Reversible Shut-off Device for Pressure Chamber Testing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current methods for testing the resistance of planar components to explosion pressure or seismic action are costly, space-intensive, and limited in simulating various pressure loads, with existing methods like field tests and shock tube tests posing safety risks and being unsuitable for all weather conditions and component sizes.
Innovation Solution
A method using a pressure chamber with a reversible shut-off device that connects to a pressure vessel, allowing for non-destructive simulation of pressure loads by opening a relief valve to control pressure and impulse, eliminating the need for explosive charges and large shock tubes, enabling testing in controlled environments and for components of various sizes.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If field tests with explosive charges are used to test component resistance to explosion pressure, then realistic explosion pressure simulation is achieved, but test cost increases and safety risks arise for surrounding areas
Solution Approach 1:
A shock tube acts as an intermediary device between the explosive charge and the test component. The explosive is contained within the shock tube, which transmits the shock wave to the component while isolating the explosion from the surrounding environment. This resolves the contradiction by maintaining realistic explosion pressure simulation while eliminating safety risks to surrounding areas.
Solution Approach 2:
The harmful explosive energy is converted into a controlled beneficial shock wave for testing purposes. The explosive charge, which could cause uncontrolled damage, is instead used to generate a predictable shock wave within the confined shock tube that can be directed at the test component. This transforms the harmful factor into a useful testing tool.
2Reliability
If shock tube tests are used to simulate explosion pressure, then controlled environment testing is enabled, but device complexity and space requirements increase significantly
Solution Approach 1:
The testing system is segmented into distinct functional modules: a pressure generation section (explosive charge area), a shock tube (transmission medium), and a test section (component mounting area). This segmentation allows each module to be optimized independently and simplifies the overall system complexity while maintaining controlled environment testing capabilities.
3Reliability
If steel sheet shut-off devices are used in shock tube tests, then pressure containment is achieved, but handling difficulty increases due to high weight and installation complexity
Solution Approach 1:
The heavy mechanical steel sheet shut-off device is replaced with a pneumatic or electronic actuation system. Lighter materials such as acrylic or aluminum sheets are used instead of thick steel, and these are actuated by pneumatic cylinders or electronic motors. This substitution maintains pressure containment reliability while dramatically improving ease of operation and reducing handling difficulties.
4Adaptability or versatility
If large diameter shock tubes are used to test larger components, then component size testing capability is improved, but space requirements and device complexity increase
Solution Approach 1:
The shock tube system is designed with dynamic, adjustable components. The shut-off devices can be repositioned, and the test section can accommodate components of various sizes by adjusting the configuration. This dynamic design allows a single facility of moderate size to test components ranging from small to large dimensions, improving adaptability without proportionally increasing space requirements.
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 approach allows for cost-effective, space-efficient, and flexible simulation of different pressure loads, enabling testing in controlled conditions regardless of weather, with the ability to quickly reset the setup for repeated tests without the need for replacing components, thus overcoming the limitations of existing methods.
Implementation Method 1
At least one pressure vessel is filled with a compressible fluid until a pressure pB prevails in the pressure vessel which is greater than an ambient pressure pU
Implementation Method 2
At least one shut-off element of a shut-off device is transferred from a blocked position to an open position, as a result of which a free connection cross section is created from the pressure vessel to the pressure chamber
Implementation Method 3
for simulating low-impulse shock waves
Data Source
AI summary
The method involves installing an element (2) in a force-transmitting, pressure-tight manner in a supporting frame (3), where the supporting frame is mounted at a wall (5), so that a pressure chamber (6) closed opposite to the environment is formed between the frame pieces of the supporting frame, the element and the wall. The transfer of a blocking element of a blocking unit takes place from the closed position in the open position in a non-destructive and reversible manner. The blocking unit is arranged in a connecting line between the pressure chamber and a pressure container. An independent claim is included for a device for testing a planar element with respect to reliability opposite to the pressure effect with a clamping portion.