Integrally Bladed Rotor Repair Using Structural and Aerodynamic Assessment
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Conventional repair methods for integrally bladed rotors (IBRs) in gas turbine engines are limited by geometric and functional assessment constraints, often leading to scrapping damaged IBRs without considering operational loads and boundary conditions, thus neglecting more optimal repair options.
Innovation Solution
A method involving finite element modeling, structural and aerodynamic analysis, and simulation-based repair processes to determine and implement repairs that meet both structural and aerodynamic criteria, allowing for the repair and reuse of IBRs.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Manufacturing precision
If conventional geometric assessment constraints are applied for IBR repair, then manufacturing precision and ease of repair are improved, but productivity and reliability deteriorate due to excessive scrapping of repairable components
Solution Approach 1:
The patent transitions from purely geometric parameter assessment to a multi-parameter assessment that includes functional parameters (aerodynamic performance, structural integrity, vibration characteristics). This allows repair solutions that maintain geometric tolerances while also ensuring functional acceptability, thereby reducing unnecessary scrapping and improving productivity.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces dynamic functional assessment criteria that evaluate the IBR's performance under operational conditions rather than static geometric constraints alone. This dynamic approach allows for repair acceptance based on actual operational capability rather than rigid geometric specifications.
2Ease of repair
If conventional geometric assessment constraints are applied for IBR repair, then ease of repair is improved, but reliability deteriorates due to neglect of functional assessment constraints
Solution Approach 1:
The patent merges geometric assessment with functional assessment into a unified repair evaluation framework. Both geometric tolerances and functional performance criteria (aerodynamic, structural, vibrational) are considered simultaneously, ensuring that repaired IBRs meet both manufacturing specifications and operational reliability requirements.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent implements a feedback mechanism where functional performance data from testing and operation is used to validate and refine repair acceptance criteria. This ensures that repair processes not only meet geometric specifications but also deliver the required functional reliability.
3Reliability
If functional assessment constraints are added to IBR repair evaluation, then reliability is improved, but device complexity increases due to multiple analysis requirements
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the complex functional assessment into distinct, manageable components: aerodynamic assessment, structural assessment, and vibrational assessment. Each component can be evaluated independently using specialized tools and criteria, then integrated into the overall repair acceptance decision, reducing the perceived complexity of the total process.
4Reliability
If comprehensive structural and aerodynamic analysis is performed, then reliability is improved, but loss of time increases due to extended repair evaluation process
Solution Approach 1:
The patent performs preliminary functional assessments during the design and initial manufacturing phases, establishing baseline performance data and acceptance criteria before the IBR enters service. This preliminary work reduces the time required for comprehensive evaluation during repair, as much of the analytical framework is already in place.
Data Source
AI summary
A plurality of potential repair processes for a stack of IBRs may be determined. Each repair process may be associated with a defect on an inspected IBR. A finite element model of the stack of IBRs may be generated to model a potential repaired defect of each inspected IBR. The model may also include a plurality of vane stages disposed between adjacent inspected IBRs and an engine case. A structural analysis and an aerodynamic analysis may be performed. Whether the stack of IBRs with the potential repaired defect meets a structural criteria and an aerodynamic criteria may be determined. Each IBR in the stack of IBRs may be repaired with the repair process for the potential repaired defect for each inspected IBR in the stack of IBRs in response to determining the stack of IBRs meets the structural criteria and the aerodynamic criteria.