Structural member influence evaluation device and structural member influence evaluation method

Abstract

To provide a structural member influence evaluation device and a structural member influence evaluation method, which enable determination of a maintenance priority of each member constituting a structure at an early design stage without presence of accumulated failure data.SOLUTION: A structural member influence evaluation device is provided, comprising an influence computation unit configured to respond to addition of changes in one or more of multiple structural members constituting a structure by computing a degree of influence, an indicator representing an influence of the one or more changed structural members on the structure, and an influence output unit for outputting the degree of influence.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to a structural member influence evaluation device and a structural member influence evaluation method for a structure. [Background technology]

[0002] Various methods are known for evaluating the strength reliability of structures, but in general, the loads acting on the structure, such as external forces, temperature changes, and chemical changes in a corrosive environment, are quantified, and the fatigue life of the structure is estimated from previously obtained relationship data between the change in load and the number of cycles or time until failure. Furthermore, since the above relationship data often varies, a certain safety factor or probability of non-failure is defined by statistically processing the data, and the strength reliability of the structure is quantified.

[0003] Meanwhile, when it comes to periodic inspections of structures, information such as the structure's operating status and defect history is registered in a database, and this information can be referenced and the accumulated information analyzed to realize more efficient maintenance and work plans.

[0004] Preventive maintenance methods include TBM (Time Based Maintenance), which is based on the concept of preventive maintenance based on time, such as performing inspections at regular intervals, and CBM (Condition Based Maintenance), which is based on the concept of preventive maintenance, which monitors the condition of equipment in structures and replaces structures that are likely to fail.

[0005] However, with these methods, reducing the cost of periodic inspections and reviewing them to minimize the decline in availability due to the shutdown of structures during inspections had to be done empirically, taking into account the characteristics of each structure, its defect history, the degree of risk to people caused by failures, and the impact on the environment. Therefore, in order to minimize the cost of periodic inspections of structures and the decline in availability due to shutdowns during periodic inspections, risk assessment methods such as RBI / RBM (Risk-Based Inspection / Maintenance) are being considered, based on a risk assessment of the degree of risk and impact, to determine periodic inspection cycles that minimize inspection costs, the frequency of defects, and the decline in availability. For example, techniques related to maintenance management are known, such as those described in Patent Documents 1 and 2.

[0006] Patent Document 1 discloses an inspection interval determination method for determining the interval between periodic inspections of equipment, which calculates the frequency of malfunctions of the equipment from the number of malfunctions that occurred in the equipment during a predetermined period in the past, calculates the risk of the equipment from the calculated frequency of malfunctions and an impact level that indicates the impact that will occur when a malfunction occurs in the equipment, calculates the inspection interval for the equipment by comparing the calculated risk of the equipment with an allowable risk that indicates the risk that the equipment can tolerate, and determines the inspection interval based on the calculated inspection interval and a predetermined longest inspection interval.In the illustrated power plant, the impact level is often determined as the cost of the calculated damage amount, taking into account the degree of danger and damage caused by a malfunction, the impact on the surrounding environment, the impact on power generation itself, etc.

[0007] Patent Document 2 discloses a preliminary evaluation process for evaluating the probability of failure and the degree of impact of each component of an infrastructure structure based on periodic inspection information of the infrastructure structure, a risk evaluation process for conducting a risk assessment based on the results of the preliminary evaluation process, and a technology for reflecting the results of the risk evaluation process in a three-dimensional CAD model of the infrastructure structure.The document also discloses that the degree of impact is determined by quantifying two items: "safety damage" and "economic damage," and that an investigation of safety damage (personal injury) involves investigating, for example, the properties, weight, height, and hazard level (temperature, pressure, momentum) of the component members in question. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0008] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2013-88828 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2016-57792 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0009] However, the conventional techniques described in Patent Documents 1 and 2 have the following problems.

[0010] That is, in the prior art described in Patent Document 1, a risk assessment method using a risk matrix is ​​applied to an equipment management system, and the inspection cycle is calculated from the risk assessment results as a quantitative value for a periodic inspection plan (preventive maintenance plan), but it is not possible to derive a strength design method or strength assessment method for each structure that makes up the equipment, such as how to modify the structure in order to extend the maintenance cycle.In addition, it is necessary to accumulate failure data for the equipment, and if there is no failure data, such as when designing a new equipment with a different structure, it is not possible to make plans such as maintenance priorities.

[0011] Furthermore, in the conventional technology described in Patent Document 2, an appropriate maintenance plan is provided by displaying the results of RBM in an easy-to-understand manner in a maintenance management system for infrastructure structures using RBM. However, as with the conventional technology described in Patent Document 1, no strength design method or strength evaluation method is provided, such as how the structure should be modified to extend the maintenance cycle.

[0012] The present invention has been made in consideration of the above, and aims to provide a structural member impact assessment method and a structural member impact assessment device that can determine the maintenance priority of each component that makes up a structure, or that can also make design changes to each component at the design stage. [Means for solving the problem]

[0013] The present invention includes multiple means for solving the above problems, and one example is an influence calculation unit that calculates the influence, which is an index that represents the influence of components that make up a structure on other components. [Effects of the Invention]

[0014] This invention quantifies how the fatigue life of other structural members will change if one of them is damaged, and visualizes the degree of impact to designers. This makes it possible to assign weights to the members to be inspected, even in the early design stage when no failure data has been accumulated, and to determine the maintenance priority of each structural member, thereby streamlining inspection and maintenance and establishing the basis for maintenance standard rules. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0015] [Figure 1] 1 is a diagram schematically illustrating the overall configuration of a structural member influence evaluation device according to a first embodiment. [Figure 2] 1 is a plan view of a railway bogie chassis shown as an example of a target for structural member influence evaluation. FIG. [Figure 3]1 is a fatigue life curve of a welded portion of steel members forming a bracket shown as an example of an object to be evaluated in a railway bogie frame. [Figure 4] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of a calculation result of a fatigue life calculation unit. [Figure 5] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the influence calculation unit, the influence calculated using the fatigue life of each bracket. [Figure 6] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an example of an output screen of a bar graph showing the influence of each bracket and a design drawing. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 is a diagram illustrating an example of a method for indicating an influence degree on a design drawing. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing an influence calculated using the fatigue life of each bracket as an example of the calculation result of the influence calculation unit according to the second embodiment. [Figure 9] FIG. 11 is a side view schematically showing the appearance of a dump truck shown as an example of a target of structural member influence evaluation in a third embodiment. [Figure 10] FIG. 2 is a perspective view schematically illustrating a chassis frame of the dump truck. [Figure 11] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of a calculation result of a fatigue life calculation unit according to the third embodiment. [Figure 12] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an influence calculated using the fatigue life of each seat as an example of a calculation result of the influence calculation unit according to the third embodiment. [Figure 13] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an influence calculated using the fatigue life of each seat as an example of the calculation result of the influence calculation unit according to the fourth embodiment. [Figure 14] FIG. 10 is a diagram schematically illustrating the overall configuration of a structural member influence evaluation device according to a fifth embodiment. [Figure 15] FIG. 13 is a side view of a crawler crane shown as an example of a target of structural member influence evaluation in the fifth embodiment. [Figure 16] 10A and 10B are diagrams illustrating an example of a calculation result of a bend tolerance calculation unit. [Figure 17]FIG. 13 is a diagram showing the calculated influence of each diagonal aggregate on the buckling tolerance, as an example of the calculation result of the influence calculation unit according to the fifth embodiment. [Figure 18] FIG. 20 is a diagram showing an influence calculated using the bending tolerance of each diagonal aggregate, as an example of a calculation result of the influence calculation unit according to the sixth embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0016] Hereinafter, an embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. Problems, configurations and effects other than those described above will become apparent from the following embodiments.

[0017] [First embodiment] A first embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIGS.

[0018] Fig. 1 is a diagram showing the overall configuration of a structural member influence evaluation device according to this embodiment. Fig. 2 is a plan view of a railway bogie chassis shown as an example of a structure to be evaluated for structural member influence. Fig. 3 is a diagram showing a fatigue life curve of a weld between steel members forming a bracket shown as an example of an evaluation target in a railway bogie chassis.

[0019] 1, the structural member influence assessment device 100 is composed of a processing unit 3, and an input unit 1, an output unit 2, and a main memory unit 4 connected to the processing unit 3. As for the location of each unit, for example, the input unit 1 and the output unit 2 may be arranged so as to be accessible by an operator who operates the structural member influence assessment device 100, and the functions of the processing unit 3 and the main memory unit 4 may be configured on the cloud.

[0020] The processing unit 3 is generally composed of a structure creation unit 5, a physical quantity change calculation unit 6, a fatigue life calculation unit 7, and an influence calculation unit 8.

[0021] The main storage unit 4 is roughly composed of a fatigue life curve storage unit 9 and a load information storage unit 10.

[0022] The input unit 1 registers information about the structure to be evaluated and the components (components) that make up the structure, input by an operator (person in charge) performing the structural component impact assessment. The operator inputs information by selectively setting it, for example. More specifically, the input unit 1 sets six brackets 18 (A-F) of the railway bogie frame 11 shown in FIG. 2 in accordance with the operator's input. Note that the structure to be registered as the evaluation target of a structure is not limited to a component unit, and multiple components of the same component may be set. Therefore, in the following explanation, the term "component" to be evaluated will include the meaning of "component" as well.

[0023] The structure creation unit 5 of the processing unit 3 creates multiple pieces of data for the structure (data showing the structure of the structure) in a state where one of the constituent members of the structure registered by the input unit 1 has been removed. More specifically, the structure creation unit 5 creates data for the structure in a state where one of the constituent members set as the evaluation target (e.g., the six brackets 18 in Figure 2) has been removed, for each case where a bracket has been removed. In other words, six pieces of data for the structure are created here. These multiple pieces of data for the structure are intended to assume a case where the removed constituent member has been damaged and no longer functions to support the structure, and will be referred to as an omitted model hereinafter. The structure creation unit 5 also creates separate data for the structure in a state where no constituent member of the structure has been removed (a standard state where all constituent members are present). This will be referred to as standard data hereinafter.

[0024] The physical quantity change calculation unit 6 of the processing unit 3 calculates the stress, strain, etc. of the members that are the subject of evaluation among the members that make up the structure for the omitted model of multiple structures created by the structure creation unit 5, based on the boundary conditions such as the design load, temperature, and environment acting on the structure, which are recorded in the load information storage unit 10 that makes up the main storage unit 4. Note that the physical quantity change calculation unit 6 separately calculates the stress, strain, etc. of each component member in the standard data of the structure in a state in which the component members of the structure are not excluded.

[0025] The fatigue life curve storage unit 9 of the main storage unit 4 stores a database containing information regarding the relationship between the amount of change in stress or strain of a material when a constant repeated load is applied, and the number of cycles of stress or strain change or the load application time until failure, for the materials that make up the structure. The fatigue life curve storage unit 9 also stores a database containing information regarding the relationship between the amount of change in stress or strain at the joints between each member (constituent member) that make up the structure when a constant repeated load is applied, and the number of cycles of stress or strain change until failure, or the load application time, for the joints. Examples of information stored in the fatigue life curve storage unit 9 include fatigue life curves.

[0026] The fatigue life calculation unit 7, which constitutes the processing unit 3, calculates the fatigue life of each component or the joint between the components using the change in stress or strain calculated by the physical quantity change calculation unit 6 for each component or the joint between the components, and information registered in the fatigue life curve storage unit 9 regarding the relationship between the change in stress or strain and the number of repetitions of stress or strain change until failure or the load application time. More specifically, as shown in Figure 4, the fatigue life calculation unit 7 creates the fatigue life of each component in an abbreviated model excluding one of the six brackets 18A-F, which are the components to be evaluated. In addition, the fatigue life calculation unit 7 separately calculates the fatigue life of each component or the joint between the components in the standard data excluding the component.

[0027] The influence calculation unit 8 of the processing unit 3 extracts the minimum fatigue life for each excluded component from all calculation results for the remaining components, based on the fatigue life calculated by the fatigue life calculation unit 7 for each component of the structure in the omitted model in which one component is excluded from among the components of the structure created by the structure creation unit 5. The reciprocal of the extracted fatigue life is defined as the influence of each excluded component. The influence will be explained in detail using Figure 5.

[0028] The points at which the influence calculation unit 8 calculates the influence may be the individual components that make up the structure, but from the perspective of being a key point in maintenance, it is desirable to calculate the influence of the joints between the components.

[0029] The output unit 2 outputs the degree of influence calculated by the degree of influence calculation unit 8 to a device such as a display that can be visually confirmed by a person in charge of evaluating the degree of influence of a structural member.

[0030] The processing contents of the structural member influence evaluation device will be specifically described below, taking a railway bogie chassis as an example of the target of the structural member influence evaluation.

[0031] In Fig. 2, the railway bogie frame 11 has a pair of side beams 12 spaced apart on the left and right along the direction of travel of the railway vehicle, and a pair of front and rear cross beams 13 extending in the sleeper direction (left-right direction) and connecting the left and right side beams 12. The direction of travel of the railway vehicle here refers to the up-and-down direction in Fig. 2. At the front and rear of the railway bogie frame 11, axles 14 extending in the left-right direction and wheels 15 attached to both ends of the axles 14 are mounted. The railway bogie frame 11 is, for example, a drive bogie, and a motor 16 and a gearbox 17 are welded to the cross beams 13 via a plurality of brackets 18 (A to F), respectively.

[0032] A user who performs a structural member impact assessment of a railway bogie frame 11 selects and inputs, for example, six brackets 18 (A to F), which are important parts in terms of strength design, as the components to be subject to the structural member impact assessment into the structural member impact assessment device 100.

[0033] The structure creation unit 5 of the structural member influence evaluation device 100 creates an abbreviated model for each bracket 18 (A to F) by omitting one of the six brackets 18 (A to F) selected as the constituent members to be evaluated in the input unit 1. In other words, six types of abbreviated models of the railway bogie chassis 11 are created by omitting each of the brackets 18 (A to F). The calculation model is made up of data suitable for calculation using the finite element method.

[0034] The load information storage unit 10 stores the values ​​and directions of loads acting on each part of the railway bogie chassis 11 as information used in the strength design of the railway bogie chassis 11 .

[0035] The physical quantity change calculation unit 6 calculates the maximum stress or maximum strain of the welded portion between the bracket 18 (A to F) and the cross beam 13 for each of the six calculation models using the finite element method or the like.

[0036] The fatigue life curve storage unit 9 stores a fatigue life curve 36 for steel-to-steel welds, as shown in Fig. 3. This fatigue life curve 36 indicates the relationship between a certain range of repeated stress and the number of repetitions until fracture of the weld, for a steel-to-steel weld, and is a database created as a design curve with a certain safety factor in mind, using experimental data obtained from multiple repeated stresses.

[0037] The fatigue life calculation unit 7 calculates the fatigue life of each bracket 18 from the maximum stress of the weld between the bracket 18 (A to F) and the cross beam 13 calculated by the physical quantity change calculation unit 6 and the fatigue life curve 36 of the weld between steel and steel registered in the fatigue life curve memory unit 9.

[0038] FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the fatigue life calculation unit.

[0039] Figure 4 shows the results of calculating the fatigue life of each bracket 18 (A to F) using each calculation model. For example, in Figure 4, the fatigue life of the welded part of bracket B calculated using a calculation model that omits bracket A is N B,A is.

[0040] The influence calculation unit 8 calculates the influence from the fatigue life of each bracket 18 (A to F) calculated using six types of omitted models created for the railway bogie chassis 11 by the structure creation unit 5.

[0041] For example, when bracket A is omitted, the influence calculation unit 8 calculates the fatigue life N of brackets B, C, D, E, and F calculated by a calculation model in which bracket A is omitted. B,A ,N C,A ,N D,A ,N E,A ,N F,A The reciprocal of the shortest fatigue life among B,A ,N C,A ,N D,A ,N E,A ,N F,A )} is defined as the influence of bracket A. This represents an index of how much the fatigue life of the remaining brackets B, C, D, E, and F will be reduced if bracket A is damaged. The influence calculation unit 8 calculates the influence for each bracket 18 (A to F). At this time, the bracket 18 (A to F) with the greatest influence can be said to be the component that requires the most attention in assessing the influence of structural components, and is also the component with the highest inspection priority in maintenance planning.

[0042] FIG. 5 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the influence degree calculation unit, calculated using the fatigue life of each bracket.

[0043] The output unit 2 plots the influence of each bracket 18 (A-F) calculated by the influence calculation unit 8 on a display device such as a monitor and presents it to the person in charge in the format shown in FIG. 5. In this embodiment, the influence is represented as I. Furthermore, the output screens shown in FIGS. 6 and 7 are preferable because they allow the user to easily understand the influence of each component. FIG. 6 shows an example of an output screen showing a bar graph indicating the influence of each bracket and a blueprint. In FIG. 6, the influence is shown as a bar graph as an example, but the graph structure is not particularly limited as long as it can indicate the influence. Furthermore, when the cursor is placed on the bar graph in FIG. 6, the corresponding location on the blueprint may be illuminated. FIG. 7 shows an example of a method for indicating the influence on the blueprint. In FIG. 7, the influence is indicated by the size and color intensity of the valve, which provides good visibility to the user. In one example, the influence is expressed using the size and color intensity of the valve, but other methods may be used as long as they can indicate the influence. The configurations in FIGS. 6 and 7 may be combined.

[0044] In this embodiment configured as described above, the structural member influence evaluation system 100 can determine the priority order for periodic inspections from among the multiple brackets 18 that make up the railway bogie chassis 11, even without storing any failure data in advance. Furthermore, it can clearly identify components for which stress should be reduced by increasing the component plate thickness.

[0045] In this embodiment, the structural member influence evaluation device 100 calculates the influence when one of the structural members of the structure is excluded, but this is not limited to this, and it may be configured to create multiple pieces of structure data (omitted models) when two or more structural members are excluded, and calculate the influence for each omitted model. In this case, multiple omitted models of the structure are created according to the combinations of the multiple omitted structural members.

[0046] [Second embodiment] The second embodiment will be described with reference to FIG.

[0047] In the first embodiment, an example was given in which the structural member influence assessment device 100 assesses, as an influence, the influence that each of the multiple components that are the subject of a structural member influence assessment has on the other components when each is damaged. In contrast, the present embodiment illustrates a case in which the structural member influence assessment device 100 assesses, as an influence, the influence that each of the multiple components that are the subject of a structural member influence assessment has on the other components. In this embodiment, the same reference numerals are used for configurations that are the same as those in the first embodiment, and descriptions thereof will be omitted where appropriate.

[0048] In the second embodiment, the influence calculation unit 8 of the structural member influence evaluation device 100 calculates the influence as follows from the fatigue life of each bracket 18 (A to F) calculated using the calculation model of six types of railway bogie frames 11 created by the structure creation unit 5.

[0049] For example, when bracket A is omitted, the influence calculation unit 8 calculates the fatigue life N of bracket A calculated by each calculation model omitting brackets B, C, D, E, and F. A,B ,N A,C ,N A,D ,N A,E ,N A,F The reciprocal of the shortest fatigue life among A,B ,N A,C ,N A,D ,N A,E ,N A,F )} is defined as the influence of bracket A. This represents an index of how much the fatigue life of bracket A will be reduced due to damage to brackets other than bracket A (B, C, D, E, F). The influence calculation unit 8 calculates the influence for each bracket 18 (A to F). At this time, the bracket with the greatest influence can be considered to be the bracket that will be most affected by damage to the other brackets, and can be said to be the component that requires the most attention in evaluating the influence of structural members, and will also be the component with the highest inspection priority in maintenance planning.

[0050] FIG. 8 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the influence degree calculation unit, calculated using the fatigue life of each bracket.

[0051] The output unit 2 plots the influence of each bracket calculated by the influence calculation unit 8 on a display device such as a display, and presents it to the person in charge.

[0052] The other configurations are the same as those in the first embodiment.

[0053] The present embodiment configured as described above can also achieve the same effects as the first embodiment. That is, in this embodiment, even if no failure data has been accumulated in advance, it is possible to determine the priority order for periodic inspections from among the multiple brackets 18 that make up the railway bogie chassis 11. Furthermore, it is also possible to clearly identify components for which stress should be reduced by increasing the component plate thickness.

[0054] [Third embodiment] A third embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIGS.

[0055] The first and second embodiments have been described by exemplifying a case where the target of structural member influence evaluation by the structural member influence evaluation device 100 is a railway bogie frame, but this embodiment will be described by exemplifying a chassis frame of a dump truck as the evaluation target. Note that in this embodiment, the same components as those in the first and second embodiments will be described using the same reference numerals, and descriptions will be omitted as appropriate.

[0056] Fig. 9 is a side view showing a schematic view of the exterior of a dump truck shown as an example of a target of structural member impact assessment in this embodiment. The dump truck shown in Fig. 9 is a large dump truck used to transport minerals, earth, sand, etc. excavated in a mine. Fig. 10 is a perspective view showing a schematic view of the chassis frame of the dump truck.

[0057] 9, a dump truck 19 is a large transport vehicle, and is entirely composed of a body 20 having a sturdy frame structure and a loading platform 21 mounted on the body 20 so as to be tiltable or movable upward and downward. The body 20 is composed of a frame 22, a building 23, a cab 24, etc.

[0058] 10, frame 22 is a frame that constitutes the chassis of vehicle body 20, and is formed as a strong support structure (welded sheet metal structure) that extends in the fore-and-aft direction. Frame 22 is composed of a base frame 25 that extends in the fore-and-aft direction, and an upper cross beam 26 that is disposed in the middle of base frame 25 in the fore-and-aft direction.

[0059] The base frame 25 is provided with a plurality of seats 27 for receiving the load from the tires. Complex loads are applied to the base frame 25 depending on the terrain on which the vehicle is traveling.

[0060] The person in charge of the structural member impact assessment of the frame 22 selects, for example, four components (A to D) of the seat 27, which is one of the important parts in strength design, as the components to be subject to the structural member impact assessment, and registers them in the input section 1 of the structural member impact assessment device 100.

[0061] The structure creation unit 5 of the structural member influence evaluation device 100 creates models (omitted models) in which one of the four seats 27 (A to D) selected as the constituent members to be evaluated is omitted, with each omitted seat 27 (A to D) changed. In other words, four types of calculation models (omitted models) of the frame 22 in which each seat 27 (A to D) is omitted are created. The calculation models are made up of data suitable for calculation using the finite element method.

[0062] The load information storage unit 10 stores the values ​​and directions of the loads acting on each part of the frame 22 as information used in the strength design of the frame 22.

[0063] The physical quantity change calculation unit 6 calculates the maximum stress or maximum strain at the joint (welded part in this case) between the seats 27 (A to D) and the base frame 25 for each of the four calculation models using the finite element method or the like.

[0064] The fatigue life curve storage unit 9 stores a fatigue life curve 36 for a steel-to-steel weld, as shown in Fig. 3. This fatigue life curve 36 indicates the relationship between a certain repeated stress and the number of repetitions until the weld fractures, for a steel-to-steel weld, and is a database created as a design curve with a certain safety factor in mind, using experimental data obtained from multiple repeated stresses.

[0065] The fatigue life calculation unit 7 calculates the fatigue life of each seat 27 from the maximum stress of the weld between the seat 27 (A to D) and the base frame 25 calculated by the physical quantity change calculation unit 6 and the fatigue life curve 36 of the weld between steels registered in the fatigue life curve memory unit 9.

[0066] FIG. 11 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation results of the fatigue life calculation unit in this embodiment.

[0067] Figure 11 shows the results of calculating the fatigue life of each seat using each calculation model. For example, in Figure 11, the fatigue life of the welded part of seat B calculated using a calculation model that omits seat A is N B,A is.

[0068] The impact calculation unit 8 calculates the impact as follows from the fatigue life of each seat 27 (A to D) calculated using four types of calculation models (abbreviated models) created for the frame 22 of the dump truck 19 by the structure creation unit 5.

[0069] That is, for example, when the position A is omitted, the influence calculation unit 8 calculates the fatigue life N of the positions B, C, and D calculated by the calculation model omitting the position A. B,A ,N C,A ,N D,A The reciprocal of the shortest fatigue life among B,A ,NC,A ,N D,A )} is defined as the influence of seat A. This represents an index of how much the fatigue life of the other remaining seats will be reduced if seat A is damaged. The influence calculation unit 8 calculates the influence for each seat 27 (A to D). The seat with the greatest influence can be said to be the member (site) that requires the most attention in structural member influence evaluation, and is also the member (site) with the highest inspection priority in maintenance planning.

[0070] FIG. 12 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the influence degree calculation unit, which is calculated using the fatigue life of each seat.

[0071] The output unit 2 plots the influence of each location calculated by the influence calculation unit 8 on a display device such as a display, and presents it to the person in charge.

[0072] The present embodiment configured as described above can also achieve the same effects as the first embodiment. That is, in this embodiment, even if failure data is not accumulated in advance, the priority order for periodic inspections can be determined from among the multiple seats 27 that make up the frame 22. Furthermore, it is possible to clearly identify components that should have their plate thickness increased to reduce stress.

[0073] [Fourth embodiment] A second embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIG.

[0074] In the third embodiment, the structural member influence assessment device 100 evaluates the influence on other structural members when each of a plurality of structural members that are the subject of a structural member influence assessment is damaged, as the influence. In contrast, the present embodiment evaluates the influence on other structural members that each of a plurality of structural members that are the subject of a structural member influence assessment is evaluated as the influence in the structural member influence assessment device 100. Note that in this embodiment, the same reference numerals are used for configurations that are the same as those in the third embodiment, and descriptions thereof will be omitted where appropriate.

[0075] In this embodiment, the influence calculation unit 8 of the structural member influence evaluation device 100 calculates the influence as follows from the fatigue life of each seat 27 (A to D) calculated using the calculation model of the four types of frame 22 created by the structure creation unit 5.

[0076] That is, for example, when the position A is omitted, the influence calculation unit 8 calculates the fatigue life N of the position A calculated by each calculation model omitting the positions B, C, and D. A,B ,N A,C ,N A,D The reciprocal of the shortest fatigue life among A,B ,N A,C ,N A,D )} is defined as the influence of seat A. This represents an index of how much the fatigue life of seat A is reduced by damage to seats B, C, and D other than seat A. The influence calculation unit 8 calculates the influence for each seat 27 (A to D). At this time, the seat with the largest influence can be considered to be the seat that is most affected by damage from other seats, and can be said to be the member (part) that requires the most attention in structural member influence evaluation, and also becomes a member with a high inspection priority in maintenance planning.

[0077] FIG. 13 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the influence calculation unit, which is calculated using the fatigue life of each seat.

[0078] The output unit 2 plots the influence of each location calculated by the influence calculation unit 8 on a display device such as a display, and presents it to the person in charge.

[0079] The other configurations are the same as those in the third embodiment.

[0080] The present embodiment configured as described above can also achieve the same effects as the third embodiment. That is, in this embodiment, even if failure data is not accumulated in advance, the priority order for periodic inspections can be determined from among the multiple seats 27 that make up the frame 22 of the dump truck 19. Furthermore, it is also possible to clearly identify members whose plate thickness should be increased to reduce stress.

[0081] [Fifth embodiment] A fifth embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIGS.

[0082] The first and second embodiments use a railway bogie frame as an example of the target of structural member influence assessment, and the third and fourth embodiments use a dump truck as an example of the target of structural member influence assessment, and explain the case of calculating the influence based on fatigue life, but this embodiment uses a crawler crane as an example of the target of structural member influence assessment, and explains the case of calculating the influence based on buckling tolerance. Note that in this embodiment, the same components as in the first to fourth embodiments will be described using the same reference numerals, and explanations will be omitted where appropriate.

[0083] FIG. 14 is a diagram showing an outline of the overall configuration of a structural member influence evaluation apparatus according to this embodiment.

[0084] In FIG. 14, a structural member influence evaluation device 100A is generally composed of an input unit 1, an output unit 2, a processing unit 3A, and a main storage unit 4A.

[0085] The processing unit 3A includes a structure creation unit 5, a physical quantity change calculation unit 6, a buckling tolerance calculation unit 7A, and an influence calculation unit 8A. The main storage unit 4A includes a buckling boundary condition storage unit 9A and a load information storage unit 10.

[0086] Fig. 15 is a side view of a crawler crane shown as an example of a target for structural member impact assessment in this embodiment. The crawler crane shown in Fig. 15 is a crane with caterpillar tracks, has mobility even on soft ground, and is suitable for a wide range of work, including construction, civil engineering, and port cargo handling.

[0087] 15, a crawler crane 28 includes a self-propelled crawler-type lower traveling body 29 and an upper rotating body 30 rotatably mounted on the lower traveling body 29. A work boom 31 is attached to the upper rotating body 30 so as to be able to move up and down (rotate).

[0088] The work boom 31 is made of a welded structure of multiple steel pipes, with multiple short diagonal frames 33 welded between four long main frames 32 arranged to extend longitudinally.

[0089] The work boom 31 is made up of two sections: an upper section 34 and a lower section 35. In this embodiment, the lower section 35, on which the weight of the steel pipe acts more heavily, is the subject of the structural member influence evaluation.

[0090] The person in charge of strength evaluation of crawler crane 28 selects, for example, six diagonal aggregates 33 (A to F) that make up the lower part 35 as important parts in terms of strength design as the constituent members to be subject to the structural member impact evaluation, and registers them in the input section 1 of the structural member impact evaluation device 100A.

[0091] The structure creation unit 5 of the structural member influence evaluation device 100A creates models (omitted models) in which one of the six diagonal aggregates 33 (A to F) selected as the constituent members to be evaluated is omitted, by changing the diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F) to be omitted. In other words, six types of calculation models (omitted models) of the work boom 31 in which each of the diagonal aggregates 33 (A to F) is omitted are created. The calculation models are made up of data suitable for calculation using the finite element method.

[0092] The load information storage unit 10 stores the values ​​and directions of the loads acting on each part of the work boom 31 as information used in the strength design of the work boom 31 .

[0093] The physical quantity change calculation unit 6 calculates the axial compressive load acting on the diagonal aggregates 33 (A to F) for each of the six calculation models using the finite element method or the like.

[0094] In the case of a structure in which multiple steel pipes are combined, as in this embodiment, preventing buckling, in which each steel pipe undergoes sudden large deformation due to a compressive load, is also an important strength design issue. The axial compressive load that causes buckling is calculated using the length of the steel pipe, the moment of inertia calculated from the cross-sectional shape of the steel pipe, and the Young's modulus of the steel pipe material. Therefore, in this embodiment, the buckling load of each diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F) is calculated by calculating the compressive load acting on the diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F) in the physical quantity change calculation unit 6.

[0095] The buckling tolerance calculation unit 7A calculates the buckling tolerance by dividing the compressive load acting on the diagonal aggregates 33 (A to F) calculated by the physical quantity change calculation unit 6 by the buckling load of each of the diagonal aggregates 33 (A to F).

[0096] FIG. 16 is a diagram showing an example of a calculation result of the bend tolerance calculation unit.

[0097] In Fig. 16, the calculation results of the buckling tolerance of each diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F) by each calculation model are shown. In Fig. 16, for example, the buckling tolerance of diagonal aggregate B calculated by the calculation model omitting diagonal aggregate A is N B,A is.

[0098] The impact calculation unit 8A calculates the impact as follows from the buckling tolerance of each diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F) calculated using the calculation models (abbreviated models) of six types of work booms 31 created for the crawler crane 28 by the structure creation unit 5.

[0099] That is, for example, when the diagonal aggregate A is omitted, the influence calculation unit 8A calculates the buckling tolerance N of the diagonal aggregates B, C, D, E, and F calculated by the calculation model in which the diagonal aggregate A is omitted. B,A ,N C,A ,N D,A ,N E,A ,N F,A The reciprocal of the smallest buckling tolerance among B,A ,N C,A ,N D,A ,N E,A ,N F,A)} is defined as the influence of diagonal aggregate A. This represents an index of how much the buckling tolerance of the remaining diagonal aggregates B, C, D, E, and F will decrease if diagonal aggregate A is damaged. The influence calculation unit 8A calculates the influence for each diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F). In this case, the diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F) with the greatest influence can be said to be the component (area) that requires the most attention in assessing the influence of structural components, and is also the component (area) with the highest inspection priority in maintenance planning.

[0100] FIG. 17 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the influence degree calculation unit, which is calculated using the buckling tolerance of each diagonal aggregate.

[0101] The output unit 2 plots the influence of each of the diagonal aggregates 33 (A to F) calculated by the influence calculation unit 8A on a display device such as a display, and presents it to the person in charge.

[0102] This embodiment configured as described above can also achieve the same effects as the first and third embodiments. That is, in this embodiment, priorities for periodic inspections can be determined from among the multiple diagonal aggregates 33 that make up the work boom 31, even without accumulating buckling damage data in advance. Furthermore, structural changes can be made at the initial design stage, such as increasing the thickness of the steel pipes of the diagonal aggregates to reduce stress and increase buckling tolerance.

[0103] [Sixth embodiment] A sixth embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to FIG.

[0104] In the fifth embodiment, the influence of each of the multiple components that are the subject of the structural member influence assessment on the other components is evaluated as the influence. In contrast, the present embodiment shows the influence of each of the multiple components that are the subject of the structural member influence assessment on the other components is evaluated as the influence. In this embodiment, the same reference numerals are used for the same components as in the fifth embodiment, and the description will be omitted as appropriate.

[0105] In this embodiment, the impact calculation unit 8A of the structural member impact evaluation device 100A calculates the impact as follows from the fatigue life of each diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F) calculated using the calculation model of six types of work booms 31 created by the structure creation unit 5.

[0106] That is, for example, in the case where the diagonal aggregate A is omitted, the influence calculation unit 8A calculates the buckling tolerance N of the diagonal aggregate A calculated by each calculation model omitting the diagonal aggregates B, C, D, E, and F. B,A ,N C,A ,N D,A ,N E,A ,N F,A The reciprocal of the smallest buckling tolerance among B,A ,N C,A ,N D,A ,N E,A ,N F,A )} is defined as the influence of diagonal aggregate A. This represents an index of the degree to which the bending tolerance of diagonal aggregate A is reduced by damage to diagonal aggregates B, C, D, E, and F other than diagonal aggregate A. The influence calculation unit 8A calculates the influence for each diagonal aggregate 33 (A to F). In this case, the diagonal aggregate (constituent member) with the largest influence can be considered to be the diagonal aggregate that is most affected by damage from other diagonal aggregates. In terms of structural member influence evaluation, this can be said to be the member (part) that requires the most attention, and also becomes the member with the highest inspection priority in maintenance planning.

[0107] FIG. 18 is a diagram showing an example of the calculation result of the influence degree calculation unit, which is calculated using the bending tolerance of each diagonal aggregate.

[0108] The output unit 2 plots the influence of each diagonal aggregate calculated by the influence calculation unit 8A on a display device such as a display, and presents it to the person in charge.

[0109] The other configurations are the same as those in the fifth embodiment.

[0110] This embodiment, configured as described above, can also achieve the same effects as the fifth embodiment. That is, in this embodiment, priorities for periodic inspections can be determined among the multiple diagonal aggregates 33 that make up the work boom 31, even without prior accumulation of buckling damage data. Furthermore, structural modifications can be made at the initial design stage, such as increasing the thickness of the steel pipes of the diagonal aggregates to reduce stress and increase buckling tolerance. Furthermore, by providing a parts database that stores information about parts and their strength, parts that can extend fatigue life can be extracted and the extracted parts are recommended to the user. This allows the user to replace parts with high impact with parts with longer fatigue life.

[0111] Furthermore, during maintenance, by combining the influence and fatigue life of each component, it is possible to extend the maintenance interval or change the maintenance priority, thereby enabling more optimal maintenance. Conventionally, the maintenance interval for each component was determined based on information on the fatigue life of each component. However, in this embodiment, by adding influence to this, if there are components with the same fatigue life and the influence of one component is higher than that of other components, it is possible to determine the maintenance interval for the component with the higher influence more frequently and to extend the maintenance interval for the other components, thereby determining the maintenance interval and frequency for the entire structure and performing optimal maintenance, which is expected to reduce costs, etc.

[0112] Furthermore, in the design phase, further benefits can be expected by adding a recycled parts information storage unit that stores information on recycled parts owned by the company and their strength. Specifically, recycled parts that meet certain criteria are extracted from the recycled parts information storage unit, and the system suggests replacing components with recycled parts that have low impact on the design. In this way, using recycled parts is expected to reduce the total cost of the design, and using a single part for a longer period of time is expected to reduce the environmental impact.

[0113] [Note] The present invention is not limited to the above-described embodiments and includes various modifications. For example, the above-described embodiments have been described in detail to clearly explain the present invention, and the present invention is not necessarily limited to those including all of the described configurations. Furthermore, it is possible to replace part of the configuration of one embodiment with the configuration of another embodiment, and it is also possible to add the configuration of another embodiment to the configuration of one embodiment. Furthermore, it is possible to add, delete, or replace part of the configuration of each embodiment with other configurations. [Explanation of symbols]

[0114] 1...input section, 2...output section, 3...processing section, 4...main memory section, 5...structure creation section, 6...physical quantity change calculation section, 7...fatigue life calculation section, 7A...buckling tolerance calculation section, 8, 8A...influence calculation section, 9...fatigue life curve storage section, 10...load information storage section, 11...railway bogie frame, 12...side beam, 13...cross beam, 14...axle, 15...wheel, 16...motor, 17...gearbox, 18...bracket, 19 ...Dump truck, 20...body, 21...loading platform, 22...frame, 23...building, 24...cab, 25...base frame, 26...upper cross beam, 27...seat, 28...crawler crane, 29...lower running body, 30...upper rotating body, 31...work boom, 32...main aggregate, 33...diagonal aggregate, 34...upper part, 35...lower part, 36...fatigue life curve, 100,100A...structural member impact assessment device

Claims

1. A fatigue life calculation unit that, when a change is made to one or more of the constituent members that make up a structure, calculates the fatigue life of each of the remaining constituent members that have not been changed; an influence degree calculation unit that calculates an influence degree, which is an index representing an influence that a component member constituting a structure has on other component members, and which is an index representing an influence that a changed component member has on the structure, using the fatigue life of the other component members that have not been changed; an output unit that outputs the degree of influence calculated by the degree of influence calculation unit; A structural member influence evaluation device comprising:

2. 2. The structural member influence evaluation system according to claim 1, A structural member influence evaluation device, characterized in that the plurality of constituent members are joints between a plurality of members that constitute the structure.

3. 3. The structural member influence evaluation system according to claim 2, A structural member influence evaluation device, characterized in that the change made to the one or more structural members is damage to the joint.

4. 2. The structural member influence evaluation system according to claim 1, The output unit A structural member influence evaluation device that simultaneously outputs a graph showing the influence of each component and a design drawing, or outputs the influence of each component on a design drawing.

5. 2. The structural member influence evaluation system according to claim 1, The fatigue life calculation unit creating a plurality of data of the structure in a state in which at least one of the constituent members of the structure has been removed; Using the load acting on the structure, a change in physical quantity of each remaining component member in the created data of the plurality of structures is calculated; A structural member influence evaluation device characterized by calculating the fatigue life of each component of the structure with at least one component removed, using the change in physical quantity and a fatigue life curve that represents the relationship between the load on the component of the structure and its life.

6. 6. The structural member influence evaluation system according to claim 5, A structural member influence evaluation device, characterized in that the change in physical quantity of the component member is a change in stress or a change in strain of each component member.

7. 6. The structural member influence evaluation system according to claim 5, The fatigue life calculation unit creating a plurality of data of the structure in a state in which the component members of the structure are not removed; Using the load acting on the structure, a change in physical quantity of each component of the structure is calculated in a state in which the component is not removed; A structural member influence evaluation device characterized by calculating the fatigue life of each component of the structure using the fatigue life curve and the changes in physical quantities of each component in data for the structure in a state where the component is not removed.

8. 2. The structural member influence evaluation system according to claim 1, a buckling tolerance calculation unit that, when a change is made to one or more of the constituent members that make up a structure, calculates the buckling tolerance of each of the remaining constituent members that have not been changed; an influence degree calculation unit that calculates an influence degree, which is an index representing an influence that a changed component member has on the structure, using the buckling tolerances of other components that have not been changed; an output unit that outputs the degree of influence; A structural member influence evaluation device comprising:

9. A procedure for calculating the fatigue life of each of the remaining components that have not been changed when changes are made to one or more components that make up a structure; a step of calculating an influence level, which is an index representing the influence of a component member constituting a structure on other component members, and which is an index representing the influence of a changed component member on the structure, using the fatigue life of the other component members to which the change has not been made; a step of outputting the calculated degree of influence; A structural member influence evaluation method comprising:

Images