Multi-disciplinary optimization-enabled design automation and optimization for pressure-controlling components

A multi-disciplinary optimization (MDO) framework and workflow facilitates analysis and optimization of set of designs of a pressure-controlling component. The MDO workflow generally enables design workflow integration and automation, which can improve engineering efficiency, and enables automated optimization within the workflow automation, which facilitates performance and reliability improvement for product development. The MDO workflow enables the integration of computer-aided design (CAD), finite element analysis (FEA), digital manufacturing simulation (DMS), and optimization packages to facilitate testing and optimization of a set of pressure-controlling component designs. As such, the MDO framework and workflow improve the efficiency of the design process by providing a scalable solution for automating aspects of the design process for a set of designs of a pressure-controlling component, which may represent a product family or a set of competing alternative designs.

BACKGROUND

A blowout preventer (BOP) is installed on a wellhead to seal and control an oil and gas well during various operations. For example, during drilling operations, a drill string may be suspended from a rig through the BOP into a wellbore. A drilling fluid is delivered through the drill string and returned up through an annulus between the drill string and a casing that lines the wellbore. In the event of a rapid invasion of formation fluid in the annulus, commonly known as a “kick,” the BOP may be actuated to seal the annulus and to contain fluid pressure in the wellbore, thereby protecting well equipment positioned above the BOP.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC EMBODIMENTS

A blowout preventer is a large valve that encases an oil well on the surface. During operation, the valve may be closed while drilling if overpressure from a reservoir causes formation of fluids, such as oil and natural gas, to back up within the wellbore. A pipe ram is an important component of the BOP system, as the pipe ram is designed to seal around a drill pipe to restrict the flow in an annulus defined between an outside of the drill pipe and the wellbore. When a pipe ram is being designed, it is typically designed as part of a product family of pipe rams having different configurations to suit a variety of drill pipe sizes. For example, within a pipe ram product family, there may be more than one hundred different pipe ram designs to accommodate a wide variety of different drill pipe sizes.

To assure their structural integrity under service loads, pipe rams are typically designed to meet one or more standards, such as the stress requirements per the American Petroleum Institute (API) Specification 16A and ASME (American Society of Mechanical Engineers) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section VIII, Division 2. With a conventional manual design workflow, considerable time and effort is expended to test all the designs of the product family for compliance with the relevant standards. Therefore, to improve the efficiency of the design process, it is presently recognized that it would be beneficial to have a scalable solution for testing entire product families or an entire set of alternative designs of a pressure-controlling component.

With the foregoing in mind, present embodiments are directed to a multi-disciplinary optimization (MDO) workflow to facilitate analysis and optimization of a set of designs of a pressure-controlling component. The MDO workflow generally enables design workflow integration and automation, which can improve engineering efficiency, and enables automated optimization within the workflow automation, which facilitates performance and reliability improvement for product development. The disclosed MDO workflow generally enables multi-code integration, computer-aided engineering (CAE) workflow automation, optimization, and design-space exploration. More specifically, the MDO workflow enables the integration of computer-aided design (CAD), finite element analysis (FEA), digital manufacturing simulation (DMS), and optimization packages to facilitate testing and optimization of a set of pressure-controlling component designs. In certain embodiments, the set of designs may represent at least a portion of product family of pressure-controlling components having the same general design or feature, but having different dimensions and/or geometries to accommodate drilling pipes of different sizes. In other embodiments, the set of designs may represent a set of alternative pressure-controlling component designs that are being evaluated to determine which design should be selected for further development based on one or more objectives (e.g., minimized material cost; minimized manufacturing cost; maximized performance; maximized operational lifetime).

To facilitate discussion, the MDO technique is described in the particular context of design and testing of pipe rams of a BOP. However, it should be appreciated that the systems and methods described herein may be adapted for the design and testing of other pressure-controlling components or equipment, such as another component of the BOP for the drilling system and/or another component of another device for any type of drilling system. For example, in certain embodiments, the MDO technique set forth herein may be applied to evaluate and optimize sets of designs of other types of rams, including shear rams and variable-bore rams.

As discussed below, the MDO workflow generally involves a MDO system that orchestrates the design and analysis of a set of pressure-controlling component designs. The MDO system receives a master template from a CAD system, wherein the master template is parametrized to represent an entire set of pressure-controlling component designs. The MDO system provides the master template and one or more operational conditions as input to a FEA system to perform simulated testing of the designs of the master template. The FEA system automatically generates a corresponding FEA model for each design/operational condition combination, uses these FEA models to simulate operation of each design in each operational condition, and performs post-processing of the results of these simulations to determine pass-fail statuses. The MDO system also provides the master template and information regarding one or more manufacturing materials to a DMS system. The DMS system automatically performs an analysis of the manufacturability and a predicted cost associated with each design of the master template using the one or more material options and/or one or more tolerances. The MDO system receives results from the FEA system and the DMS system, and provides these results to a report system. The report system receives the results, analyzes the results of FEA simulation and DMS analysis for each design, and prepares suitable reports for each design of the master template. For example, the reports may include FEA reports indicating the pass-fail status of each design in each operational condition, and DMS reports indicating the fully burdened cost of manufacturing each design in one or more materials and at one or more different tolerances. In certain embodiments, such as when the master template includes a set of alternative designs to be evaluated, the report system may rank the designs of the master template based on one or more objectives. For example, the report system may rank the designs of the master template based on the pass-fail statuses of each design indicated in the FEA results, based on minimizing and manufacturing cost indicated in the DMS reports, or any other suitable manufacturing objective.

With the foregoing in mind, the MDO technique substantially enhances efficiency and consistency in performing FEA modeling, performing DMS modeling, and producing reports based on these analyses. The MDO technique also enables automatic comparison of designs based on simulated operational performance and predicted manufacturing cost, which enables an efficient design and optimization process for pressure-controlling components. As such, embodiments of the MDO technique significantly improve the performance and reliability of pressure-controlling components, while also minimizing development and production costs.

With the foregoing in mind,FIG.1is a block diagram of an embodiment of a mineral extraction system10. The mineral extraction system10may be configured to extract various minerals and natural resources, including hydrocarbons (e.g., oil and/or natural gas), from the earth and/or to inject substances into the earth. The mineral extraction system10may be a land-based system (e.g., a surface system) or an offshore system (e.g., an offshore platform system).

As shown, a BOP stack12may be mounted to a wellhead14, which is coupled to a mineral deposit16via a wellbore18. The wellhead14may include or be coupled to any of a variety of other components such as a spool, a hanger, and a “Christmas” tree. The wellhead14may return drilling fluid or mud toward a surface during drilling operations, for example. Downhole operations are carried out by a conduit20(e.g., drill string) that extends through a central bore22of the BOP stack12, through the wellhead14, and into the wellbore18. As discussed in more detail below, the BOP stack12may include one or more BOPs24. To facilitate discussion, the BOP stack12and its components may be described with reference to a vertical axis or direction30, an axial axis or direction32, and/or a lateral axis or direction34.

FIG.2is a cross-sectional top view of a portion of an embodiment of the BOP24that may be used in the mineral extraction system10ofFIG.1, in accordance with an embodiment of the present disclosure. As shown, the BOP24includes opposed rams50that are positioned such that the BOP24is in an open configuration54. In the open configuration54, the opposed rams50are withdrawn from the central bore22, do not contact the conduit20, and/or do not contact one another.

As shown, the BOP24includes a housing56surrounding the central bore22. The housing56is generally rectangular in the illustrated embodiment, although the housing56may have any cross-sectional shape, including any polygonal shape and/or annular shape. Bonnet assemblies60are mounted on opposite sides of the housing56(e.g., via threaded fasteners). Each bonnet assembly60supports an actuator62, which may include a piston64and a connecting rod66. The actuators62may drive the opposed rams50toward one another along the axial axis32to reach a closed position in which the opposed rams50are positioned within the central bore22, contact and/or shear the conduit20to seal the central bore22, and/or contact one another to seal the central bore22.

Each of the opposed rams50may include a body68(e.g., ram body) that includes a leading surface70(e.g., side; portion; wall) and a rearward surface72(e.g., side; portion; wall; rearmost surface). The leading surfaces70may be positioned proximate to the central bore22and may face one another when the opposed rams50are installed within the housing56. The rearward surfaces72may be positioned distal from the central bore22and proximate to a respective one of the actuators62when the opposed rams50are installed within the housing56. The leading surfaces70may be configured to couple to and/or support sealing elements (e.g., elastomer elements) that are configured to form a seal to seal the central bore22in the closed position, and the rearward surfaces72may include an attachment interface74(e.g., recess) that is configured to engage with the connecting rod66of the actuator62. The body68also includes lateral surfaces76(e.g., walls) that are on opposite lateral sides of the body68and that extend along the axial axis32between the leading surface70and the rearward surface72. InFIG.2, the opposed rams50have a generally rectangular shape to facilitate discussion; however, it should be appreciated that the opposed rams50may have any of a variety of shapes or features (e.g., curved portions to seal against the conduit20; knife edges to shear the conduit20).

FIG.3is a perspective front view andFIG.4is a perspective rear view of an embodiment of one of the opposed rams50that may be used in the BOP. As shown, the ram50includes the body68having the leading surface70and the rearward surface72. The ram50inFIGS.3and4is a pipe ram that includes one or more curved portions77formed in the leading surface70and that extends along the lateral axis34of the ram50. The curved portions77may be configured to couple to and/or support the seal elements that seal against the conduit that extends through the central bore of the BOP. However, it should be appreciated that the ram50may have any of a variety of other configurations (e.g., the ram50may be a shear ram that includes a knife edge that is formed on the leading surface70and that extends along the lateral axis34of the ram50). The ram inFIGS.3and4also includes leading cutouts78formed in the leading surface70(e.g., positioned near or between the curved portions77along the vertical axis30). The body68may include a solid portion80(e.g., block portion; center portion) between the leading surface70and the rearward surface72along the axial axis32, between the lateral surfaces76along the lateral axis34, and between a top surface82(e.g., top-most surface) and a bottom surface84(e.g., bottom-most surface) along the vertical axis30. The leading surface70, the rearward surface72, the lateral surfaces76, the top surface82, and the bottom surface84may be considered outer surfaces of the ram50.

Additionally, it may be appreciated that the ram50illustrated inFIGS.3and4may represent a family of related rams of similar design. That is, as the ram50is being designed, it may be developed as part of a line or design family of rams50having similar general features. For example, within a particular design family of the ram50, a set of similar rams may be manufactured that have different dimensions to accommodate conduits of different dimensions. For example, as illustrated inFIG.3, different designs within a design or product family of the ram50may have a different length85along the axis32, different thicknesses86and88of portions of the leading surface70, different angles90,92, or94between portions of the leading surface70, a different distance96around (e.g., partial circumference of) the curved portions77. It may be appreciated that any other suitable dimension of the pressure-controlling component may be varied over a line or family of related pressure-controlling components. For example, a product family of a given pipe ram design may include dozens of designs having different dimensions and/or geometries to handle conduits (e.g., drill pipes) having sizes ranging from about 8.9 centimeters (3.5 inches) to about 16.8 centimeters (6.625 inches).

MDO Framework

As noted above, multi-disciplinary optimization (MDO) generally involves integration of multiple software packages utilized in the design process, computer aided engineering (CAE), workflow automation, design-space exploration, and optimization.FIG.5illustrates an embodiment of a MDO framework100, in accordance with embodiments of the present disclosure. As used herein, the term “framework” refers to a collection of software and data resources (e.g., software applications, libraries, databases), as well as hardware resources (e.g., memory circuitry, processing circuitry, networking circuitry), that cooperate to enable a MDO workflow102for design automation.

For the embodiment illustrated inFIG.5, the MDO framework100includes a MDO system104. For the illustrated embodiment, the MDO system104coordinates operation of the various systems of the MDO framework100to perform the MDO workflow102. More specifically, the MDO system104orchestrates operations between a CAD system106, a FEA system108, a DMS system110, and a report system112to perform the MDO workflow102. For the illustrated embodiment, the MDO system104, the FEA system108, the DMS system110, and the report system112each include respective memory circuitry114and respective processing circuitry116. However, in other embodiments, one or more systems of the MDO framework100may be hosted on the same computing device (e.g., a common server), and may share memory and/or processing resources.

The memory circuitry114of the MDO system104may store, and the processing circuitry116of the MDO system104may execute, a suitable MDO software application to coordinate the activities of the other systems of the MDO framework100. In certain embodiments, the MDO software application may include, but is not limited to: Optislang™ (available from ANSYS), iSight™ (available from Dassault Systèmes), HEEDS® (available from Siemens Industry Software, Inc.), or OpenMDAO (available from NASA Glenn Research Center). In certain embodiments, the MDO system104may be implemented as a collection of customized scripts (e.g., execution requesting scripts; data exchange scripts; optimization scripts) that are executed to coordinate operation of the other systems of the MDO framework100, which may enable greater efficiency and reduced overhead compared to embodiments that utilize a commercial MDO software application. It may be appreciated that such implementations may enable the disclosed MDO framework100and/or MDO workflow102to be applied beyond the design stage (e.g., design space exploration and optimization), such that the MDO framework100can, additionally or alternatively, be used to model and optimize other aspects of production (e.g., operations). As such, the MDO system104enables design workflow integration and automation, which can be used for improving engineering efficiency. Additionally, the MDO system enables automated optimization capability that is built on top of workflow automation, which renders performance and reliability improvement for product development.

The memory circuitry114of the FEA system108may store, and the processing circuitry116of the FEA system108may execute, a suitable FEA software application to perform FEA modeling and simulated testing of the designs in different operational conditions. In certain embodiments, the FEA software application may include Abaqus Unified FEA—SIMULIA™ (available from Dassault Systemes), Mechanical Simulation™ (available from ANSYS), Simcenter Nastran™ (available from Siemens Industry Software, Inc.), or another suitable FEA modeling and simulation application. The memory circuitry114of the DMS system110may store, and the processing circuitry116of the DMS system110may execute, a suitable DMS software application to perform DMS modeling to determine cost-related information regarding each design represented within the master template118. In certain embodiments, the DMS software application may include TechniQuote™ (available from CETIM), aPriori™ (available from aPriori, Inc.), a proprietary manufacturability analysis application, or another suitable DMS application.

During operation of the MDO framework100, the MDO system104receives a master template118of a pressure-controlling component (e.g., ram50) from the CAD system106. An example method whereby the CAD system106generates the master template118is discussed below with respect toFIG.6. In general, the master template118is a CAD model that has been suitably parameterized to represent an entire set of designs. In certain cases, the master template118may represent a product family of designs having similar features, but with different geometries and/or dimensions (e.g., to accommodate different sizes of the conduit20). In such cases, the MDO framework100may be configured to perform FEA modeling and/or DMS modeling to evaluate the performance and cost of each design in the product family represented within the master template118. In other cases, the master template118may include a set of alternative candidate designs with different features. In such cases, the MDO framework100may be configured to perform FEA modeling and/or DMS modeling to evaluate the performance and cost of each alternative design represented within the master template118. Additionally, for such embodiments, the MDO framework100may provide a ranked set of the alternative designs based on one or more objectives (e.g., maximizing compliance with a standard, minimizing materials and/or manufacturing costs) to enable automation of aspects of the design process.

After receiving the master template118from the CAD system106, the MDO system104automatically queues FEA modeling (block120) by the FEA system and automatically queues DMS modeling (block122) by the DMS system110for each design represented within the master template118. An example of a FEA modeling process of the FEA system108is discussed with respect toFIG.7, and an example of a DMS modeling process of the DMS system110is discussed with respect toFIG.14. The MDO system104also automatically queues report generation (block124) for each design represented within the master template118based on results generated by the FEA modeling and the DMS modeling. An example of a report generation process is discussed with respect toFIG.15.

It may be appreciated that embodiments of the MDO framework100are highly-distributed for enhanced efficiency. For example, the MDO system104enables the FEA modeling and DMS modeling of a particular design to be performed in parallel. Similarly, the FEA system108and the DMS system110may be configured to simultaneously model more than one design (e.g., all of the designs of the master template118) in parallel. Furthermore, the MDO system104optimizes the exchange of data between the systems of the MDO framework100, meaning that results from the FEA modeling or DMS modeling of a given design are provided to the report system112as they are generated, which enables the report system112to immediately being generating reports as soon as the FEA and/or DMS results are provided to the MDO system104.

Master Template Generation

FIG.6is a flow diagram illustrating an embodiment of a master template generation process130whereby the CAD system106of the MDO framework100generates the master template118as part of the MDO workflow102. In certain embodiments, the CAD system106receives or accesses a component or product database132that stores properties (e.g., material properties; geometries; dimensions) of pressure-controlling components (e.g., ram50). For the illustrated embodiment, the CAD system106first performs (block134) rationalization on a set of pressure-controlling component designs from the component database132to generate a rationalization dataset136. As used herein, “rationalization” refers to the process of grouping similar components into families by comparing their standard feature geometries (e.g., dimensions; tolerances; surfaces). The resulting rationalization dataset136serves as an information database for a number of existing and/or theoretical components, highlighting the common features shared between them, and defining ranges of parameter values to explain variation in the size and configuration of those features.

For the illustrated embodiment, the master template generation process130continues with the CAD system106performing parameterization (block138), based on the rationalization dataset, to generate the master template118. As used herein, “parameterization” refers to the process of identifying and classifying all relevant parameters of the designs to be represented by the master template118. For example, for the ram50discussed above with respect toFIG.3, these parameters may include different lengths85along the axis32, different thicknesses86and88of portions of the leading surface70, different angles90,92, or94between portions of the leading surface70, different distances96around (e.g., partial circumference of) the curved portions77, and so forth. In certain embodiments, each of these parameter values may be classified by a designer as being either fixed, logic driven (e.g., via equations), or direct user inputs. As such, the resulting master template118is a parameterized, three-dimensional CAD model in which these parameter values are determined based on the classification of each parameter.

FEA Modeling

FIG.7is a flow diagram illustrating an embodiment of a FEA modeling process150whereby the FEA system108of the MDO framework100performs FEA modeling of the designs represented within the master template118as part of the MDO workflow102. For the illustrated embodiment, the FEA system108receives the master template118from the MDO system104that includes a set of pressure-controlling component designs. The FEA system108also receives or accesses operational conditions152that define parameter values describing one or more conditions in which the operation of the pressure-controlling component designs will be simulated. In certain embodiments, the operational conditions152may be defined by a designer and provided as inputs to the MDO workflow102and/or the FEA modeling process150.

In certain embodiments, when performing FEA modeling of the pipe ram50, the ram50may be modeled in three different operational conditions152: (1) hang-off loading; (2) opening; and (3) closed, locked, and vented (at maximum wellbore pressure). For each of these operational conditions152, FEA system108may be configured to only model components of interest and to simulate the interactions with other components as boundary conditions, which simplifies FEA models. It may be appreciated that, when the pressure-controlling component is not a pipe ram, such as a shear ram, other operational conditions may be selected for FEA modeling, in accordance with the present disclosure.

For example, the hang-off loading operational condition corresponds to the rams50of the BOP24in a closed position, and a conduit20hanging from the top of the rams50.FIGS.8A,8B, and9illustrate loading and boundary conditions during FEA modeling of a ram50in a hang-off loading operational condition. More specifically, in the hang-off loading operational condition represented inFIG.8A, a first boundary condition (e.g., a compression only support) is applied that creates a frictionless contact with a rigid surface where the connecting rod66comes in contact with the area on the rearward surface72of the ram50, as indicated by the shaded region154. As illustrated inFIGS.8A and8B, another boundary condition (e.g., another compression only support) is applied to the portion of the outer surfaces of the ram50that are in contact with the ram cavity of the BOP body, as indicated by the shaded regions156. Additionally, as illustrated inFIG.9, a force in the vertical direction is applied to the ram50to represent the load from the conduit20, as indicated by the arrow158. It may be appreciated that rams50may be rated for a variety of maximum hang-off loads depending on the size of the conduit20.

The opening operational condition corresponds to the rams50of the BOP24being opened with a particular pressure (e.g., 3,000 pounds per square inch) after previously closing and possibly being seized.FIGS.10A and10Billustrate loading and boundary conditions during FEA modeling of the pressure-controlling component in the opening operational condition. More specifically, in the opening operational condition represented inFIG.10A, a first boundary condition (e.g., a fixed support constraining all degrees of freedom) is applied to the leading surface70of the rams50, as indicated by the shaded regions160. Additionally, a retracting force is applied the at the point where the connecting rod66comes in contact with the rearward surface72of the ram50, as indicated by the arrow162ofFIG.10B.

The closed, locked, and vented operational condition corresponds to the rams50of the BOP24being in the closed position, the locking mechanism on the bonnet assemblies60engaged, and the closing pressure vented from the bonnet assemblies.FIGS.11A,11B,12A and12Billustrate loading and boundary conditions during FEA simulation of the ram50in the closed, locked, and vented operational condition. More specifically, as illustrated inFIG.11B, a first boundary condition (e.g., a compression only support) is applied that creates a frictionless contact with a rigid surface where the connecting rod66comes in contact with the area on the rearward surface72of the ram50, as indicated by the shaded region164. As illustrated inFIG.11A, a second boundary condition (e.g., another compression only support) is applied to the outer surface of the ram50that is in contact with the ram cavity of the BOP body, as indicated by the shaded regions166. As illustrated inFIG.11A, a third boundary condition (e.g., another compression only support) is applied to the leading surface70of the ram50that contacts the conduit20, as indicated by the shaded regions168. Additionally, a pressure produced by elastomer seals of the ram50is applied to the surfaces of the ram50that are in contact with these seals, as indicated by the shaded regions170and the arrow172ofFIG.12A. Furthermore, the rams50are being subjected to a maximum wellbore pressure (e.g., 3,000 pounds per square inch), as indicated by the shaded regions173arrow174ofFIG.12B.

Returning to the FEA modeling process150ofFIG.7, the FEA system108performs a set of steps180for each design represented within the master template118(as indicated by the for-block176) and for each of the operational conditions152(as indicated by the for-block178). As such, the set of steps180is performed for each unique design/operational condition combination, such that the performance of each design represented within the master template118is simulated in each of the operational conditions152. In certain embodiments, the FEA system108may be configured to perform the set of steps for each unique design/operational condition combination in parallel for enhanced efficiency.

For the embodiment of the FEA modeling process150illustrated inFIG.7, the set of steps180begin with the FEA system108generating (block182) a FEA model for a particular design in a particular operational condition. For example,FIG.13is a representation of a portion of a FEA model184generated by the FEA system108for a design of a ram50. The illustrated FEA model184of the ram50inFIG.13is modeled as a fine mesh186with quadratic solid elements.

Returning toFIG.7, the embodiment of the FEA modeling process150continues with the FEA system108determining (block188) an area of interest within the FEA model184. For example, in certain embodiments, a product subject-matter expert (SME) may identify an area of interest in the FEA model184for each of the operational conditions152, which may be provided as an input to the FEA system108and/or FEA modeling process150. For example, turning toFIG.13, the FEA system108may receive an indication from the product SME an area of interest190for the hang-off loading operational condition corresponds to the area of the curved portion77. In response to receiving this input, the FEA system108may automatically identify (block192) a maximum stress point in the area of interest. For example, returning toFIG.13, the FEA system108identifies the maximum stress point194in the area of interest190.

The embodiment of the FEA modeling process150illustrated inFIG.7continues with the FEA system108identifying (block196) a path that includes the maximum stress point194. For example, as illustrated inFIG.13, the FEA system108identifies the path198that includes the maximum stress point194in the area of interest190. Returning toFIG.7, the FEA system108performs (block200) calculations to predict stress linearization (e.g., membrane stress, bending stress, total stress) along the path198. Finally, the FEA system108determines (block202) a pass-fail status for the design in the operational condition, based on the stress linearization calculation and one or more standards related to the pressure-controlling component.

In certain embodiments, stress calculations may be performed in accordance with the stress linearization analysis per the ASME and/or API standards set forth above. For example, in certain embodiments, the stress distribution calculation defined by the ASME BPVC standard may be used to calculate the membrane and bending components based on equations 1-4. The membrane stress tensor is the tensor comprised of the average of each stress component along the stress classification line (e.g., path198) according to equation 1:

σi⁢jm=1t⁢∫0t⁢σi⁢j⁢d⁢xSEq.⁢1
where σijm, t, σijand xsrepresent the membrane stress tensor, the thickness of the section, the stress tensor along the path, and the coordinate along the path, respectively. The bending stress tensor is comprised of the linear varying portion of each stress component along the stress classification line according to equation 2:

σi⁢jb=6t2⁢∫0t⁢σi⁢j⁡(t2-x)⁢d⁢xSEq.⁢2
where σijb, t, σijand xsrepresent the bending stress tensor, the thickness of the section, the stress tensor along the path, and the coordinate along the path, respectively. The allowable stresses are determined using equations 3 and 4:
Sm=⅔SyEq. 3
Se=SyEq. 4
where Smis the design stress intensity, Syis minimum yield strength of the material, and Seis the maximum allowable equivalent stress.

To perform the calculations, the FEA system108may use certain materials property values of the pressure-controlling component and/or certain values (e.g., limits) defined by the ASME and/or API standards. For example, for an embodiment of the pipe ram50, a minimum yield strength of the material is 90 kilopounds per square inch (ksi), the allowable membrane stress is 60 ksi, and the allowable sum of membrane stress and bending stresses is 90 ksi. In certain embodiments, these calculations may be implemented using a parametric design language associated with the FEA system108. The FEA results204for all the designs of the master template118in each of the operational conditions can be compared to the aforementioned allowable stresses to determine compliance, as indicated by the pass-fail status. As noted above, in certain embodiments, the FEA results204are immediately provided to the MDO system104as each design and operational condition combination are simulated.

DMS Modeling

FIG.14is a flow diagram illustrating an embodiment of a DMS modeling process220whereby the DMS system of the MDO framework100performs DMS modeling of the designs represented within the master template118as part of the MDO workflow102. For the illustrated embodiment, the DMS system110receives the master template118from the MDO system104that includes the set of pressure-controlling component designs. For the illustrated embodiment, the DMS system110also receives or accesses a set of material options222, which is a dataset that defines different materials from which the pressure-controlling component may be manufactured, as well as information related to the cost of purchasing and machining the material in various manners. For the illustrated embodiment, the DMS system110also receives or accesses one or more sets of tolerances224, wherein each set dictates a tolerances of each parametrized feature of the pressure-controlling component in the master template118. It may be appreciated that, in some embodiments, the DMS system110may receive or access other information, such as product or material inventory information, or information related to labor or other overhead costs, to perform DMS modeling of the designs represented within the master template118.

For the embodiment of the DMS modeling process220illustrated inFIG.14, the DMS system110performs a set of steps226for each design represented within the master template118(as indicated by the for-block228), for each of the material options222(as indicated by the for-block230), and for each of the sets of tolerances224(as indicated by the for-block232). As such, the set of steps226is performed for each unique combination of a design, a material option, and a set of tolerances, such that the manufacturability and cost of each combination or permutation can be modeled and predicted. In certain embodiments, the DMS system110can perform the set of steps226for each combination in parallel for enhanced efficiency.

For the embodiment of the DMS modeling process220illustrated inFIG.14, these steps226include the DMS system110generating (block234) a DMS model for a combination of a particular design of the master template118, a particular material option of the material options222, and particular set of tolerances of the sets of tolerances224. The DMS system110may then simulate manufacturing of the combination using this DMS model to predict (block236) a cost associated with manufacturing each feature (e.g., each geometric feature or design feature) of the combination. Subsequently, the DMS system110may combine information regarding the cost associated with the particular material option with the predicted costs determined in block236to predict (block238) a fully burdened cost of manufacturing for the particular combination. As noted above, in certain embodiments, the DMS results240are immediately provided to the MDO system104as each combination is simulated.

Report Generation

FIG.15is a flow diagram illustrating an embodiment of a report generation process260whereby the report system112of the MDO framework100generates reports based on the FEA and DMS results for each of the designs represented within the master template118as part of the MDO workflow102. For the illustrated embodiment, the DMS system110receives the master template118from the MDO system104that includes the set of pressure-controlling component designs. In certain embodiments, the FEA system108also receives or accesses a set of objectives262(e.g., design objectives), which define one or more goals to be achieved with respect to the manufacturing of the pressure-controlling component. For example, a non-limiting set of example objectives includes: maximizing compliance with one or more standards (e.g., maximizing positive pass-fail statuses), minimizing materials costs, minimizing manufacturing costs, maximizing operational lifetime, or any combination thereof.

The report system112also receives, from the MDO system104, the FEA results204generated from the FEA modeling, as well as the DMS results generated from the DMS modeling, of the designs represented within the master template118. For the illustrated embodiment, the report system112generates (block264) a respective FEA report for each design represented within the master template118, wherein the FEA reports266includes the determined pass-fail status for each of the designs and operational conditions152simulated during FEA modeling. For the illustrated embodiment, the report system112also generates (block268) a respective DMS report for each design represented within the master template118to yield the DMS reports270. In other embodiments, the report system112may generate a single FEA report and/or a single DMS report that includes results for all of the designs represented within the master template118, or a single master report that includes both the FEA and DMS modeling results for all of the designs represented within the master template118. For enhanced efficiency, the report system112may be configured to automatically begin generating each of the FEA reports266and/or DMS reports270as each result is received from the MDO system104.

In certain embodiments, when the master template118includes a number of alternative designs being compared, the report system112may also rank (block272) the designs of the master template based on the FEA results204, the DMS results240, and the objectives262. For example, the objectives262may include maximizing compliance with one or more standards and minimizing manufacturing costs. As such, the report system112may first rank or order the designs of the master template118based on a greatest number of positive pass-fail statuses for the different simulated operational conditions during FEA modeling. In some embodiments, the report system112may remove designs from the ranking when the design is not associated with all positive pass-fail statuses. The report system112may then further rank or order the designs of the master template118based on the fully burdened manufacturing costs, wherein the lowest costs receive a higher ranking. In certain embodiments, the report system112may provide the ranked set274of pressure-controlling component designs as an output of the MDO workflow102. As such, the MDO workflow102enables automatic optimization of designs, enabling designers to quickly eliminate inferior or costly designs and home in on designs that are optimized for performance and/or manufacturability.

FIG.16illustrates an embodiment of a graphical user interface (GUI)290of the MDO framework100that presents parameters and results of FEA modeling, under various operational conditions, for a set of pipe ram designs represented within the master template118. For the illustrated embodiment, the GUI290presents the FEA results204determined based on the FEA modeling process150ofFIG.7for a master template118including ten designs of a product family of the ram50. In some embodiments, the GUI290may be part of the report system112, part of the FEA system108, part of the MDO system104, or distributed between one or more of these systems of the MDO framework100.

For the embodiment illustrated inFIG.16, the GUI290includes a table292, wherein each row of the table corresponds to a design of the master template118. Each column of the table292corresponds to a parameterized value of each design, such as different distances or angles that define the different geometries of the designs of the master template118. The GUI290also includes a results section294that also includes columns and rows. Each of the three rows of the results section294corresponds to a different one of the three operational conditions152simulated for the pipe ram designs during FEA modeling, as discussed above. The left column296of the results section294illustrates portions of the FEA models184(e.g., the mesh of quadratic solid elements) that were generated for a particular design, which include the annotations discussed above with respect toFIG.13. The middle column298of the results section294includes the stress linearization curves predicted for the particular design in each of the operational conditions based on the equations set forth above. The right column300of the results section294includes stress contour diagrams for each of the operational conditions, as determined during the FEA modeling process150.

For the embodiment of the GUI290illustrated inFIG.16, when a user selects a particular design (e.g., a particular row) of the table292, then the results section294is updated to present the FEA models, the stress linearization curves, and the stress contour diagrams for the selected design in the three different operational conditions. As noted, once the master template118has been provided to the MDO system, as set forth above, the MDO workflow102may automatically produce the FEA reports266, which include similar data as is presented by the GUI290. In some embodiments, the GUI290may enable the conditions of the FEA modeling and the FEA results204to be directly viewed by the user, for example, before the FEA reports266are generated. In some embodiments, the GUI290may enable the user to modify one or more of the inputs or parameters to the FEA modeling process150. In other embodiments, the GUI290may additionally or alternatively serve as a FEA report viewer to enable the user to review the FEA reports266and analyze the FEA results represented therein.

FIG.17illustrates an embodiment of another GUI310of the MDO framework100that presents parameters and results of the DMS modeling for a product family of pipe ram designs represented within an example master template118. For the illustrated embodiment, the GUI310presents DMS results240determined based on the DMS modeling process220ofFIG.14for a master template118including a set of designs from a product family of the pipe ram50. In some embodiments, the GUI310may be part of the report system112, part of the DMS system110, part of the MDO system104, or distributed between one or more of these systems of the MDO framework100. Additionally, in certain embodiments, the GUI310may be used to provide information (e.g., material options, tolerances) as inputs to the DMS modeling process220.

For the embodiment illustrated inFIG.17, the GUI310includes a CAD drawing312of the ram50. The GUI310also includes a review button314that enables the user to review machining issues identified during the DMS modeling. The GUI310also includes a manufacturing method button315that enables the user to change the method of manufacturing (e.g., milling; additive manufacturing) applied during the DMS modeling. The GUI310also includes a select material button316that enables the user to select different material options222for manufacturing the ram50. In some embodiments, the GUI310may include inputs to enable the user to select other information (e.g., sets of tolerances224) that may be applied during DMS modeling.

For the embodiment illustrated inFIG.17, the CAD drawing312of the ram50includes a number of different shaded regions318. These shaded regions318of the CAD drawing312correspond to the top n (e.g., top five, top ten, top twenty) features that bear the highest manufacturing cost. It may be appreciated that, in certain embodiments, once the master template118has been provided, the MDO workflow102may automatically produce the DMS reports270discussed above, which include similar data as is presented by the GUI310. In some embodiments, the GUI310may additionally or alternatively serve as a DMS report viewer to enable the user to review the DMS reports270and analyze the DMS results240represented therein. In some embodiments, the GUI310may enable the conditions of the DMS modeling and the DMS results240to be directly viewed by the user, for example, before the DMS reports270are generated. As such, in certain embodiments, the GUIs290and310may enable a user to perform “what-if” analyses for varying geometric features, dimensions, materials, and so forth, and eventually optimize for minimizing cost, or finding out the optimum tradeoff between cost and performance for the designs represented in the master template118as part of the MDO workflow102.

FIG.18is a bar graph330illustrating the predicted, relative, fully burdened cost for manufacturing each design of a set of a pressure-controlling component designs using two different materials, as determined by the DMS modeling process220of the MDO workflow102for an example master template118. More specifically, the bar graph330includes entries for each of a set of 10 different alternative designs represented in the example master template118. Each entry includes a first bar332that indicates a fully burdened cost of manufacturing each of the designs using a first, more expensive material, and a second bar334that indicates a fully burdened cost of manufacturing each of the design using a second, more cost-effective material. As noted, the bar graph330may be included as part of the DMS reports270generated by the report system112based on the DMS results240. In certain embodiments, the report system112may consider the fully burden costs of manufacturing each design in the two different materials as part of determining a relative ranking of designs.

FIG.19is a bar graph340illustrating the predicted, relative, fully burdened cost for manufacturing each design of a product family of a pressure-controlling component at two different tolerances, as determined by the DMS modeling process220of the MDO workflow102. More specifically, the bar graph340includes entries for each of a set of 10 different designs of a product family represented in the example master template118. Each entry includes a first bar342that indicates a fully burdened cost of manufacturing each of the designs using a first, more rigid set of tolerances, and a second bar344that indicates a fully burdened cost of manufacturing each of the design using a second, less rigid set of tolerances. In certain embodiments, the report system112may consider the fully burden costs of manufacturing each design at the different tolerances as part of determining a relative ranking of designs.

The disclosed techniques enable a multi-disciplinary optimization (MDO) workflow to facilitate analysis and optimization of set of designs of a pressure-controlling component. The MDO workflow generally enables design workflow integration and automation, which can improve engineering efficiency, and enables automated optimization within the workflow automation, which facilitates performance and reliability improvement for product development. The MDO workflow enables the integration of computer-aided design (CAD), finite element analysis (FEA), digital manufacturing simulation (DMS), and optimization packages to facilitate testing and optimization of a set of pressure-controlling component designs. As discussed, the MDO workflow enables automatic optimization of designs, enabling designers to quickly eliminate inferior or costly designs and home in on designs that are optimized for performance and/or manufacturability.