Wind Turbine Blade Subsurface Void Repair Method

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Conventional repair methods for wind turbine blades are time-consuming, labor-intensive, and result in inconsistent and suboptimal structural strength, especially for on-site repairs, as they disrupt airflow and degrade aerodynamic performance.

Innovation Solution

A method involving non-destructive defect detection, drilling fill and vent holes, injecting a flowable bonding material, and reinforcing with mechanical fasteners to create a structurally sound repair zone that maintains aerodynamic performance.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If conventional grind/over-laminate repair procedure is used, then structural strength is improved, but repair time and labor are significantly increased

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural strengthVSAvoidrepair time
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The repair process is segmented into distinct phases: drilling fill holes, injecting bonding material, drilling vent holes, and installing mechanical fasteners. This segmentation allows parallel execution of tasks and eliminates sequential dependencies present in conventional methods, reducing overall repair time while maintaining structural integrity

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Fill holes are drilled and bonding material is injected before finalizing the repair structure. This preliminary action prepares the defect zone in advance, allowing mechanical fasteners to be installed subsequently without requiring extensive surface preparation or grinding operations that would extend the repair timeline

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

2Strength

If conventional grind/over-laminate repair procedure is used, then structural strength is improved, but labor intensity is significantly increased

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural strengthVSAvoidlabor intensity
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The repair procedure is divided into discrete, manageable steps that can be performed by standard technicians without requiring specialized skills in surface preparation, grinding, or laminate application. Each segment (drilling, injecting, fastening) is straightforward and reduces dependence on highly skilled labor

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The conventional mechanical process of grinding and manual laminate application is replaced with a simplified system using drill holes, injectable bonding material, and mechanical fasteners. This substitution eliminates labor-intensive operations while ensuring consistent structural outcomes

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

3Loss of time

If drill and fill technique is used, then repair time is reduced, but structural strength and consistency are compromised

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverepair timeVSAvoidstructural strength
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The simple drill and fill approach is enhanced by segmenting the process into fill hole drilling, bonding material injection, vent hole drilling, and mechanical fastener installation. This segmentation maintains the time efficiency of the original method while adding structural reinforcement elements that ensure consistent and optimal strength

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The repair structure combines bonding material (chemical bond) with mechanical fasteners (physical connection) to create a composite repair system. This composite approach leverages both adhesive bonding and mechanical interlocking to achieve superior and consistent structural strength compared to drill and fill alone

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

4Strength

If over-laminate ply is added for additional strength, then structural strength is improved, but aerodynamic performance is degraded

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural strengthVSAvoidairflow disruption
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSObject-affected harmful factors

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of adding material in the aerodynamic flow direction (which would create surface protrusions), the repair method places mechanical fasteners and bonding material within drilled holes that are flush with the blade surface. This dimensional change moves the reinforcement elements into the subsurface, eliminating aerodynamic interference while maintaining structural strength

Inventive Principle:
Principle #17Another dimension (Dimensionality change)

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 allows for efficient, consistent, and structurally sound on-site repairs of wind turbine blades, reducing time and labor while maintaining aerodynamic performance.

Implementation Method 1

A flowable bonding material is then injected into the fill hole until the bonding material flows from the vent hole

Methodology Applied
Scientific EffectFluid flow:

Data Source

PatentUS8091229B2Method of repairing a subsurface void or damage for a wind turbine blade
Publication Date: 2012.01.10 GE INFRASTRUCTURE TECH LLC
  • US8091229B2 patent drawing
  • US8091229B2 patent drawing
  • US8091229B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A procedure for repairing subsurface defects in a shell member laminate of a wind turbine blade includes detecting the location and boundary of the subsurface defect and drilling a fill hole from an external surface of the laminate into the defect proximate to a boundary of the defect. A vent hole is drilled from the external surface of the laminate into the defect proximate to an opposite boundary from the fill hole. A flowable bonding material is injected into the fill hole until the bonding material flows from the vent hole. The repair zone is reinforced with at least one mechanical fastener defined through the laminate either within the boundary of the defect or outboard of the boundary of the defect.