Method of assessing damage to composite members

A method of assessing damage to a composite member requires the formation of a composite member comprising at least one cavity. A first pressure differential is then established between the cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure. The rate of change of the pressure differential over a first predetermined period is monitored and then the pressure differential is allowed to subside. The result of the monitoring step is stored as a reference value, so that after the composite member is damaged, or after it has been in service for a predetermined time, the test can be repeated and compared with the reference value. If the result of the repeated monitoring differs from the reference value by more than a predetermined amount, it is determined that the composite member is defective.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is a national phase entry under 35 U.S.C. § 371 of International Application No. PCT/GB2017/051647, filed Jun. 7, 2017, entitled “METHOD OF ASSESSING DAMAGE TO COMPOSITE MEMBERS,” which designated, among the various States, the United States of America, and which claims priority to GB 1610511.6 filed Jun. 16, 2016, both of which are hereby incorporated by reference.

TECHNICAL FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates to a method of assessing damage to composite members; that is to say, assessing damage to members made of composite materials, such as fibre reinforced plastics, reinforced thermoplastics, carbon-based composites and the like. In particular, but not exclusively, the invention concerns assessing damage to composite components of vehicles, especially automobiles.

BACKGROUND TO THE INVENTION

Several methods are known for assessing damage to composite members. The most well-known (and crudest) is to simply visually inspect a composite member and assess whether it appears to be damaged or not. For example after a vehicle, such as an automobile, crashes mechanics will typically visually inspect composite components, such as panels to assess whether they have been damaged. Sometimes this damage is obvious—panels will often snap and break into several pieces. At other times, structural damage can be caused that cannot be seen.

Another method for assessing damage to composite members, especially for dealing with damage to a surface which cannot be seen, caused by an impact to a surface which can be seen is described in US2009/0173139. According to this method, a structure is provided with a sensor having a body portion that has a surface provided with at least one channel, the surface of the body portion is affixed to a surface which cannot be seen, such that a conduit is formed by the channel and the second surface and a pressure differential is established between the conduit and a reference pressure adjacent the at least one conduit, then, to determine whether the surface is damaged, the pressure is monitored for a change in pressure differential of the at least one conduit.

This method suffers certain disadvantages. In particular, it calls for a sensor to be affixed to the composite panel and hermetically sealed thereto, and for the conduit formed by the sensor and the panel to be plumbed to a monitoring instrument. Moreover a differential pressure (either positive or negative) must be applied to the second surface of the composite panel.

The requirement for a sensor and a monitoring instrument to be attached and plumbed respectively to the composite panel adds weight and complexity. This is particularly important in automotive applications, but also elsewhere, because composites are typically used in place of traditional components because of their low weight, which is obviated by adding components. Moreover, many composites are already expensive to produce, so additional expense is to be avoided, and in addition, extra, non-structural components, take up space which is also frequently at a premium, especially in performance automobiles.

Finally, the prolonged application of differential pressure to one side of a component, intended by the method of US2009/0173139, which monitors for a change in state of pressure in, or flow through, the conduit, could in itself cause damage, especially where components are particularly delicate.

The present invention seeks to provide an improved method of assessing damage to composite members.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

According to a first aspect of the invention, there is provided a method of assessing damage to a composite member comprising: providing a composite member comprising at least one cavity; establishing a first pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a first predetermined period; and allowing the pressure differential to subside (preferably such that the pressure in the cavity becomes equal to ambient pressure); the method characterised by storing the result of the monitoring step as a reference value for said composite member; and repeating the steps of establishing a pressure differential between the at least one cavity of said composite member and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a predetermined period; allowing the pressure differential to subside (preferably such that the pressure in the cavity becomes equal to ambient pressure); and comparing the result of the repeated monitoring step for said composite member with the reference value for said composite member; and if the result of the repeated monitoring step differs from the reference value by more than a predetermined amount, determining that the composite member is defective.

Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the expression “composite member” means a member formed from a composite material. The composite material may comprise a reinforcement such as fibre and a binder such as resin, and may be fibre reinforced plastics, reinforced thermoplastics, carbon based composites or the like.

This method has several advantages over the prior art. For example, since the pressure differential is allowed to subside, the composite member is not kept at an elevated or reduced pressure over time; this reduces stress on the composite member. Moreover, composite members often have variable amounts of initial leakage, i.e. two identical members, both suitable for the same function may have quite different original rates of change of pressure differential over the first predetermined period, but may still both be suitable for their intended purpose—typically the function of the composite member is not to contain fluid; the cavity is only formed for test purposes. Accordingly, the initial leakage may not be a good indication of the structural integrity of the device. However, a reduction in structural integrity, caused by damage etc., will be accompanied by a substantial decrease in the rate of change of the pressure differential. Therefore, when the test is repeated, the comparison with the original value is a much better determiner of whether the component is damaged and needs replacing, than comparison with any arbitrary absolute value.

The method may comprise carrying out further checks on the acceptability of the composite member, for example by x-ray or laser shearography. Such checks may be conducted before the steps are repeated, and may be conducted before the composite member is installed in a vehicle, such as an automobile, they may be carried out before the initial monitoring step.

Conducting such additional steps, which are normally used to assess damage can act as an additional backup to ensure that parts of the composite member that might be defective owing to an error in the manufacturing process can be detected in addition to detecting defects caused over time.

For example, as another further check, the method may comprise measuring the rate of pressure increase when establishing a first pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure. A particularly high rate may indicate blocked cavities/pipes (or connection to the wrong component) and a low rate of increase could indicate cracks/apertures or again connection to the wrong component. Moreover, the method may comprise comparing the rate of establishing a first pressure differential with a previously established reference value for establishing the first pressure differential. The method may comprise establishing a reference value for rate of increase, by monitoring the rate of pressure increase over a predetermined period as a compressed fluid is introduced into the component to establish the first pressure differential.

The first pressure differential may be a predetermined pressure differential.

The repeated pressure differential may be the same as the first pressure differential.

The repeated period may be the same as the first predetermined period.

The result of the monitoring step may be stored as a differential pressure value reached after the predetermined period.

The result of the monitoring step may be stored as a rate of change of pressure differential.

The method may comprise putting the composite member into active use after storing the reference value and before repeating the steps of establishing a pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a predetermined period; and comparing the result of the repeated monitoring step with the reference value.

The characterising steps may be repeated after an incident, e.g., if the composite member is a component of a vehicle, after that vehicle has been involved in a crash. This is useful for ascertaining whether non-visible damage has been caused by the crash and determining whether it is necessary to replace a part.

The characterising steps may be repeated after a predetermined period, e.g. after the composite member has been in service for a predetermined time.

For example, the method may comprise waiting at least one day after storing the reference value and before repeating the steps of establishing a pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a predetermined period; and comparing the result of the repeated monitoring step with the reference value.

Alternatively, the method may comprise waiting at least one week after storing the reference value and before repeating the steps of establishing a pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a predetermined period; and comparing the result of the repeated monitoring step with the reference value.

Alternatively, the method may comprise waiting at least one month after storing the reference value and before repeating the steps of establishing a pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a predetermined period; and comparing the result of the repeated monitoring step with the reference value.

Alternatively, the method may comprise waiting at least one year after storing the reference value and before repeating the steps of establishing a pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a predetermined period; and comparing the result of the repeated monitoring step with the reference value.

The characterising steps may be repeated according to a service schedule, e.g. if the composite member is a component of a vehicle, after that vehicle has travelled a predetermined number of miles.

The characterising steps may be repeated more than once, in accordance with a service schedule. These options are useful for determining whether non-visible damage has been caused over time, for example due to fatigue loading.

The reference value may be stored electronically, for example in a manufacturer's database and may be accessible via an internet, intranet, or the like. Alternatively, the reference value may be stored manually and printed on, or attached to the component.

The method may be applied to a plurality of composite members, and each reference value may be associated with a unique ID associated with the respective one of the plurality of composite members.

The reference value may be compared to a threshold value (e.g. a maximum reduction in pressure over the first predetermined period, or a maximum average rate of change of pressure over the first predetermined period) and if it exceeds the threshold value, the respective component may be rejected for use.

The method may comprise the step of determining that the composite member is defective if the reference value exceeds a predetermined absolute threshold value.

The method may further comprise the steps of, after storing the result of the monitoring step as a reference value, installing the composite member as a component part of a vehicle, and storing the reference value in a database associated with the vehicle in which the part is installed.

The method may comprise the steps of: establishing a first pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a first predetermined period; and allowing the pressure differential to subside; and storing the result of the monitoring step as a reference value prior to installation of the composite member in a vehicle and/or after installation in a vehicle.

The method may further comprise the steps of repairing or replacing a defective component comprising a cavity; and establishing a first pressure differential between the at least one cavity in the replaced/repaired component and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a first predetermined period; and allowing the pressure differential to subside; and storing the result of the monitoring step as a new reference value.

The method may comprise replacing the reference value in the database with the new reference value.

The method may comprise repeating the steps of establishing a pressure differential between the at least one cavity and the surrounding ambient pressure; monitoring the rate of change of the pressure differential over a predetermined period; and allowing the pressure differential to subside; then comparing the result of the repeated monitoring step with the new reference value; and if the result of the repeated monitoring step differs from the reference value by more than a predetermined amount, determining that the composite member is defective.

The pressure differential may be established by pumping a fluid into the cavity. The fluid may be air, water or helium.

The cavity may be formed in a region where damage to the composite member would be critical to its safe function.

The composite member may be a component of an automobile body.

The composite member may be a component of an automobile chassis structure.

Alternatively, and preferably, the composite member may be a wheel or a component of a wheel, in particular an automotive wheel.

The composite member may be a component of a vehicle other than an automobile, such as part of an aeroplane, for example, a rib of a wing. Alternatively, the composite member may be a different structure, or component of a structure/system; it could even extend to composite materials such as reinforced concrete, in which case, the composite member could be a bridge, a building, or a component of a bridge or building.

A second aspect of the invention provides a test apparatus comprising a connector for connection to an opening of a cavity of a composite member, apparatus for creating a pressure differential between the cavity and the surrounding environment, a sensor for sensing a change in pressure differential, and a processor adapted to implement the method set out above, optionally including the optional features thereof.

As illustrated inFIG. 1, an exemplary composite member1, which may be assessed by the method of the invention comprises a body, in this case of cuboid form, formed from a composite material, such as fibre reinforced plastics, reinforced thermoplastics, carbon based composites or the like by conventional means. Within the body, a cavity2is formed. In the particular example, the cavity2is formed as a network of connected tubes. The tubes are strategically placed adjacent to regions of the composite member where damage would be critical to its safe function.

At one corner of the composite member1, an opening3is formed, which comprises a suitable socket (not shown), e.g. with a screw thread, into which the e.g. externally threaded connector of the tubing4of a test apparatus5can be connected. The test apparatus comprises a compressor6connected to tubing4, which is also provided with a pressure sensor7. The pressure sensor7is shown schematically as an analogue gauge, but in practice, the method is preferably automated, in which case, both the measurement of pressure and the pumping of fluid into the composite member1would be computer controlled by a monitoring unit8as shown inFIG. 3.

The monitoring unit8comprises a communications unit9, which sends signals to the compressor6and receives signals from the pressure sensor7(for example through a wired connection, WIFI® or the like; a processor10, which processes the signals received from the sensor7, and other inputs11, e.g. user actuable input device, such as a mouse, button, or touch screen, or barcode/RFID scanner according to instructions saved in a memory12. The processor10outputs information to a database, which may be stored, for example in “the cloud”13.

The monitoring unit8is operable to carry out the method20described below, with reference toFIG. 4.

According to the method20of an embodiment of the invention shown inFIG. 4, once a composite member1is formed with a cavity therein, at step21, an operator, e.g. in the quality control department of a manufacturer connects the test apparatus to the composite member, then at step22the leak performance of the component is measured. To measure the leak performance, the processor10sends a signal via the communications unit9to the compressor6to cause it to pump compressed fluid, in this case air, into the component1, simultaneously the processor10monitors the pressure in the component as sensed by the sensor7and, once a predetermined pressure P1is reached (whereby a pressure differential between the cavity and the surrounding air pressure has been generated), the processor10sends a signal to the compressor6causing it to cease from pumping air into the composite member1. The test apparatus5then monitors the rate of change of the pressure differential over a first predetermined period T1, of course the precise rate of change may not be linear, but as defined herein, the rate of change of the pressure differential is to be understood broadly, including an estimated average rate of change of the pressure differential, which may be obtained by subtracting the pressure P2at the end of the predetermined period from the predetermined pressure P1at the start of the predetermined period and dividing by the predetermined period T1.

In step23, the estimated average rate of change of pressure differential is then compared with a threshold value and if it exceeds the threshold value—i.e. if the rate of change is higher than the threshold value, in step24, the part is rejected for use.

The threshold value may be dependent on ambient pressure, which may be estimated and input to the monitoring unit8via the input11, such as a user actuable input device and stored in memory12, or may be determined by the sensor7when it is not connected to a composite member, e.g. as part of a start-up process. Varying the threshold value according to the ambient pressure allows for the difference in the rate of change of pressure differential which would occur for the same component at the same original pressure P1, because the initial differential will be higher where ambient pressure is lower (e.g. at higher altitude).

If, in step23it is determined that the estimated average rate of change of the pressure differential does not exceed a threshold value (which could be achieved simply by comparing the pressure at the end of the predetermined period P2with a threshold pressure, given that the predetermined pressure and the predetermined period are known), it is determined that the leak performance of the composite member meets the minimum requirement and further processing may continue.

Thus, the pressure differential may be allowed to subside by disconnecting the test apparatus5, opening a valve, or (least preferably) simply waiting. Then, at step25the result of the monitoring step23is stored as a reference value. Of course, it will be appreciated that there are many different ways of storing the reference value—for example, the final pressure value could be stored, the rate of change of pressure could be stored, or a more comprehensive set of data could be stored, for example, the predetermined period T1, the predetermined pressure P1the pressure P2at the end of the predetermined period and the ambient pressure where the test was conducted.

As set out inFIG. 4, step25, at the same time as recording the test result as a reference value, a serial number (ID number) can be assigned to the component. This could be written to an RFID tag, or the like on the component, or could be printed and applied to the component. Alternatively, the component could already have a serial number stored in a database, for example in an intranet or cloud13and the reference value could be stored in a field associated with that serial number.

In the present embodiment of the invention, at step26, the composite member is installed in a vehicle (in other embodiments, the composite member may take on a different role) and an optional process27is followed. In this optional process for vehicles, in particular automobiles (not shown), after installation at step26, in step28the composite member1is once again connected to the test apparatus5.

Thereafter, in step29, the leak performance of the component is measured once again. The same process that was carried out before installation in the vehicle is carried out again: that is to say, to measure the leak performance, the processor10sends a signal via the communications unit9to the compressor6to cause it to pump compressed fluid, in this case air, into the component1, simultaneously the processor10monitors the pressure in the component as sensed by the sensor7and, once a predetermined pressure P1is reached (whereby a pressure differential between the cavity and the surrounding air pressure has been generated), the processor10sends a signal to the compressor6causing it to cease from pumping air into the composite member1. The test apparatus5then monitors the rate of change of the pressure differential over a first predetermined period T1. Once again, the rate of change may again be obtained by subtracting the pressure P3at the end of the predetermined period from the predetermined pressure P1at the start of the predetermined period and dividing by the predetermined period T1.

Then, in the final step of the optional process27for composite members which are installed as component parts, for example of automobiles, at step30, the test result is recorded and referenced to the vehicle as well as the serial number of the part. Thus, an operator may, for example, scan an RFID tag associated with the vehicle and having the vehicle's VIN and/or an internal serial number associated with it, or the test apparatus may be provided with an appropriate sensor as an input device11to read this information and the result of the test may be uploaded to a database s stored for example in an intranet or cloud13.

A further optional step in the optional process27, not shown inFIG. 4may also be carried out after step29, whereby the result of the leak detection test carried out at step29on the installed component is compared to the result of the initial testing carried out before installation at step23and, if the results differ by more than a predetermined amount, it is determined that the component has been damaged during installation and is rejected and removed from the vehicle to be replaced by a new component, which will have been tested in the same way.

The composite member1is then put into active use.

As set out in step31, based on usage or misuse, at some time after the composite member is put into use, it is retested. The retesting step may be repeated after an incident, e.g., if the composite member is a component of a vehicle, after that vehicle has been involved in a collision, accident, fire or the like, after a predetermined period, e.g. after the composite member has been in service for a predetermined time, or according to a service schedule, e.g. especially if the composite member is a component of a vehicle, after that vehicle has travelled a predetermined number of miles; whichever is earliest.

In the preferred embodiment, the same test equipment5is used to carry out the repeated test31and the same initial pressure P1, the same pressure differential and the same predetermined period T1is used. Of course, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the test could be modified if a different period/differential pressure was used, an anticipation of different results. However, in the embodiment the same process is used, whereby the processor10sends a signal via the communications unit9to the compressor6to cause it to pump compressed fluid, in this case air, into the component1, simultaneously the processor10monitors the pressure in the component as sensed by the sensor7and, once a predetermined pressure P1is reached (whereby a pressure differential between the cavity and the surrounding air pressure has been generated), the processor10sends a signal to the compressor6causing it to cease from pumping air into the composite member1. The test apparatus5then monitors the rate of change of the pressure differential over the same first predetermined period T1, and obtains a new result by subtracting the pressure P4at the end of the predetermined period from the predetermined pressure P1at the start of the predetermined period and dividing by the predetermined period T1.

At step32, the result of this repeated monitoring step is compared with the reference value, i.e. the original value. In the case of a composite member which is installed as a component part, in which the optional process27is completed, the original value, or reference value, against which the new result is compared may either be the result stored prior to installation at step25, or that stored after installation at step30. Of course, in an ideal situation, those two original values should be the same.

In order to compare the results, the processor obtains the serial number of the composite member1from the (e.g. user actuable) input device11, and reads the reference value from the database stored for example in the cloud13, and subtracts that result from the result of the repeated step31. The result of this subtraction is then compared to a threshold amount in step33, and if it is less than the threshold amount, it is determined that the composite member is in satisfactory condition.

In this case, as shown in step34, the part remains installed and in service. And the flow chart returns to step31, whereby the characterising steps of repeating the measurement and computing with a reference value continue to be repeated more than once, in accordance with a service schedule or until another incident, e.g. a crash, requires that the composite member1is retested.

On the other hand, if at step33it is determined that the result of subtracting the reference value from the test value is greater than the predetermined threshold amount, then the composite member1is identified as defective step35determines that the part requires repair or replacement. In the case of a composite member1which is not a component part, this will be the final step, the composite member1will be disposed of, or repaired, and if repaired it will be treated as a new component returning to step21.

In the case of a composite member according to the present embodiment, which is a component part of a vehicle, such as an automobile, a new part (or the repaired part) will be fitted to the vehicle at step36. This new/repaired composite member1, will of course have been tested in accordance with steps21-26and have had a reference value stored against its serial number.

The new/repaired part will then be tested in a similar fashion as conducted in optional process27, whereby, in step37the composite member1is once again connected to the test apparatus5.

Thereafter, in step38, the leak performance of the component is measured once again. The same process that was carried out before installation in the vehicle is carried out again: that is to say, to measure the leak performance, the processor10sends a signal via the communications unit9to the compressor6to cause it to pump compressed fluid, in this case air, into the component1, simultaneously the processor10monitors the pressure in the component as sensed by the sensor7and, once a predetermined pressure P1is reached (whereby a pressure differential between the cavity and the surrounding air pressure has been generated), the processor10sends a signal to the compressor6causing it to cease from pumping air into the composite member1. The test apparatus5then monitors the rate of change of the pressure differential over a first predetermined period T1. The rate of change may again be obtained by subtracting the pressure P5at the end of the predetermined period from the predetermined pressure P1at the start of the predetermined period and dividing by the predetermined period T1.

Then, at step39, the test result is recorded and referenced to the vehicle as well as the serial number of the part. Thus, an operator may, for example, scan an RFID tag associated with the vehicle and having the vehicle's VIN and/or an internal serial number associated with it, or the test apparatus may be provided with an appropriate sensor as an input device11to read this information and the result of the test may be uploaded to a database stored for example in an intranet or cloud13as a reference value.

A further optional step in the optional process27, not shown inFIG. 4may also be carried out after step38, whereby the result of the leak detection test carried out at step38on the installed component is compared to the result of the initial testing carried out before installation and, if the results differ by more than a predetermined amount, it is determined that the component has been damaged during installation and is rejected and removed from the vehicle to be replaced by a new component, which will have been tested in the same way.

The composite member1is then put into active use once again and the cycle of testing, steps31-34, continues indefinitely.

Additionally and not mentioned in the flow sheet inFIG. 4, further tests may be conducted prior to installing the component at step26, or even prior to conducting the test at step21, in order to ensure that the components are satisfactory in areas where existing damage, caused e.g. by defects in the manufacturing process may not be detected by the test carried out at step23. Such tests include x-ray and/or laser shearography, both of which are well known to those skilled in the art of testing composite materials.

As set out above, in view of the fact that the cavity2formed in the composite member1is only for testing purposes and fluid-tightness is not an essential function of many composite members1, which may be formed of materials which are inherently permeable, there can be a wide variation of initial leakage. Accordingly, carrying out subsequent tests to check the fluid-tightness against the original fluid-tightness provides a much better indication of whether the composite member is damaged than checking against an arbitrary threshold for fluid-tightness and provides a much better indication of whether the structural integrity of the composite member has deteriorated between the point of original testing and the point of repetition.

The above embodiment is described by way of example only. Many variations are possible without departing from the scope of the invention as defined in the appended claims.