Tire Retreadability Screening Using Chemical and Physical Degradation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing methods for evaluating the residual durability of base tires for retreading are limited, as they only consider chemical degradation states and do not account for internal physical damage, leading to inaccuracies in determining whether a tire can withstand use after retreading.

Innovation Solution

A retreadability determination method and apparatus that acquire state characteristic values to perform both chemical and physical degradation state determinations, allowing for a comprehensive evaluation of a tire's residual durability by considering both chemical changes in rubber materials and physical damage to the tire.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If only chemical degradation state determination is performed, then the evaluation process is simple, but the accuracy of residual durability evaluation is insufficient

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of residual durability evaluationVSAvoidcomplexity of determination process
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The determination process is segmented into two distinct determination steps: first determination (chemical degradation state) and second determination (physical degradation state). This segmentation allows the system to evaluate different degradation aspects separately and comprehensively, improving measurement precision without creating an overly complex unified process.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adjusts the determination process based on the outcome of the first determination. The second determination is executed conditionally - only when the first determination indicates the tire can be retreaded. This dynamic approach optimizes the evaluation process by avoiding unnecessary second determinations for tires that already fail the first assessment.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If both chemical and physical degradation state determinations are performed, then the accuracy of retreadability determination is improved, but the determination process becomes more complex

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvereliability of retreadability determinationVSAvoidcomplexity of determination process
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The chemical degradation state determination (first determination) is performed as a preliminary step before the physical degradation state determination (second determination). This preliminary action filters out tires that clearly fail chemical degradation criteria, preventing unnecessary complexity in the overall process while ensuring comprehensive evaluation for tires that proceed to the second determination.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The determination process is designed to be dynamic and adaptive. The execution of the second determination is contingent upon the result of the first determination, creating a flexible workflow that adjusts complexity based on actual tire conditions rather than applying a fixed complex process to all cases.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

3Measurement precision

If comprehensive evaluation including physical damage is performed, then the accuracy of determining whether the tire can withstand use after retreading is improved, but the evaluation time increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveaccuracy of retreadability determinationVSAvoidtime for determination process
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The first determination serves as a preliminary filter that quickly assesses chemical degradation state. By performing this assessment first, the system can eliminate tires that fail this criterion without requiring the more time-consuming second determination, thus reducing overall evaluation time while maintaining comprehensive evaluation for qualifying tires.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The evaluation process is dynamically structured to minimize time loss. The conditional execution of the second determination ensures that comprehensive evaluation is performed only when necessary - specifically when the first determination indicates the tire meets retreadability criteria. This dynamic approach balances thoroughness with efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Data Source

PatentUS20250180437A1Retreading possibility determination method and retreading possibility device
Publication Date: 2025.06.05 BRIDGESTONE CORP
  • US20250180437A1 patent drawing
  • US20250180437A1 patent drawing
  • US20250180437A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A retreadability determination method includes a step (S1) of acquiring a state characteristic value, indicating a state of the tire, to be used in a first determination and a second determination, a step (S2) of executing the first determination, and a step (S9) of executing the second determination in a case in which it is determined in the first determination that the tire can be retreaded. The first determination is one of a chemical degradation state determination using a residual durability of the base tire calculated based on a chemical change in rubber material of the tire and a physical degradation state determination using a residual durability of the base tire calculated based on a state of physical damage to the tire, and the second determination is the other of the chemical degradation state determination and the physical degradation state determination.