined with orthogonal experimental design, the robustness of consumables under process fluctuations is efficiently evaluated while significantly reducing the number of tests. Through multi-dimensional quantitative analysis of performance indicators in key areas, objective and accurate ranking and selection of the comprehensive performance of consumables are achieved, thereby providing key data support and material selection basis for the reliable maintenance of complex aircraft structures.

[0005] According to one aspect of this application, a method for performance evaluation of composite material repair consumables is provided, comprising: A variety of preset features are obtained, and a differentiated test piece integrating the preset features is prepared, wherein the preset features include sensitive geometric features and / or defect features; Multiple process factors affecting the repair performance of composite material repair consumables are identified, and multiple process levels are set for each process factor. Based on the multiple process factors and the multiple process levels corresponding to each process factor, a set of parameter combinations is determined by orthogonal combination. For each composite material repair consumable to be evaluated, based on the composite material repair consumable, a repair test is performed on the differentiated test piece according to a preset repair operation procedure according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, to obtain a repair test piece after each repair test, and the performance index of the target area corresponding to each preset feature on each repair test piece is recorded. Based on the performance index of each target area, the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination is obtained. Based on the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination, the total performance score of the composite material repair consumable is calculated. Based on the overall performance score of each composite material repair consumable, the performance evaluation results of various composite material repair consumables are obtained.

[0006] According to another aspect of this application, a performance evaluation system for composite material repair consumables is provided, comprising: The test specimen preparation module is used to acquire multiple preset features and prepare a differentiated test specimen integrating the multiple preset features, wherein the preset features include sensitive geometric features and / or defect features; The parameter setting module is used to identify multiple process factors that affect the repair performance of composite material repair consumables, and set multiple process levels for each process factor. Based on the multiple process factors and the multiple process levels corresponding to each process factor, the parameter combination set is determined by orthogonal combination. The scoring calculation module is used to perform maintenance tests on the differentiated test piece according to the preset maintenance operation procedure for each composite material maintenance consumable to be evaluated, based on the composite material maintenance consumable and according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, to obtain the maintenance test piece after each maintenance test, and record the performance index of the target area corresponding to each preset feature on each maintenance test piece, based on the performance index of each target area, to obtain the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination, and to calculate the total performance score of the composite material maintenance consumable based on the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination. The evaluation module is used to obtain performance evaluation results for various composite material repair consumables based on the overall performance score of each composite material repair consumable.

[0007] According to another aspect of this application, a storage medium is provided that stores a computer program thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the above-described performance evaluation method for composite material repair consumables.

[0008] According to another aspect of this application, a computer device is provided, including a storage medium, a processor, and a computer program stored on the storage medium and executable on the processor, wherein the processor executes the program to implement the above-described performance evaluation method for composite material repair consumables.

[0009] By employing the above technical solutions, this application provides a performance evaluation method and system for composite material maintenance consumables, a storage medium, and a computer device. Through the design of specialized test pieces integrating multiple sensitive geometric and defect features, it proactively creates maintenance challenges, maximizing the performance differences between different consumables. Combined with orthogonal experimental design, it efficiently evaluates the robustness of consumables under process fluctuations while significantly reducing the number of tests. Through multi-dimensional quantitative analysis of performance indicators in key areas, it achieves objective and accurate ranking and selection of the comprehensive performance of consumables, thereby providing crucial data support and material selection criteria for the reliable maintenance of complex aircraft structures.

[0010] The above description is only an overview of the technical solution of this application. In order to better understand the technical means of this application and to implement it in accordance with the contents of the specification, and to make the above and other objects, features and advantages of this application more obvious and understandable, the following are specific embodiments of this application. Attached Figure Description

[0011] The accompanying drawings, which are included to provide a further understanding of this application and form part of this application, illustrate exemplary embodiments and are used to explain this application, but do not constitute an undue limitation of this application. In the drawings: Figure 1 A flowchart illustrating a performance evaluation method for composite material repair consumables provided in an embodiment of this application is shown. Figure 2 A schematic diagram of a differentiated test specimen provided in an embodiment of this application is shown; Figure 3 This invention provides a schematic diagram of the structure of a performance evaluation system for composite material repair consumables according to an embodiment of the present application. Figure 4 A schematic diagram of the device structure of a computer device provided in an embodiment of this application is shown. Detailed Implementation

[0012] The present application will be described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and embodiments. It should be noted that, unless otherwise specified, the embodiments and features described in the embodiments of the present application can be combined with each other.

[0013] This embodiment provides a performance evaluation method for composite material repair consumables, such as... Figure 1 As shown, the method includes: Step 101: Obtain multiple preset features and prepare a differentiated test piece integrating the multiple preset features, wherein the preset features include sensitive geometric features and / or defect features.

[0014] Step 102: Identify multiple process factors that affect the repair performance of composite material repair consumables, and set multiple process levels for each process factor. Based on the multiple process factors and the multiple process levels corresponding to each process factor, determine the parameter combination set through orthogonal combination.

[0015] Step 103: For each composite material repair consumable to be evaluated, based on the composite material repair consumable, according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, perform a repair test on the differentiated test piece according to the preset repair operation procedure, obtain the repair test piece after each repair test, and record the performance index of the target area corresponding to each preset feature on each repair test piece. Based on the performance index of each target area, obtain the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination. Calculate the total performance score of the composite material repair consumable based on the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination.

[0016] Step 104: Based on the overall performance score of each composite material repair consumable, obtain the performance evaluation results of various composite material repair consumables.

[0017] This application provides a performance evaluation method for composite material repair consumables. By constructing a scientific, efficient, and realistic differentiated test specimen, it is used to accurately evaluate and screen composite material repair consumables, thereby achieving objective and accurate ranking and screening of the comprehensive performance of consumables.

[0018] First, a highly integrated differentiated test specimen is constructed as a benchmark platform for performance evaluation. Traditional methods use simple flat plate specimens, which cannot effectively expose the performance shortcomings of consumables under real and complex working conditions. The embodiments of this application pre-extract key sensitive geometric features (such as small radius of curvature surfaces, large height difference steps, and continuous thickness variation areas) and defect features (such as edge delamination) from aviation maintenance practice, and design and fabricate these pre-defined features on a single test specimen to generate a differentiated test specimen. This allows all subsequent evaluations to be conducted in a scenario that can simulate the most stringent maintenance challenges, laying a physical foundation for amplifying the performance differences between different consumables.

[0019] The quality of composite material repair depends not only on the consumables themselves but also on various process factors such as curing temperature, time, and pressure. This application systematically identifies these key process factors and sets multiple representative process levels for each factor. Then, using orthogonal arrays, a small subset of highly representative test combinations is scientifically selected from a vast array of possible parameter combinations to form a parameter combination set. This method cleverly solves the problem of excessive and costly comprehensive experiments, enabling a comprehensive and balanced examination of the performance of composite material repair consumables under different parameter combinations with a limited number of tests, thereby evaluating their robustness.

[0020] For each composite material repair consumable to be evaluated, repair tests were rigorously conducted on the aforementioned differentiated test specimens, covering all parameter combinations selected by orthogonal design. After each test, performance indicators such as porosity and bond strength were precisely recorded for each preset characteristic target area (i.e., those "challenge points"). Subsequently, based on the performance indicators of each area, the performance score for a single test was first calculated, and then the scores under all parameter combinations were combined to obtain the overall performance score of the composite material repair consumable. This process transforms subjective and vague performance judgments into objective and quantitative data, providing a precise basis for decision-making.

[0021] Finally, by ranking the overall performance scores of each composite material repair consumable, the performance evaluation results of various composite material repair consumables can be obtained.

[0022] By applying the technical solution of this embodiment, the problem of "insensitivity" in the test scenario is solved through differentiated test pieces, significantly amplifying even minor differences in consumables; orthogonal experimental design addresses the issues of low testing efficiency and insufficient consideration of process fluctuations, enabling efficient exploration across all parameter spaces; and multi-region index quantification and comprehensive scoring overcome the problems of single evaluation dimensions and strong subjectivity, yielding comprehensive and objective ranking results. Ultimately, composite material maintenance consumables that perform exceptionally well in complex real-world environments can be selected, providing assurance for ensuring the quality and safety of aviation maintenance.

[0023] In this embodiment of the application, optionally, the composite material repair consumable is an aircraft component repair consumable; before step 101, the method further includes: acquiring historical maintenance data, wherein the historical maintenance data includes historical maintenance areas of various types of aircraft components, and the regional features corresponding to the historical maintenance areas; when the preset features include sensitive geometric features, extracting the curved surface repair area and the edge sealing repair area of ​​the aircraft component from the historical maintenance area, and determining the minimum convex radius, minimum concave radius, maximum step height difference, and maximum gradient difference included in the curved surface repair area and the edge sealing repair area based on the regional features of the curved surface repair area and the edge sealing repair area. The minimum convex radius, the minimum concave radius, the maximum step height difference, and the maximum gradient difference are used as sensitive geometric features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables; and / or, based on the regional characteristics of the historical maintenance area included in the historical maintenance data, continuous thickness variation features are determined, and the continuous thickness variation features are used as sensitive geometric features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables; when the preset features include defect features, edge maintenance areas are extracted from the historical maintenance areas, and based on the regional characteristics of the edge maintenance areas, layered defect features are determined, and the layered defect features are used as defect features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables.

[0024] In this embodiment, firstly, detailed historical maintenance data covering various types of aircraft components is acquired. This data includes not only specific maintenance areas but also records regional characteristics such as the geometric shape and structural features corresponding to those maintenance areas.

[0025] Next, when identifying sensitive geometric features, two typical maintenance challenge areas can be selected from historical maintenance areas: curved surface maintenance areas and edge sealing maintenance areas. Then, geometric feature analysis is performed on a massive number of cases in these maintenance challenge areas to extract the most challenging parameter extrema, including the minimum convex radius, the minimum concave radius, the maximum step height difference, and the maximum gradient difference. This condenses complex engineering experience into a series of measurable and highly reproducible critical conditions, ensuring that the final differentiated test pieces can comprehensively reflect the most stringent geometric forms on aircraft components, significantly increasing the difficulty of assessing the sealing performance, fit, and pressure transmission uniformity of consumables.

[0026] When identifying defect characteristics, edge repair areas can be selected from historical repair areas, as these areas are weak points in vacuum sealing and are also high-incidence areas for delamination defects. By analyzing historical repair data from these edge repair areas, typical delamination defect characteristics can be identified, and these characteristics can be used as defect features for aircraft component repair consumables. This allows differentiated test pieces to not only evaluate the performance of consumables under ideal conditions but also directly test their repair effectiveness and defect control capabilities in areas with initial damage or stress concentration (i.e., the weakest points most important to focus on during repair). In a specific embodiment, delamination defects can be created in the edge repair areas of the test piece by implanting a thin film. The edge is a weak point in vacuum sealing and the area most sensitive to leakage. Poor sealing performance of consumables (especially vacuum bags and vacuum tapes) can significantly amplify the spread of edge delamination or lead to extremely high porosity in this area.

[0027] This application's embodiments reverse-engineer the challenging features (sensitive geometric features and defect features) of differentiated test pieces based on real and comprehensive historical maintenance data. This ensures a high degree of correlation between the evaluation environment and real maintenance scenarios, making the evaluation results highly instructive for engineering applications. This systematic feature extraction and quantification method overcomes the subjectivity and inconsistency inherent in traditional design methods that rely on individual expert experience. The resulting differentiated test pieces can accurately and efficiently expose key issues that consumables may encounter in aircraft component maintenance, thus providing a rigorous yet reliable standardized testing platform for consumable performance evaluation.

[0028] Optionally, in this embodiment, step 103, "based on the composite material repair consumables, performing repair tests on the differentiated test piece according to a preset repair operation procedure according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, to obtain a repair test piece after each repair test," includes: for each parameter combination, laying the composite material repair consumables to the target position of the differentiated test piece according to a preset consumables laying procedure, and performing a repair test on the differentiated test piece according to the preset repair operation procedure, wherein the preset consumables laying procedure includes the consumables laying sequence, consumables coverage area, consumables laying method, and the number of consumables laying layers; after the repair test is completed, generating a curing process curve according to the parameter combination, and curing the repaired differentiated test piece based on the curing process curve to obtain a repair test piece after the repair test.

[0029] In this embodiment, the abstract maintenance test is decomposed into a highly standardized and variable-controlled physical implementation process, ensuring the consistency and comparability of subsequent performance data. Specifically, this application embodiment clearly defines a preset consumable placement procedure, which specifies key elements such as the consumable placement sequence, coverage area, placement method, and number of layers. When performing tests for each parameter combination, this procedure must be strictly followed first, accurately placing the composite material maintenance consumable to be evaluated onto the target position of the differentiated test piece. This step ensures that all tests start from the same point, that is, the initial state and positioning of the composite material maintenance consumable are standardized and repeatable, thus attributing the differences in subsequent results primarily to the performance of the composite material maintenance consumable itself and the changing process parameters, rather than operational inconsistencies. Here, the target position is the location where the composite material maintenance consumable is needed for auxiliary maintenance during the maintenance test.

[0030] In one specific embodiment, the order of consumable placement may include the placement method and coverage of vacuum bags, breathable cotton, absorbent cloth, separation membrane, etc., with particular emphasis on the consistency of placement techniques in challenge areas to ensure that differences between tests mainly come from the consumables themselves.

[0031] After the standardized deployment of composite material repair consumables is completed, the repair testing process can begin. Repair operations are then performed on differentiated test specimens with the assistance of these consumables. After repair, the parameter combinations are concretized into an executable curing process curve. This curve precisely defines the path of key parameters such as temperature, time, and pressure over time. The repaired test specimens can then be cured according to this curve, which matches their specific parameter combinations. This step is crucial for the chemical reaction and microstructure formation of the material, and it is also the core step in fully exposing the consumables' sensitivity to process fluctuations. This allows the performance shortcomings of the consumables under suboptimal or fluctuating process conditions, such as uneven resin curing, porosity, and poor adhesion, to be effectively identified and revealed. The final product is a cured repair specimen suitable for subsequent testing and analysis.

[0032] This application's embodiments eliminate random errors in the operational process by pre-setting consumable placement procedures, enabling experimental differences to accurately point to the two variables under investigation: consumable performance and process parameters. By transforming abstract parameter combinations into specific, executable curing process curves, it achieves precise simulation and reproduction of the complex autoclave or oven curing environment in real-world maintenance. This highly controlled testing method greatly improves the reliability and discriminative power of the evaluation results, ensuring the ability to keenly capture the performance boundaries and robustness differences of different consumables under process fluctuations, providing a solid and effective data foundation for the final accurate evaluation.

[0033] Optionally, in this embodiment of the application, step 103, "obtaining the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination based on the performance indicators of each target region, and calculating the total performance score of the composite material repair consumables based on the performance scores corresponding to each parameter combination," includes: for each parameter combination, determining the index value corresponding to each target region based on the performance indicators of each target region under the parameter combination, normalizing the index value, and using the normalization result as the performance score of the corresponding target region; for each target region, averaging the performance scores of the target region under each parameter combination to obtain the average performance score of the target region; and calculating the total performance score of the composite material repair consumables based on the average performance score of each target region and the region weight corresponding to each target region.

[0034] In this embodiment, firstly, for each performance index of the target region under each parameter combination, normalization is performed based on the measured original index values, such as porosity and bond strength. This step uses a specific mathematical formula to uniformly map all original index values ​​to dimensionless values ​​between 0 and 1, with a unified convention that the closer the value is to 1, the better the performance. This successfully eliminates the comparison obstacles caused by the different physical meanings and dimensions of the indices, laying a foundation for comparability in subsequent comprehensive calculations. Next, the normalized result for each performance index is used as the corresponding performance score. It should be noted that when a target region corresponds to multiple performance indices, the original index values ​​for each performance index can be normalized separately to obtain the normalized results for each performance index. Then, these normalized results are weighted and averaged to obtain the performance score for the target region.

[0035] After obtaining the performance scores for each target region under each parameter combination, the arithmetic mean of multiple performance scores obtained for the same target region under all different parameter combinations (i.e., simulating various possible process fluctuation scenarios) is further calculated to obtain the average performance score for that target region. This average performance score represents the average performance level of the consumable in this specific challenge region when facing changes in process parameters. It effectively smooths out the randomness that may exist in a single test, thus more reliably reflecting the overall performance of the consumable in that location.

[0036] Subsequently, the average performance score of each target region calculated in the previous step is weighted and summed with its corresponding region weight to calculate the final overall performance score of the composite material repair consumable. This step condenses the performance of the consumable under multiple challenge points and various process conditions into a single quantitative result that is representative, balanced, and has practical engineering significance. Here, the region weight is a pre-assigned weight for each target region based on its actual engineering importance; for example, regions prone to catastrophic stratification and difficult to detect can be assigned a higher weight.

[0037] Compared to a one-sided evaluation model that relies on individual indicators or single experimental results, the overall performance score obtained in this application is a reliable metric that integrates multiple information such as performance quality, stability level, and engineering importance, thereby improving the accuracy of consumable performance evaluation.

[0038] In this embodiment of the application, optionally, after "obtaining the average performance score of the target area", the method further includes: for each target area, calculating the standard deviation of the performance score of the target area under each parameter combination; calculating the ratio between the standard deviation and the average performance score, and calculating the reciprocal of the ratio, using the reciprocal as a robustness index; weighted summing of the average performance score and the robustness index to obtain the regional comprehensive score of the target area; and calculating the total performance score of the composite material repair consumable based on the regional comprehensive score of each target area and the regional weight corresponding to each target area.

[0039] In this embodiment, after calculating the average performance score of the target area under different parameter combinations, the standard deviation of the performance score of the target area under different parameter combinations can be further calculated. The standard deviation is a classic statistical indicator that quantifies the dispersion of data points relative to their mean. Here, the standard deviation accurately reflects the fluctuation range of the consumable's performance score when subjected to different process conditions in the target area. A large standard deviation means that the consumable's performance fluctuates drastically with changes in process parameters, while a small standard deviation indicates that its performance remains stable within a narrow, high-level range, which reflects excellent process robustness.

[0040] However, the standard deviation alone is difficult to use directly for cross-regional comparisons due to its different dimensions and baseline levels. Therefore, the ratio of the standard deviation to the average performance score (i.e., the coefficient of variation) is calculated, and the reciprocal of this ratio is defined as the robustness index. The ratio eliminates the influence of the average level on dispersion, making the assessment fairer, while taking the reciprocal transforms a "smaller is better" indicator (volatility) into a "larger is better" indicator (robustness index). Thus, composite material repair consumables not only possess a level value reflecting their average performance in a specific target region, but also a vertical indicator quantifying their stability.

[0041] After defining two orthogonal dimensions—the average performance score representing the average level and the robustness index representing stability—these two values ​​are weighted and summed to obtain the regional comprehensive score for the target area. The weighting coefficients here predefine whether the final evaluation prioritizes the absolute performance level of the consumable or its stability and reliability. Through this integration, a consumable with a high average score but large fluctuations (poor robustness) can be fairly measured and compared with a consumable with a slightly lower average score but extremely stable performance (good robustness) under the new evaluation system.

[0042] Subsequently, the regional comprehensive scores of each target region calculated in the previous step are weighted and summed with their respective regional weights to calculate the final overall performance score of the composite material maintenance consumable.

[0043] In this embodiment, the final overall performance score is no longer simply an average performance value, but a composite evaluation index that simultaneously encompasses both high performance and performance stability. This method can effectively identify consumables that perform well only under ideal process conditions but are sensitive to production fluctuations, and select consumables that consistently perform reliably and have lower risk in real, fluctuating maintenance environments.

[0044] In this embodiment of the application, the sensitive geometric features may optionally include at least one of the following: a convex or concave surface region with a radius of curvature of less than 50 mm; a stepped region with a height difference of more than 5 mm; or a gradient region with a thickness that varies continuously between 2 mm and 8 mm.

[0045] In this embodiment, the repair areas of complex aircraft structures (such as wing leading edges, door frames, and stiffened panels) typically feature small radii of curvature, steps, thickness variations, and stiffening. These areas place higher demands on consumable performance and are high-risk areas for repair failures; planar test pieces cannot simulate these challenges. Therefore, concave or convex areas with extremely small radii of curvature (e.g., R < 50 mm) are designed. These areas place extremely high demands on the extensibility, wrinkle resistance, and edge adhesion of the vacuum bag. If the consumable's sealing performance is slightly poor, vacuum leakage is highly likely to occur here, leading to a significant increase in local porosity. Steps with significant height differences (e.g., 5 mm or more) are also designed. In these areas, the vacuum bag is prone to suspension, wrinkling, or puncture. It is difficult to lay the breathable cotton / absorbent cloth flat, and the pressure transmission uniformity or sealing of the consumable is poor, which can lead to pore accumulation, resin enrichment or desiccation, or even delamination at the root or top of the step. In addition, the design features gradient regions with continuous thickness variations (e.g., from 2mm to 8mm). Different thickness regions have different requirements for heat absorption, resin flow, and pressure transmission during curing. Poor consumable performance can lead to overheating / short resin in thin areas, under-curing / rich resin or high porosity in thick areas.

[0046] like Figure 2 As shown, a differentiated test specimen is presented that simultaneously includes step features, thickness variation features (gradient region), minimal curvature convex surface features, and layered defect features.

[0047] In this embodiment of the application, optionally, the process factors include heating rate, cooling rate, holding temperature and holding time; wherein, the heating rate is set with multiple process levels including 1℃ / min, 3℃ / min and 5℃ / min; and / or, the cooling rate is set with multiple process levels including 1℃ / min, 3℃ / min and 5℃ / min.

[0048] In a specific embodiment, it is assumed that the process factors include factor A (heating rate), factor B (cooling rate), factor C (holding temperature), and factor D (holding time). The following process levels are set: Low temperature group test: Factor A: Heating rate (Level 1: 1℃ / min; Level 2: 3℃ / min; Level 3: 5℃ / min) Factor B: Cooling rate (Level 1: 1℃ / min; Level 2: 3℃ / min; Level 3: 5℃ / min) Factor C: Insulation temperature (Level 1: 55℃, Level 2: 60℃, Level 3: 65℃) Factor D: Incubation time (Level 1: 90 min, Level 2: 120 min, Level 3: 150 min) Medium temperature group experiment: Factor A: Heating rate (Level 1: 1℃ / min; Level 2: 3℃ / min; Level 3: 5℃ / min) Factor B: Cooling rate (Level 1: 1℃ / min; Level 2: 3℃ / min; Level 3: 5℃ / min) Factor C: Insulation temperature (Level 1: 115℃, Level 2: 120℃, Level 3: 125℃) Factor D: Incubation time (Level 1: 120 min, Level 2: 150 min, Level 3: 180 min) High-temperature group test: Factor A: Heating rate (Level 1: 1℃ / min; Level 2: 3℃ / min; Level 3: 5℃ / min) Factor B: Cooling rate (Level 1: 1℃ / min; Level 2: 3℃ / min; Level 3: 5℃ / min) Factor C: Insulation temperature (Level 1: 170℃, Level 2: 175℃, Level 3: 180℃) Factor D: Incubation time (Level 1: 60 min, Level 2: 90 min, Level 3: 120 min) The resulting parameter combinations are shown in the table below: Table 1 Parameter Combination Set

[0049] Furthermore, as Figure 1 In terms of specific implementation, this application provides a performance evaluation system for composite material repair consumables, such as... Figure 3 As shown, the system includes: The test specimen preparation module is used to acquire multiple preset features and prepare a differentiated test specimen integrating the multiple preset features, wherein the preset features include sensitive geometric features and / or defect features; The parameter setting module is used to identify multiple process factors that affect the repair performance of composite material repair consumables, and set multiple process levels for each process factor. Based on the multiple process factors and the multiple process levels corresponding to each process factor, the parameter combination set is determined by orthogonal combination. The scoring calculation module is used to perform maintenance tests on the differentiated test piece according to the preset maintenance operation procedure for each composite material maintenance consumable to be evaluated, based on the composite material maintenance consumable and according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, to obtain the maintenance test piece after each maintenance test, and record the performance index of the target area corresponding to each preset feature on each maintenance test piece, based on the performance index of each target area, to obtain the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination, and to calculate the total performance score of the composite material maintenance consumable based on the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination. The evaluation module is used to obtain performance evaluation results for various composite material repair consumables based on the overall performance score of each composite material repair consumable.

[0050] Optionally, the system further includes a feature extraction module; the feature extraction module is used for: The composite material repair consumables are aircraft component repair consumables; before acquiring multiple preset features, historical repair data is acquired, wherein the historical repair data includes historical repair areas for various types of aircraft components, and the area features corresponding to the historical repair areas; When the preset features include sensitive geometric features, the curved surface maintenance area and the edge sealing maintenance area of ​​the aircraft component are extracted from the historical maintenance area. Based on the regional features of the curved surface maintenance area and the edge sealing maintenance area, the minimum convex radius, the minimum concave radius, the maximum step height difference, and the maximum gradient difference are determined. The minimum convex radius, the minimum concave radius, the maximum step height difference, and the maximum gradient difference are used as the sensitive geometric features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables. And / or, based on the regional features of the historical maintenance area included in the historical maintenance data, continuous thickness variation features are determined, and the continuous thickness variation features are used as the sensitive geometric features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables. When the preset features include defect features, an edge maintenance area is extracted from the historical maintenance area, and the layered defect features contained therein are determined according to the regional features of the edge maintenance area. The layered defect features are then used as the defect features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables.

[0051] Optionally, the scoring calculation module is used for: For each parameter combination, the composite material repair consumables are laid to the target position of the differentiated test piece according to the preset consumables laying procedure, and a repair test is performed on the differentiated test piece according to the preset repair operation procedure. The preset consumables laying procedure includes the consumables laying sequence, consumables coverage area, consumables laying method and the number of consumables laying layers. After the repair test is completed, a curing process curve is generated according to the parameter combination, and the differentiated test pieces after repair are cured based on the curing process curve to obtain the repair test pieces after the repair test.

[0052] Optionally, the scoring calculation module is further configured to: For each parameter combination, based on the performance indicators of each target region under the parameter combination, the corresponding indicator value for each target region is determined, and the indicator value is normalized. The normalization result is used as the performance score of the corresponding target region. For each target region, the average performance score of the target region under each parameter combination is calculated to obtain the average performance score of the target region. The overall performance score of the composite material repair consumables is calculated based on the average performance score of each target region and the region weight corresponding to each target region.

[0053] Optionally, the scoring calculation module is further configured to: After obtaining the average performance score of the target region, for each target region, the standard deviation of the performance score of the target region under each parameter combination is calculated; Calculate the ratio between the standard deviation and the average performance score, and calculate the reciprocal of the ratio, using the reciprocal as the robustness index; The average performance score and the robustness index are weighted and summed to obtain the overall regional score of the target region. The overall performance score of the composite material repair consumables is calculated based on the comprehensive regional score of each target region and the regional weight corresponding to each target region.

[0054] Optionally, the sensitive geometric features include at least one of the following: Convex or concave surface regions with a radius of curvature less than 50 mm; Stepped areas with a height difference greater than 5mm; A gradient region with a thickness that varies continuously between 2 mm and 8 mm.

[0055] Optionally, the process factors include heating rate, cooling rate, holding temperature, and holding time; The heating rate is set to multiple process levels including 1℃ / min, 3℃ / min, and 5℃ / min; and / or, The cooling rate is set to multiple process levels, including 1℃ / min, 3℃ / min, and 5℃ / min.

[0056] It should be noted that other corresponding descriptions of the functional units involved in the performance evaluation system for composite material repair consumables provided in this application embodiment can be found in the following references. Figures 1 to 2 The corresponding descriptions in the method will not be repeated here.

[0057] This application also provides a computer device, which may specifically be a personal computer, a server, a network device, etc. Figure 4As shown, the computer device includes a bus, a processor, memory, and a communication interface, and may also include an input / output interface and a display device. The processor provides computing and control capabilities. The memory includes a non-volatile storage medium and internal memory. The non-volatile storage medium stores an operating system, computer programs, and a database. The internal memory provides an environment for the operation of the operating system and computer programs in the non-volatile storage medium. The database stores location information. The network interface allows communication with external terminals via a network connection. When the computer program is executed by the processor, it implements the steps in the various method embodiments.

[0058] Those skilled in the art will understand that Figure 4 The structure shown is merely a block diagram of a portion of the structure related to the present application and does not constitute a limitation on the computer device to which the present application is applied. Specific computer devices may include more or fewer components than those shown in the figure, or combine certain components, or have different component arrangements.

[0059] In one embodiment, a computer-readable storage medium is provided, which may be non-volatile or volatile, having stored thereon a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the above method embodiments.

[0060] In one embodiment, a computer program product is provided, including a computer program that, when executed by a processor, implements the steps in the above method embodiments.

[0061] It should be noted that the user information (including but not limited to user device information, user personal information, etc.) and data (including but not limited to data used for analysis, data stored, data displayed, etc.) involved in this application are all information and data authorized by the user or fully authorized by all parties.

[0062] Those skilled in the art will understand that all or part of the processes in the above embodiments can be implemented by a computer program instructing related hardware. The computer program can be stored in a non-volatile computer-readable storage medium. When executed, the computer program can include the processes of the embodiments described above. Any references to memory, databases, or other media used in the embodiments provided in this application can include at least one of non-volatile and volatile memory. Non-volatile memory can include read-only memory (ROM), magnetic tape, floppy disk, flash memory, optical memory, high-density embedded non-volatile memory, resistive random access memory (ReRAM), magnetic random access memory (MRAM), ferroelectric random access memory (FRAM), phase change memory (PCM), graphene memory, etc. Volatile memory can include random access memory (RAM) or external cache memory, etc. By way of illustration and not limitation, RAM can take many forms, such as Static Random Access Memory (SRAM) or Dynamic Random Access Memory (DRAM). The databases involved in the embodiments provided in this application may include at least one type of relational database and non-relational database. Non-relational databases may include, but are not limited to, blockchain-based distributed databases. The processors involved in the embodiments provided in this application may be general-purpose processors, central processing units, graphics processing units, digital signal processors, programmable logic devices, quantum computing-based data processing logic devices, etc., and are not limited to these.

[0063] The technical features of the above embodiments can be combined in any way. For the sake of brevity, not all possible combinations of the technical features in the above embodiments are described. However, as long as there is no contradiction in the combination of these technical features, they should be considered to be within the scope of this specification.

[0064] The embodiments described above are merely illustrative of several implementation methods of this application, and while the descriptions are specific and detailed, they should not be construed as limiting the scope of this patent application. It should be noted that those skilled in the art can make various modifications and improvements without departing from the concept of this application, and these all fall within the protection scope of this application. Therefore, the protection scope of this application should be determined by the appended claims.

Claims

1. A performance evaluation method for composite material repair consumables, characterized in that, include: A variety of preset features are obtained, and a differentiated test piece integrating the preset features is prepared, wherein the preset features include sensitive geometric features and / or defect features; Multiple process factors affecting the repair performance of composite material repair consumables are identified, and multiple process levels are set for each process factor. Based on the multiple process factors and the multiple process levels corresponding to each process factor, a set of parameter combinations is determined by orthogonal combination. For each composite material repair consumable to be evaluated, based on the composite material repair consumable, a repair test is performed on the differentiated test piece according to a preset repair operation procedure according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, to obtain a repair test piece after each repair test, and the performance index of the target area corresponding to each preset feature on each repair test piece is recorded. Based on the performance index of each target area, the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination is obtained. Based on the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination, the total performance score of the composite material repair consumable is calculated. Based on the overall performance score of each composite material repair consumable, the performance evaluation results of various composite material repair consumables are obtained.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The composite material repair consumables are aircraft component repair consumables; before acquiring multiple preset features, the method further includes: Acquire historical maintenance data, wherein the historical maintenance data includes historical maintenance areas for various types of aircraft components, and the regional characteristics corresponding to the historical maintenance areas; When the preset features include sensitive geometric features, the curved surface maintenance area and the edge sealing maintenance area of ​​the aircraft component are extracted from the historical maintenance area. Based on the regional features of the curved surface maintenance area and the edge sealing maintenance area, the minimum convex radius, the minimum concave radius, the maximum step height difference, and the maximum gradient difference are determined. The minimum convex radius, the minimum concave radius, the maximum step height difference, and the maximum gradient difference are used as the sensitive geometric features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables. And / or, based on the regional features of the historical maintenance area included in the historical maintenance data, continuous thickness variation features are determined, and the continuous thickness variation features are used as the sensitive geometric features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables. When the preset features include defect features, an edge maintenance area is extracted from the historical maintenance area, and the layered defect features contained therein are determined according to the regional features of the edge maintenance area. The layered defect features are then used as the defect features of the aircraft component maintenance consumables.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The repair consumables based on the composite material are used to perform repair tests on the differentiated test pieces according to a preset repair operation procedure, based on each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, to obtain repair test pieces after each repair test, including: For each parameter combination, the composite material repair consumables are laid to the target position of the differentiated test piece according to the preset consumables laying procedure, and a repair test is performed on the differentiated test piece according to the preset repair operation procedure. The preset consumables laying procedure includes the consumables laying sequence, consumables coverage area, consumables laying method and the number of consumables laying layers. After the repair test is completed, a curing process curve is generated according to the parameter combination, and the differentiated test pieces after repair are cured based on the curing process curve to obtain the repair test pieces after the repair test.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the performance indicators of each target region, a performance score is obtained for each parameter combination. Based on the performance scores for each parameter combination, the total performance score of the composite material repair consumable is calculated, including: For each parameter combination, based on the performance indicators of each target region under the parameter combination, the corresponding indicator value for each target region is determined, and the indicator value is normalized. The normalization result is used as the performance score of the corresponding target region. For each target region, the average performance score of the target region under each parameter combination is calculated to obtain the average performance score of the target region. The overall performance score of the composite material repair consumables is calculated based on the average performance score of each target region and the region weight corresponding to each target region.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, After obtaining the average performance score of the target region, the method further includes: For each target region, calculate the standard deviation of the performance score of the target region under each parameter combination; Calculate the ratio between the standard deviation and the average performance score, and calculate the reciprocal of the ratio, using the reciprocal as the robustness index; The average performance score and the robustness index are weighted and summed to obtain the overall regional score of the target region. The overall performance score of the composite material repair consumables is calculated based on the comprehensive regional score of each target region and the regional weight corresponding to each target region.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The sensitive geometric features include at least one of the following: Convex or concave surface regions with a radius of curvature less than 50 mm; Stepped areas with a height difference greater than 5mm; A gradient region with a thickness that varies continuously between 2 mm and 8 mm.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The process factors include heating rate, cooling rate, holding temperature, and holding time; The heating rate is set to multiple process levels including 1℃ / min, 3℃ / min, and 5℃ / min; and / or, The cooling rate is set to multiple process levels, including 1℃ / min, 3℃ / min, and 5℃ / min.

8. A performance evaluation system for composite material repair consumables, characterized in that, include: The test specimen preparation module is used to acquire multiple preset features and prepare a differentiated test specimen integrating the multiple preset features, wherein the preset features include sensitive geometric features and / or defect features; The parameter setting module is used to identify multiple process factors that affect the repair performance of composite material repair consumables, and set multiple process levels for each process factor. Based on the multiple process factors and the multiple process levels corresponding to each process factor, the parameter combination set is determined by orthogonal combination. The scoring calculation module is used to perform maintenance tests on the differentiated test piece according to the preset maintenance operation procedure for each composite material maintenance consumable to be evaluated, based on the composite material maintenance consumable and according to each parameter combination in the parameter combination set, to obtain the maintenance test piece after each maintenance test, and record the performance index of the target area corresponding to each preset feature on each maintenance test piece, based on the performance index of each target area, to obtain the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination, and to calculate the total performance score of the composite material maintenance consumable based on the performance score corresponding to each parameter combination. The evaluation module is used to obtain performance evaluation results for various composite material repair consumables based on the overall performance score of each composite material repair consumable.

9. A storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by a processor, it implements the method of any one of claims 1 to 7.

10. A computer device, comprising a storage medium, a processor, and a computer program stored on the storage medium and executable on the processor, characterized in that, When the processor executes the computer program, it implements the method of any one of claims 1 to 7.

Images