Adhesion Strength Detection System Using Die Assembly and Tensile Testing

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing adhesion strength testing methods for polymer materials are inefficient and unreliable, limiting the ability to find polymers with desired adhesive properties, and lack flexibility to test various variables critical for applications like dialyzers and hemofilters used in renal failure treatment.

Innovation Solution

An adhesion strength detection system and method utilizing a force or tensile testing machine with an integrated heating chamber, a die assembly, and a thickness measuring gauge, along with surface treatment devices like plasma treatment and UV lamps, to evaluate the adhesion strength between polymers or metals, simulating manufacturing processes and environmental conditions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If conventional adhesion testing methods are used, then testing can be performed, but the results are unreliable and the process is inefficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveadhesion testing reliabilityVSAvoidtesting efficiency
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies parameter changes by systematically varying multiple test parameters including polymer composition, surface treatment conditions, curing parameters, and environmental conditions to establish their effects on adhesion strength. This structured parameter exploration transforms unreliable conventional testing into a systematic methodology that delivers consistent, reliable results while improving efficiency through identified optimal parameter ranges.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Manufacturing precision

If multiple variables are tested to find optimal polymer properties, then desired adhesive properties can be achieved, but the process becomes time-consuming

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepolymer adhesion property controlVSAvoidmaterial selection time
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent employs preliminary action by pre-establishing the relationships between multiple variables (polymer composition, surface treatment, curing conditions) and adhesion outcomes through systematic testing. This creates a knowledge base of optimal parameter combinations that can be applied to future material selections, reducing the time required for polymer selection while maintaining precise control over adhesion properties.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

By systematically exploring and documenting the effects of various parameters on adhesion strength, the patent creates a framework that allows rapid identification of suitable polymer combinations for specific applications, reducing material selection time while achieving desired manufacturing precision.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Adaptability or versatility

If a flexible testing system is designed to test various variables, then it can accommodate different applications like dialyzers and hemofilters, but the system complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvetesting flexibility for different applicationsVSAvoidtesting system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies universality by designing a testing system and methodology that can evaluate multiple variables (polymer properties, surface treatments, curing conditions, environmental factors) across different applications including dialyzers, hemofilters, and other medical devices. This multi-functional approach achieves versatility without proportionally increasing complexity, as the same systematic framework applies across different device types.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

The system provides repeatable, meaningful, and cost-effective results, allowing for the evaluation of multiple variables affecting adhesion strength, enhancing the reliability and efficiency of polymer material selection and testing across various industrial applications.

Implementation Method 1

The system and method employ a force or tensile testing machine, which may have an integrated heating chamber

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectHeating: Heating

Implementation Method 2

surface treatment devices like plasma treatment and UV lamps

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectPlasma treatment: Plasma

Implementation Method 3

surface treatment devices like plasma treatment and UV lamps, to evaluate the adhesion strength between polymers or metals, simulating manufacturing processes and environmental conditions

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectUV irradiation: Photopolymerisation

Data Source

PatentEP3184988B1Adhesion strength detection system and method
Publication Date: 2019.04.17 GAMBRO LUNDIA AB
  • EP3184988B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3184988B1 patent drawingFigure 2A~2B
  • EP3184988B1 patent drawingFigure 3A~4

AI summary

An adhesion strength detection system (10) includes: a die assembly (20) including a lower die (22), a fixture (30) fitted to the lower die (22), and a piston (40) insertable into the fixture (30), wherein a sample (100) may be fitted between the lower die (22) and the fixture (30), such that the piston (40) may come to rest on the sample (100); and a tensile testing machine (12) structured to accept the die assembly (20), the tensile testing machine (12) storing a force application program suitable for the sample (40), wherein the force application program when executed causes the piston (100) to be moved against the sample (100), the tensile testing machine (12) further configured to measure a resistive force applied by the sample (100) while the piston (40) is moved at least until delamination within the sample (100) occurs.