Composite Blade Metal Edge Repair by Local Patch Rebonding

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional methods for repairing composite blades, particularly those used in gas turbine engines, often require the replacement of entire metallic edges due to localized damage, which is economically and time-wise inefficient, and involves complex debonding processes.

Innovation Solution

A method for repairing composite blades by locally removing and replacing only the damaged metal work components, including a bullet and wing portions, using a combination of cutting, heating, and manual debonding techniques to minimize material waste and tool complexity, allowing for reconditioning and rebonding with adhesive layers.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the entire metallic material is replaced due to localized damage, then the blade reliability is improved, but the repair cost and time increase significantly

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveblade reliabilityVSAvoidrepair time
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The metallic material is divided into a damaged portion and an undamaged portion. Only the damaged segment is removed and replaced, while the undamaged segment is retained. This segmentation allows localized repair instead of complete replacement, significantly reducing repair time and cost while maintaining blade reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The repair process applies local quality by treating only the damaged area with specialized debonding and replacement procedures, while the undamaged areas remain untouched. This localized approach focuses resources where needed, improving efficiency without compromising overall blade reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If the entire metallic material is replaced due to localized damage, then the blade reliability is improved, but the material cost increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveblade reliabilityVSAvoidmaterial cost
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The metallic material is segmented into damaged and undamaged portions. By removing only the damaged segment and retaining the undamaged segment, material waste is minimized. This approach preserves valuable metallic material while ensuring blade reliability through targeted replacement of only the compromised portion.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The undamaged metallic material is recovered and reused in the repaired blade, while only the damaged portion is discarded and replaced. This recovery and reuse of sound material significantly reduces material costs while maintaining the required blade reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #34Discarding and recovering

3Reliability

If sophisticated tools and complex debonding processes are used for metallic material replacement, then the repair completeness is improved, but the device complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverepair completenessVSAvoidtool complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of applying complex debonding processes to the entire metallic material, the method applies partial action by focusing debonding efforts only on the damaged portion. This reduces the complexity of tools and processes required while achieving complete repair of the damaged area, as the undamaged portion does not require debonding.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

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

This method enables localized repair of composite blades, reducing costs and time by salvaging undamaged materials, eliminating the need for sophisticated tools, and preserving protective coatings, thus optimizing the repair process.

Implementation Method 1

an adhesive layer bonding the metal work to the composite part

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectAdhesion: Adhesive

Implementation Method 2

heating the composite blade to a temperature between 50°C and 100°C

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectThermal heating: Heating

Implementation Method 3

heating the composite blade to a temperature between 50°C and 100°C for softening of an adhesive layer

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectThermal softening of adhesive:

Data Source

PatentUS11891912B2Method of metal work repair in hybrid composite blades
Publication Date: 2024.02.06 ROLLS ROYCE PLC
  • US11891912B2 patent drawing
  • US11891912B2 patent drawing
  • US11891912B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of repairing a composite blade. The composite blade includes a metal work bonded to a composite part through an adhesive layer. The method includes determining a locally damaged portion of the metal work, and removing a bullet portion corresponding to the locally damaged portion. The method further includes detaching, debonding, and removing a first wing portion from the composite part to obtain a first exposed surface portion. The method further includes detaching, debonding, and removing a second wing portion from the composite part to obtain a second exposed surface portion. The method further includes reconditioning the first and second exposed surface portions to obtain first and second reconditioned surface portions, respectively, and applying first and second adhesive layers to the first and second reconditioned surface portions respectively. The method further includes bonding a metal work patch to the first and second adhesive layers.