Machine Component Life Prediction Using Multi-Point Load Analysis

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional methods for predicting the life consumption of machine components are inaccurate as they do not consider all significant load cycles, leading to potential component failures and unnecessary replacements, especially when actual load sessions differ from predetermined ones.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that apply a mesh to a geometric model of the component to identify critical points, using multiple parameter sets and life consumption calculation models to predict damage based on actual load sessions, allowing for more accurate and reliable life consumption predictions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If conventional methods (ELCF cycles) are used to predict life consumption, then the prediction process is simple, but the accuracy deteriorates when actual load sessions differ from predetermined ones

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelife consumption prediction accuracyVSAvoidprediction system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The component is divided into multiple critical points (e.g., 3-5 locations) where different stress conditions may occur. Each critical point is analyzed separately using finite element analysis to determine local stress concentrations, allowing the system to capture varying damage patterns across different regions of the same component.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different calculation models are selected for different critical points based on their specific stress conditions. For example, some points may use high-cycle fatigue models while others use low-cycle fatigue models, depending on the local stress amplitude and mean stress characteristics. This localized approach improves accuracy without requiring complete redesign of the prediction system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Measurement precision

If multiple critical points are analyzed with different calculation models, then prediction accuracy improves, but computational complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvelife consumption prediction accuracyVSAvoidcalculation time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The system pre-calculates and stores S-N curves, damage accumulation rules, and model selection criteria during the design phase. During actual operation, the system only needs to input measured stress data and automatically selects the appropriate pre-configured models, significantly reducing real-time computational requirements while maintaining high accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically selects different calculation models based on stress parameter thresholds. For instance, if the stress amplitude exceeds a certain threshold, a low-cycle fatigue model is automatically selected; otherwise, a high-cycle fatigue model is used. This parameter-based model selection reduces the need to evaluate all possible models, thereby reducing calculation time.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Productivity

If safety margins are reduced based on improved predictions, then component utilization improves, but the risk of failure increases if predictions are inaccurate

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomponent utilizationVSAvoidcomponent reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The system continuously monitors actual component performance and compares it with predicted life consumption. When discrepancies are detected, the system adjusts the prediction model parameters and recalculates remaining life. This feedback mechanism ensures that even with reduced safety margins, the system adapts to actual conditions, maintaining reliability while maximizing component utilization.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Solution Approach 2:

The safety margin is not fixed but dynamically adjusted based on confidence levels of the prediction. When the prediction model has high confidence (based on quality of input data and model fit), smaller safety margins are applied, allowing higher utilization. When confidence is lower, larger safety margins are automatically applied, preserving reliability. This dynamic approach resolves the contradiction between utilization and reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentEP2862032B1Reliable prediction of life consumption of a machine component
Publication Date: 2023.08.23 GKN AEROSPACE SWEDEN AB
  • EP2862032B1 patent drawingFigure 1~3
  • EP2862032B1 patent drawingFigure 4
  • EP2862032B1 patent drawingFigure 5

AI summary

A method and system for predicting a life consumption of a component in a machine. The method comprises receiving load data from a load session of said machine, accessing a plurality of parameter sets, each associated with a critical point of said component, which point is considered to have critical life consumption, and for each critical point, calculating life consumption using a life consumption calculation model receiving said load data and said parameter sets as input. By selecting a plurality of critical points on the component, a more complete view is presented of how the different parts of the component are affected by the load session.