Gas Turbine Component Qualification via Variance Modeling

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current gas turbine engine component qualification methods are inefficient as they focus on individual parameter tolerances, leading to unnecessary disqualification and waste, especially when manufacturing variations result in components with acceptable overall configurations but out-of-tolerance individual parameters.

Innovation Solution

A process and system that utilize a variance model to qualify components based on their representative parameter profiles, considering mean, median, or mode averages within one standard deviation, and incorporating predictive models like Gaussian processes to assess the component's behavioral characteristics, allowing for qualification despite minor deviations from individual tolerance ranges.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Manufacturing precision

If traditional individual parameter tolerance checking is used to qualify components, then manufacturing precision and quality control are improved, but productivity decreases and waste increases due to unnecessary disqualification of components with acceptable overall configurations

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomponent parameter toleranceVSAvoidcomponent qualification rate
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSProductivity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the qualification process into two distinct stages: (1) individual parameter measurement and initial assessment, and (2) holistic configuration evaluation using predictive models. This segmentation allows parameters to be checked individually for basic compliance while enabling the overall component configuration to be assessed separately, preventing automatic disqualification based solely on individual parameter deviations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent transforms the qualification approach by changing from static individual parameter threshold checking to dynamic holistic configuration assessment. Predictive models (such as Gaussian process regression) are trained on historical data to learn the relationship between parameter variations and component performance, enabling the system to accommodate parameter variations that do not adversely affect overall component functionality.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Manufacturing precision

If strict individual parameter tolerance limits are enforced, then manufacturing precision is maintained, but loss of substance increases due to scrapping of components that could function acceptably

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveparameter specification complianceVSAvoidcomponent material waste
Core Design Contradiction:
Manufacturing precisionVSLoss of substance

Solution Approach 1:

The patent converts what would traditionally be considered harmful (parameter deviations from nominal values) into beneficial information for holistic assessment. Instead of treating parameter variations as defects to be eliminated, the system uses predictive models to evaluate whether these variations actually impact component performance, thereby converting potential waste into usable components.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #22Blessing in disguise (Convert harm into benefit)

Solution Approach 2:

The patent performs preliminary training of predictive models using historical manufacturing and performance data before actual qualification decisions are made. This preliminary action establishes the relationship between parameter variations and component performance in advance, enabling informed qualification decisions that prevent unnecessary scrapping while maintaining quality standards.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

3Productivity

If comprehensive predictive modeling is implemented for holistic component assessment, then productivity and component utilization are improved, but device complexity increases due to advanced modeling requirements

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvequalification process efficiencyVSAvoidpredictive modeling system
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a virtual digital twin or copy of the physical component through predictive modeling. Instead of physically testing each component or using complex physical measurement systems, the system creates a computational model that replicates component behavior based on parameter measurements, simplifying the assessment process while maintaining accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #26Copying

Solution Approach 2:

The patent replaces complex physical testing and evaluation mechanisms with computational predictive models. Instead of using elaborate physical test rigs or extensive manual inspection procedures, the system uses software-based Gaussian process regression and other statistical models to predict component performance, reducing physical complexity while improving efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Data Source

PatentEP3591174B1Aircraft component qualification system and process including variation modelling
Publication Date: 2022.04.27 RTX CORP
  • EP3591174B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP3591174B1 patent drawingFigure 2A~2C
  • EP3591174B1 patent drawingFigure 3A~3C

AI summary

A method for qualifying a gas turbine engine component (174;400;500) includes creating a first set of substantially identical gas turbine engine components (174;400;500) via a uniform manufacturing procedure, determining a set of as-manufactured parameters of each gas turbine engine component (174;400;500) in the first set, and determining a variance model of the first set. The variance model includes a representative parameter profile (710), which includes a plurality of component parameter profiles (610, 620, 630, 640). The sum of each of the component parameter profiles (610, 620, 630, 640) is the representative parameter profile (710). The method also includes determining at least one predicted response models based at least in part on the variance model, identifying as-manufactured parameters of a second engine component (174;400;500), applying the as-manufactured parameters of the second engine component (174;400;500) to the at least one predicted response models, thereby generating a predicted response output, and qualifying the second engine component (174;400;500) for usage in at least one gas turbine engine corresponding to the at least one predicted response model.