This application is related to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/412,044 entitled FITTINGS FOR COMPRESSED GAS STORAGE VESSELS, filed Oct. 24, 2016, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and for all purposes.
This application is related to U.S. Non-Provisional patent application Ser. No. 14/624,370 entitled COILED NATURAL GAS STORAGE SYSTEM AND METHOD, filed Feb. 17, 2015, now abandoned, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and for all purposes.
This application is related to U.S. Non-Provisional patent application Ser. No. 14/172,831 entitled NATURAL GAS INTESTINE PACKED STORAGE TANK, filed Feb. 4, 2014, now U.S. Pat. No. 10,088,101, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and for all purposes.
This application is related to U.S. Non-Provisional patent application Ser. No. 13/887,201 entitled CONFORMABLE NATURAL GAS STORAGE, filed May 3, 2013, now U.S. Pat. No. 9,217,538, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and for all purposes.
This application is related to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/642,388 entitled CONFORMING ENERGY STORAGE, filed May 3, 2012, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and for all purposes.
This application is related to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 61/766,394 entitled NATURAL GAS INTESTINE PACKED STORAGE TANK, filed Feb. 19, 2013, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and for all purposes.
This application is related to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/175,914 entitled SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR A CONFORMABLE PRESSURE VESSEL, filed Jun. 15, 2015, which is incorporated herein by reference in its entirety and for all purposes.
It should be noted that the figures are not drawn to scale and that elements of similar structures or functions are generally represented by like reference numerals for illustrative purposes throughout the figures. It also should be noted that the figures are only intended to facilitate the description of the preferred embodiments. The figures do not illustrate every aspect of the described embodiments and do not limit the scope of the present disclosure.
Turning to
In various embodiments, the connector portion 110 can have a diameter that is smaller than the tubing portions 130, with the taper portion 125 providing a transition between the diameter of the connector portion 110 and the tubing portion 130. However, further embodiments can comprise a tank 100 with portions having one or more suitable diameter, and in further embodiments, a tank 100 can have portions that are non-cylindrical, which can include various suitable shapes.
In one embodiment, the liner 100A can be generated via extrusion molding systems, or the like, which can comprise rotating dies that are configured to rotate in concert such that corresponding dies mate about an extruded tube generated by an extruder. Corresponding mated dies can thereby define one or more of the connector portion 110, taper portion 125 and/or the tubing portion 130.
In various embodiments, a vacuum can pull the material of an extruded tube to conform to negative contours defined by the mated die. In some embodiments, positive pressure can be introduced within the tube to conform to negative contours defined by the mated die. In various embodiments, such a manufacturing process can be beneficial because liners tanks 100 can be made seamlessly, with no welds, and using a single material.
In some embodiments, liners tanks 100 having varying lengths of the connector portion 110, taper portion 125 and/or the tubing portion 130, can be made by selectively choosing the order of dies such that desired portions are made longer or shorter. For example, in some embodiments, a tank 100 can be produced that fits into an irregular or non-rectangular cavity, which can require a tank 100 to have tubing portions 130 of variable lengths.
In some embodiments, a tank 100 can be made by forming various pieces of the tank 100 and then coupling the pieces together. For example, as illustrated in
Accordingly, the embodiments of a tank 100 shown and described herein should not be construed to be limiting on the wide variety of tanks 100 that are within the scope and spirit of the present invention. For example, tanks 100 as described in U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/175,914, which is incorporated herein by reference, illustrates some example embodiments of tanks 100.
In some embodiments, a tank 100 can comprise a naked liner 100A as illustrated in
As discussed in detail herein, the material(s), shape, size, configuration and other variables related to a braid 300 can be chosen to increase the strength provided by the braiding 300, increase the flexibility of the braiding 300, increase the strength to weight ratio of the braiding 300 and the like.
In various embodiments, the tank 100 can be folded into a three-dimensional structure. For example,
The tank 100 can also include fittings 425. Although
In various embodiments, such fittings 425 can be configured to interface with a tank valve and have a hollow center bore that is not only large enough to allow the passage of a fluid but also large enough to allow the pass-through of valve instrumentation, or the like. For example, in various embodiments, such tank valves can be instrumented to detect tank conditions within the tank 100.
In some embodiments, a tank 100 can comprise smooth cuffs 115 at one or both ends of the tank 100 for fitting attachment (e.g., as illustrated in
As discussed in more detail herein, in some embodiments, a tank 100 can be initially flexible and then configured to be substantially rigid. For example, in various embodiments discussed in detail herein, a braided liner 100B can be infused and/or coated with a resin, and when the resin dries, the resin can make the tank 100 substantially rigid. In some embodiments, a resin-infused tank 100 can be dried in a stacking architecture 405 so that the tank 100 is held in a desired configuration while the resin dries, so that the tank 100 maintains this desired configuration when the resin has dried and the stacking architecture 405 is removed from about the dried tank 100.
In some embodiments, the resin can cure over time, can be cured via heat, can be cured by drying, can be cured via light (e.g., ultra violet light), or the like. In various embodiments, it can be desirable to have the hardened folded tank 100 in the stacking architecture 405 so that the tank 100 becomes rigid and more resistant to failure due to movement and to increase the strength and durability of the tank 100. In further embodiments, a resin can cure or dry and remain flexible. Accordingly, in such embodiments, the tank 100 can be folded before or after curing or drying of such a flexible resin. Various suitable types of resins, or the like, can be used in various embodiments. For example, a resin can comprise one or more of an epoxy resin, a thermoplastic resin, a vinylester resin, a polyester resin, urethane, or the like.
In further embodiments, an elongated or folded resinated tank 100 can be rotated while drying or curing the resin. For example, to prevent resin from being unevenly distributed on the tank 100 while drying, to generate a uniform drying temperature about the tank 100, and to prevent sagging, a resinated elongated tank 100 can be rotated about a central axis during drying. Similarly, a folded tank 100 (e.g. as shown in
As illustrated in
As discussed above and illustrated in
A tank 100 can be configured or rated for use with pressurized fluids including being rated for use at at least 10 MPa, 25 MPa, 50 MPa, 70 MPa, 90 MPa, 110 MPa, 130 MPa, 150 MPa, or the like. In one preferred embodiment, a tank 100 as described herein can be rated for use with pressurized hydrogen at 70 MPa nominal working pressure. In another preferred embodiment, a tank 100 can be rated for use with compressed natural gas (CNG) at 25 MPa nominal working pressure. Although various embodiments of a tank 100 discussed herein can be configured for use with fuel fluids such as hydrogen or compressed natural gas, further embodiments can be configured for use with any suitable fluid at various suitable pressures. Additionally, some embodiments can be configured for use with cryogenic fluids, room-temperature fluids, or heated fluids.
As discussed herein, in some embodiments, a tank 100 can comprise a naked liner 100A (e.g., as shown in
Turning to
In various embodiments, the grooves 620 can be curved as shown in
In various embodiments, the braiding machine 600 can be configured such that the fibers 610 run along the face 618 of the cone 615, whereby resin disposed in the grooves 620 coats and/or impregnates the fibers 610 before the fibers 610 are woven into a braid 300 over the tank 100. In the example braiding machine 600 of
In various embodiments, resin can be introduced to the resin tube 835 via a fitting 850 on the end of the resin tube 835. The positive flow of the resin can reach and fill the reservoir 830 and the positive flow causes the resin to be extruded from the resin port 845 defined by the tip washer 820 and reservoir body 810.
In various embodiments, the flow characteristics of the resin port 845 can be changed by changing the distance between the reservoir body 810 and the tip washer 820 to widen or narrow the resin port 845. Additionally, variables such as the pressure and/or flow rate can also be selectively changed to modify the flow characteristics of resin being extruded from the resin port 845.
As discussed herein, fibers 610 (see
In some embodiments, a portion of the resin applicator 710 can be heated and connected to a resin melting and extrusion assembly. Additionally, in some embodiments, resin can wick into fibers 610. In embodiments having thermoplastic resin, or the like, a resinated tank 100 can be heated to make the resin flexible enough such that the tank 100 can be bent or otherwise suitably configured. Additionally, in some embodiments, an over-braided liner 100B and/or bent tank 100 can be heated after bending or braiding so that adjacent braid layers can be bonded together via the resin. In further embodiments, braiding fibers 610 can comprise thermoplastic fibers, or the like.
In various embodiments, the face 711 can define a taper angle θT. For example,
Additionally, where formation of the braid 300 on the resin applicator 710 is undesirable, it can be beneficial to configure the braiding head 705 such that an internal diameter of the forming ring 605 that defines the orifice 715 of the forming ring 605 is smaller than the largest outer diameter of the resin applicator 710. For example,
As illustrated in
In various embodiments, maintaining the cross section of the tank 100 in a fixed position that is concentric with the central axis XB of the braiding machine 600, 700 (see
As illustrated in
In embodiments where a plurality of layers of braiding 300 are applied to a tank 100 such layers can add additional diameter to the tubing portions 130 such that the tubing portions 130 increase in diameter as successive layers of braiding 300 are added. In some embodiments, the size of the cavity 619 can correspond to the anticipated diameter of N−1 braiding layers, where N is the maximum number of layers of braiding 300 being applied to the tank 100.
Alternatively, in further embodiments, the diameter of the cavity 619 can be changed as successive layers of braiding 300 are added to the tank 100. In other words, as successive layers of braiding 300 are added to the tank 100, the diameter of the cavity 619 can be increased to correspond to the increasing diameter of the tank 100 so that the tank 100 passing through the cavity 619 can held substantially coincident with the central axis XB of the braiding machine 600, 700.
Various suitable systems for changing the diameter of the cavity 619 can be employed. For example,
As discussed herein, the resin applicator 710 can define a cavity 619. As shown in
For example, one or more layer of braiding 300 can first be applied to a naked liner 100A or to an over-braided liner 100B while passing through the constraint cavity 1916 of the constraint tube 1915 present in the cavity 619 of the resin applicator 710 as illustrated in
In further embodiments, any suitable plurality of constraint tubes 1915 of different diameters can be used while applying a plurality of layers of braiding to a tank 100. For example, in some embodiments, a larger-diameter constraint tube 1915 can be swapped in after each layer of braiding is applied. In further embodiments, a larger-diameter constraint tube 1915 can be swapped in after every other layer of braiding is applied. Additionally, some braiding methods can rely solely on constraint tubes 1915, whereas some braiding methods can employ both constraint tubes 1915 and a cavity 619 of the resin applicator 710.
For example, as illustrated in
Returning to the method 900 of
At 940, if the braiding process is complete the method 900 ends at 998. However, if the braiding process is not complete, the method 900 cycles back to 910, where the tank 100 is further fed into the braiding machine 600, 700. Accordingly, as discussed in relation to the examples of
The example systems and methods of generating a resinated braid 300 should not be construed to be limiting on the many variations and alternatives that are within the scope and spirit of the preset invention. For example, although a resin applicator 710 or resin cone 615 are two examples shown in
Additionally, although some embodiments discuss a resinated braid being applied to a naked liner 100A to generate a resinated over-braided liner 100B, a resinated or non-resinated braid can be applied to a tank 100 having any suitable covering or wrapping. For example, in some embodiments, resin can be applied to a tank 100 and a resinated or non-resinated braid 300 can be applied to the tank 100. In further embodiments, one or more layers of non-resinated braiding 300 can be applied to a tank 100 and such non-resinated braiding 300 can remain non-resinated. Accordingly, the systems and methods described herein can apply to tanks 100 without resin and/or tanks without resinated braiding 300.
In another embodiment, a resinated or non-resinated braid 300 can be applied to a tank 100 that comprises a resinated or non-resinated braid 300. In other words, some embodiments can comprise two or more layers of braiding 300, which can be applied concurrently or applied successively. For example, in some embodiments, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or more layers of braiding 300 can be applied. In some examples, a three-layer braid 300 on a tank 100 can be desirable for CNG tanks and a seven-layer braid 300 on a tank 100 can be desirable for hydrogen tanks.
Additionally, although some examples include applying a resinated or non-resinated braid 300 to a naked liner 100A or a braided liner 100B, further embodiments can include application of a resinated or non-resinated braid 300 over a liner having one or more layers of wrapping, covering, or other suitable layer that covers or surrounds at least a portion of a naked liner 100A. Additionally, such wrapping or covering layers can be applied between and/or over one or more layer of braiding 300.
A layer of braiding 300 can be configured to provide various suitable amount of coverage. For example, in some embodiments, a layer of braiding 300 can completely cover an underlying surface (e.g., a naked liner 100A or braided liner 100B). However, in some embodiments, a layer of braiding may not completely cover an underlying surface. In embodiments having a plurality of layers of braiding 300 the amount of coverage can be the same for all layers, can be different, or can be alternating in a desired pattern, increasing or decreasing for additional layers, or the like.
At block 970, a determination is made whether additional braid layers are desired, and if so, in block 980, a resinated braid layer is generated over the previous braid layer. The method 950 cycles back to block 970, where a determination is made whether additional braid layers are desired. If not, the method 950 continues to block 999 where the method 950 is done.
Additionally, although braids 300 are discussed herein in relation to various embodiments, other embodiments can comprise application of a wrap or other suitable coating to a tank 100. For example, in one embodiment, a sleeve can be applied to a tank 100 and shrink-wrapped about the tank 100 and a braid 300 may or may not be applied over the sleeve. A sleeve can comprise various suitable articles including a cylindrical sheet or tube of plastic that is configured to surround the tank 100.
Additionally, although resin is discussed herein in relation to various embodiments, any suitable liquid, amorphous solid, solid, gas, or the like, can be used in accordance with further embodiments. For example, further embodiments can employ an adhesive, glass, fiberglass, metal, epoxy, or any other suitable material. Accordingly, the present invention should not be construed to be limited to only resin.
a and 7b illustrate embodiments where resin can be applied to fibers 610 before and/or during the braiding process. However, in further embodiments, resin can be applied to an over-braided liner 100B after the braid 300 has been applied to a naked liner 100A. For example,
Although the example of using traveler plates 1020 to move a tank 100 is shown herein, it should not limit the wide variety of systems and structures that can be used to convey a tank 100 through a resin chamber 1005 and/or braiding machine 700. For example, in some embodiments, a caterpillar system, capstan system, or the like, can be used to convey a tank 100 through a resin chamber 1005 and/or braiding machine 700.
In various embodiments, a caterpillar system can comprise a pair of parallel rotating tracks. The opposing tracks can exert a force normal to the tank 100 which allows the tracks to grip the tank 100 between the tracks. The rotation of the tracks can be used to advance the tank 100. A caterpillar system can be positioned in series before a braiding machine 700, after a braiding machine 700, before a resin chamber 1005, after a resin chamber 1005, and the like. In some embodiments, a plurality of caterpillar systems can be positioned in suitable positions in a manufacturing line.
In some embodiments where the tank 100 is compressed by the tracks of a caterpillar system, it can be desirable to counteract such compression by pressurization of the tank 100. Additionally, to prevent deformation of the tank 100, of the braid 300 or of resin present on the tank 100, it can be desirable to have a caterpillar with 3D contoured jaws with the pattern of a tapered section of the tank 100 or other suitable portion of the tank 100. Such an embodiment may be desirable as it would apply force directly along the axis of travel, eliminating the need for the force to be translated from normal/frictional to axial.
In further embodiments, it can be desirable to apply a protective sleeving to a tank 100 at one or more stages of manufacture (e.g., after all layers of a braid 300 have been deposited onto the tank 100, or the like). Such an example can be configured to distribute the forces of the caterpillar through the tank 100 and/or braid 300 as to minimize distortion thereof. Yet another embodiment can comprise light axial yarns configured to prevent the load-bearing yarns from slipping while still allowing the tank 100 to bend. These axial yarns may also help with minimizing braid distortion during other steps of the tank fabrication, such as during the folding process.
In further embodiments, a capstan can be used in any suitable position during the manufacture of the tank 100. A capstan can comprise a motor-driven reel that pulls on the tank 100 to traverse it through a braiding machine 700 and/or resin chamber 1005. For example, after a small section of the braid 300 has been formed, a rope can be attached to the end of the braid 300, and the other end of the line can be attached to the reel. During the braiding process the reel is engaged and the rotary motion of the reel can generate a linear traverse of the tank 100 through the braiding machine 700.
In various embodiments, it can be desirable to vary the rate at which the tank 100 moves through the braiding machine 700 and/or resin chamber 1005. For example, to maintain a suitable braiding angle on a tank 100 having small, large and tapered portions, it may be necessary to slow or speed up the tank 100 for certain portions. Similarly, it may be desirable to vary the rate at which the tank 100 moves through the resin chamber 1005 because some portions of the tank 100 may benefit from greater time soaking in resin or a slower or faster draw through a squeegee as discussed in greater detail herein.
Accordingly, in various embodiments, the distance between various elements of a liner manufacturing line and/or the length of components of a liner manufacturing line can be defined based on a pattern of varied rate of movement of a tank 100. For example, if the rate of movement of the tank 100 is slowed down during application of the braid 300 to a larger portion of tank 100, the length and position of a resin chamber 1005 in series with the braiding machine 700 can be configured such that a larger portion of a tank 100 farther down the line is moving through the resin chamber 1005 while the rate of the tank 100 is slowed.
As discussed in more detail herein, the resin chamber 1005 can be configured to hold a reservoir of resin through which the tank 100 moves. The tank 100 can thereby be exposed to resin in the resin chamber 1005 without substantial loss of resin from the chamber 1005 as the tank 100 travels through the resin chamber 1005.
For example,
Each of the squeegee sheets 1225 defines a squeegee orifice 1240. Each of the mounting plates 1230 defines a mounting port 1245. In various embodiments, the central opening 1220, squeegee orifice 1240, and mounting port 1245 can be substantially circular and aligned along a common axis to define a liner channel that extends through the mounting plates 1230, squeegee sheets 1225, chamber plates 1205 and tub 1210.
In various embodiments, and as illustrated in
Accordingly, for the tank 100 to pass through the squeegee orifice 1240 defined by the squeegee sheets 1225, the squeegee orifice 1240 may need to expand. To provide for such expansion, the squeegee sheets 1225 can comprise an elastic material, which in some embodiments can comprise silicone, latex, or other suitable material. Having an elastic material defining the squeegee sheets 1225 is desirable in various embodiments, because it can allow the squeegee sheets 1225 to dynamically adapt to changing diameters of the tank 100, and provide a seal for the resin reservoir 1215 such that resin disposed within the resin reservoir 1215 can be substantially contained therein as the tank 100 passes through the resin chamber 1005. Accordingly, the tank 100 can be completely surrounded by resin when passing through the resin reservoir 1215, and the dynamic seal of the squeegee sheets 1225 about the liner 100 tank 100 can prevent substantial leakage of resin out of the resin chamber 1005.
Additionally, the squeegee sheets 1225 can act as a squeegee to remove excess resin as the tank 100 leaves the resin chamber 1005. For example, as illustrated in
In embodiments where a tank 100 is covered in a braid 300 and passes through a resin chamber 1005, the second squeegee sheet 1225B can desirably force resin into the braid 300. For example,
Although various embodiments of a resin chamber 1005 include one or more squeegee sheet 1225, in further embodiments any suitable sealing mechanism can be used. For example
Additionally, the example resin chamber 1005 and example resin application system 1000 shown herein should not be considered limiting on the variety of suitable resin chambers and example resin application systems that are within the scope and spirit of the present invention. For example, in some embodiments, example resin application system can comprise a plurality of chambers positioned in series such that a liner can enter and exit a plurality of chambers, which may hold the various fluids that can comprise resin or other desirable fluids. In further embodiments, the same tank 100 can be passed through a resin chamber 1005 a plurality of times.
In some embodiments a resin application system can be coupled with a braiding machine (e.g., as shown in
In further embodiments, a squeegee system can be present proximate to a braiding machine 700 where resin is applied to a tank 100, before, during, or shortly after the braiding process. For example,
In various embodiments, the braiding machine head 1600 can introduce resin at the forming point of the braid 300 on the liner. For example, the tank 100 can be fed through the liner passage 1610 and a braid 300 (
After the resin has been deposited on the fibers 610, the fibers 610 can be laid down onto the tank 100 as a braid 300 as discussed herein. In order to achieve a desired volume fraction of fiber to resin, a controlled amount of resin can be introduced to the dry fibers 610 before it is applied to the tank 100 as a braid 300. In some embodiments discussed herein (e.g.,
In further embodiments, a squeegee system can be positioned downstream of a braiding machine 700 after a resinated fiber 610 has been deposited onto the tank 100 as a braid 300. For example,
The squeegee sheet 1725 defines a squeegee orifice 1740 having a first diameter. The first and second spacers 1730 define a spacer orifice 1745 having a second diameter. The mounting bracket 1705 defines a bracket orifice 1755 having a third diameter. In various embodiments, the squeegee orifice 1740 has a smaller diameter than the spacer orifices 1745 and the bracket orifice 1755, and the bracket orifice 1755 has a diameter that is larger than the spacer orifices 1745 and the squeegee orifice 1740.
The orifices 1755, 1745, 1740 can be configured to be aligned along a central axis when the squeegee sheet 1725 and spacers 1730 are coupled to the mounting bracket 1705 as illustrated in
As discussed herein, a braid 300 can be applied to a tank 100 in various embodiments. Although any suitable braid configuration and material can be used, in some embodiments, braid configurations and materials can be chosen such that the resulting braid has certain desirable characteristics. A non-limiting discussion of selection of desirable braid configurations and materials is presented in the following paragraphs.
Braid Calculations
Introduction
It may be desirable for the braid to satisfy certain kinematic constraints and mechanical equilibrium everywhere on the surface of the tank. For example, it may need to have a net coverage factor of unity (summed over all of the layers), it may need to be configured to not jam when bent, and it may need to retain the certain pressure within a liner that the braid surrounds.
In this analysis we focus on the straight sections and on the bend. We assume that if kinematic and mechanical equilibrium are satisfied in these areas, they will also be satisfied on the taper. However, in some embodiments, it can be desirable to redesign the taper of the liner to match a chosen braid. In the example implementation discussed herein, a liner taper design was optimized for braiding at a hose angle of 54.7°. Accordingly, where a hose angle of greater or less than 54.7° is implemented, it may be desirable to modify the liner taper design.
When selecting a braid, certain global variables can be constant or assumed to be constant throughout the tank geometry, and there can be local variables which can change as a function of the local tank geometry, as a function of the speed of the braiding machine versus the speed of the braiding mandrel, and the like. We include the tank geometry as part of the global variables.
As discussed herein and illustrated in the following figures, global variables can include:
M=number of braid layers,
N=number of carriers per layer,
ν=fiber volume fraction in the braid,
y=the linear weight of the yarn,
ρ=density of the individual fibers in the yarn,
σ=tensile strength of the individual fibers in the yarn,
η=fiber strength utilization,
p=pressure inside the tank,
rl=outer radius of the tank liner, large diameter section,
rs=outer radius of the tank liner, small diameter section, and
R=bend radius of the small diameter section of the tank.
The local variables, at each location, i, are:
θi=braid angle,
ti=thickness of the yarn, and
wi=width of the yarn.
In various embodiments, braid angle (θi) may be the only local variable that we have control over; the other local variables are dependent on the global variables and braid angle (θi).
Kinematic Constraint Modeling
Combined Kinematics
Jamming occurs in some embodiments when the yarn aspect ratio, =wi/ti, drops below a certain threshold. The yarns can only change shape to a certain degree, so if they are forced to change shape further, they jam and cannot obtain the desired configuration. The aspect ratio will always be lowest on the bend, so we calculate the minimum aspect ratio on the bend, min. This equation thus sets the threshold for jamming on the bend, as a whole, in accordance with some embodiments.
Reduced coverage occurs when the aspect ratio, =wi/ti, becomes too high. The yarns can only flatten a certain amount, and if they are forced to flatten past this threshold they will instead separate, opening up space between them (reduced coverage). Too much space between the yarns is undesirable, since it puts excess stress on the resin between the yarns. The yarns 2010 are flattest on the large diameter sections, so the aspect ratio here can be equal to the maximum aspect ratio on the whole tank, max. The aspect ratio there is equal to
Mechanical Equilibrium
Stresses
In various embodiments, it can be desirable to determine or model the stress in each part of the tank 100. Since some embodiments of the tank 100 comprise an anisotropic material, one approach can be to first calculate the membrane tension, which is a force per unit length. For embodiments having an isotropic material, the membrane tension can be equal to the stress in the material integrated through its thickness. The membrane tension can be divided up into two components: γH,i, in the hoop direction, and γA,i in the axial direction. In the larger diameter section, we can have the following equations for a straight cylinder:
Here we have assumed that t1<<R, which, in various embodiments, is a reasonable assumption for the larger diameter sections. If the tapers are properly designed, the membrane tension on the large diameter sections is the highest of the entire geometry, so the required fiber weight can be calculated by considering only the membrane tension on this portion of the geometry.
Braid Mechanics—No Resin
In embodiments where no resin is used on a tank 100, the yarns 1710 must carry substantially all of the load when the tank 100 is under pressure. Tension in a fiber for a cylindrical pressure vessel can be derived as follows to obtain the tension, Ti, in an individual yarn as function of γH,l or γA,i.
Setting these tensions equal to each other, we see that, in accordance with some embodiments the ideal local fiber angle can be given by
In one embodiment, on the straight larger-diameter section, θ1=54.7°, whereas on the curved sections the ideal local angle can be a function of R/rs. These example angles are plotted in
That tension can then be resisted by stress within the braid. As one example approximation, we can write the tension in a yarn when the tank bursts in terms of the tensile strength of the fibers that make up the yarn, σ as T=σ tiwiv. However, fiber crimp and other factors can decrease the maximum tension that a yarn can withstand before breaking. Thus we introduce a strength utilization factor, η, and instead write that
Ti=σ(ηvtiwi). (24)
This can also be written in terms of non-local variables as
Since the membrane tension can be highest at the larger diameter sections, i=1, in some embodiments, the braid should be designed to restrain the pressure in that section, without worrying about mechanics in the smaller sections. In some embodiments, the resulting braid deformation in the smaller sections can be dealt with if it becomes an issue. We can calculate the tension within the yarn at section i=1 by combining Eqs. (2), (14), (15), (20), and (23),
Equating (25) and (26), we can calculate the required linear weight of the yarn to restrain the pressure in the larger sections,
previous experimental data as
Combined Kinematics and Mechanics
The required linear weight of the yarn that was calculated in Eq. (27) can be used and combined with the kinematic results as discussed above, to determine the number of carriers that should be used in accordance with some embodiments. Substituting (27) into (12), along with the hose angle, θ1=arctan (√√{square root over ( )} 2), gives the aspect ratio on the large diameter sections, max, in terms of mechanical properties,
where the parameter is β is defined by
β can be dictated by the burst pressure that is desired and the material properties of the fibers, and can be a ratio between the strength of the material and the desired strength of the vessel. We can influence this parameter through our choice of the braid material, and the like.
We substitute (27) into (11) to obtain a similar equation for, min, which can dictate whether or not the braid jams on the bend,
In some embodiments, we can simplify this expression by replacing R with rl in f( ). For example, in embodiments where the liners 100A rested against each other so that the mandrels were directly touching, this replacement could be desirable. Since in some embodiments there can be a fiber layer and/or some space between the two cylinders, R>rl, so setting R=rl in the jamming calculations is one example approximation. Making this substitution, we arrive at
where the function g( ) is defined as
Combining (29) and (30) gives one equation that can show how the ratio N/M effects both jamming (through min) and coverage (through max),
The function g(θs, rl/rs) is plotted in
so that higher values of g( ) allow the yarn to deform less. This is discussed in more detail herein.
One aspect of g( ), in various embodiments, is that the peak value of g( ) is a non-monotonic function of rl/rs. The peak value of g( ) can be greater for rl/rs, =2.25 than it is for rl/rs, =2 or 3. Thus, there is an optimal value of rl/rs for various embodiments, which we can compute numerically to be at rl/rs=2.18 as discussed in more detail herein. Note that this is close to the chosen value for the corrugated liner of 2.25 discussed in the examples above.
We can also now express the required yarn weight from Eq. (27) in terms of β as
Tank Geometry
In various embodiments, determining the optimal ratio of rl/rs, can be instructive to examine the purpose of tapering to a smaller diameter. As discussed herein, in some embodiments, the yarns can have a tendency to adopt a lower aspect ratio on the inside and outside of the bend.
The degree of change of the aspect ratio, can be a function of R/rs, the ratio of the bend radius to the tube radius, so this effect can be mitigated in some embodiments by decreasing the small tube radius, rs, since the bend radius can be fixed at roughly the large tube radius, rl, in order to allow adjacent large tubes to nest closely together. However, the yarns may also be compressed when the tube radius decreases from rl to rs, in some embodiments it may be desirable for this change in ratio to not be dramatic. Hence, in some embodiments, there can be a balance between two competing effects: a smaller rs can allow for an easier bend, while a larger rs can allow for less compression during the change of diameters. These tradeoffs suggest that in some embodiments there can be an optimal ratio rl/rs that would result in the least dramatic change in aspect ratio of the yarns.
In various embodiments, an optimal ratio rl/rs can occur when the yarns have the least change in aspect ratio. This allows the yarns to avoid jamming while having desirable coverage on the large diameter sections. Thus, in one example, we can calculate the ratio of the aspect ratios, min/max, by dividing equations (11) by (12), and substituting in θl=54:7, the hose angle,
In various embodiments, we can simplify this expression by replacing R with rl in f( ). If the tanks rested against each other so that the liners 100A were directly touching, this replacement would be valid in accordance with some embodiments. Since there can be a fiber layer and there can be some space between the two cylinders, however, R>rl, so setting R=rl in the jamming calculations is a conservative approximation in some embodiments. Making this substitution, we define g(rs/rl, θs)=min/max, and arrive at
The function g(θs, rl/rs,) is plotted in
Accordingly, in various embodiments, the optimal ratio rl/rs can be a purely geometric consideration, and may not depend on the specifics of the braid itself, or even the burst pressure. Thus, in various embodiments, the optimal diameter reduction can be selected without limiting the braid choices.
Optimal Braid Angle on Smaller Diameter Sections
Fewest Number of Layers (M)
In various embodiments, it can be desirable to have a braid configuration having the fewest number of layers M. To use the fewest number of braid layers, M, in some embodiments, the small section of a tank 100 can be braided at the angle corresponding to the peak in g( ) for a given value of R/rs since this point can correspond to the maximum ratio of min/max through Eq. (32). In other words, this braid angle can give the best coverage on the large sections while still resisting jamming on the small sections.
The peak can occur at the intersection point between f2(θs,R/rs) and f3(θs,R/rs), which can be defined as ({circumflex over (θ)}s, R{circumflex over ( )}l/rs). Solving for ({circumflex over (θ)}s, R{circumflex over ( )}l/rs), we arrive at
The angle θs is plotted as a function of R/rs in
Substituting into Eq. (11), the peak value off (θs, R/rs) as a function of θs or R/rs can be
The peak value of g (θs, Rl/rs) as a function of {circumflex over (θ)}s or {circumflex over (r)}l/rs can be
and g({circumflex over (θ)}s, {circumflex over (r)}l/rs) is plotted in
One example optimal value of g({circumflex over (θ)}s, {circumflex over (r)}l/rs) at rl/rs≈2.18 is shown in
Least Material on the Small Sections
Though the example peaks in f( ) and g( ) allow us to use the fewest number of layers, {circumflex over (θ)}s may not be the ideal angle for a given value of rl/rs. An alternate way to choose an optimal angle, θs, is to choose the angle that deposits the least material on the small sections of the tank 100. The total thickness of material on the small sections, before bending, is given by
Thus, for a selected value of rl/rs, and β, lower braiding angles can result in a thinner composite. However, in some embodiments, for any value of rl/rs, there can be a lower bound to the braiding angle that is possible, before there is simply not enough yarn length to wrap around the outer edge of the bend. That limit can be given by Eq. (7), which denotes the point where f( ) and g( ) are equal to zero. Accordingly, if we choose the minimum allowable value of 0, that will give us the minimum possible thickness, but with an infinite number of layers to achieve net full coverage, since g( )=0.
Conversely, braiding at {circumflex over (θ)}s can allow the use of a minimum number of layers. However, in some embodiments, the difference between {circumflex over (θ)}s and the minimum θs may only be only a few degrees. Thus, in some embodiments, the savings in braid thickness that can be achieved by braiding at the minimum θs vs. braiding at {circumflex over (θ)}s is minimal.
For the example value of rl/rs, =2.25, for example, {circumflex over (θ)}s 49.7°, whereas the minimum possible value can be θs 46.2°. The maximum possible difference in braid thickness, for this example, on the thin region is thus)cos(49.7°)/cos(46.2°)≈0.93. Thus, in this example, we could reduce the braid thickness at the thin section by at the most 7% by using an infinite number of braid layers at the lowest possible braid angle. Accordingly, in various embodiments, it does not make sense to vary from {circumflex over (θ)}′s on the small sections.
Hose Angle on the Small Sections
In some embodiments, for mechanical reasons, it can be desirable to braid at the hose angle on the small sections (e.g., θs=54.7°). The values of g( ) for this example angle are plotted in
Braid Crimp and Fiber Utilization
In some embodiments, fiber 2010 of a braid 300 (see
In one embodiment, the fiber waviness can be determined by a function of ti/wi=1/. In various embodiments, such waviness can have more of an impact on the large-diameter sections, i=1. On these, waviness can be defined as,
Constant Diameter Liner
In some embodiments, a tank 100 can have a variable diameter as shown in
In some embodiments, to ensure that the straight sections are properly loaded, it can be desirable to choose θl=54.7°. The minimum aspect ratio in various cases can be at the inside of the bend, jamming can be an issue at that location. The maximum aspect ratio, on the other hand, can be on the straight sections and it can be on the outside of the bend. Thus, in some embodiments,
Largest Diameter Possible
In some embodiments, in order to reduce overall complexity and reduce processing costs, it may be desirable to make liner sections of the largest diameter possible. Accordingly, the following uses the example derived braid equations discussed above to determine the largest rl that is possible. In this non-limiting example, we focus on satisfying the kinematic and mechanic equations on the large diameter, since the conditions on the small diameter can be satisfied with proper choice of max, rl/rs, and θs. Thus, the two equations that can be solved are
We can combine these equations to obtain the previously derived example relationship for N,
As well as a new example relationship for rl
In this example embodiment, we have expressed rl in terms of the number of layers 2020 M, rather than the number of carriers, N. In some embodiments, the number of layers 2020 can be more restrictive criteria, since fiber utilization can decrease with increasing number of layers 2020.
To obtain some numerical values for allowable values of rl, values can be chosen for the other parameters. In one non-limiting example, we can set σ=700 ksi, p=9 ksi, η=0.75, v=0.55, and p=1.8 g/cc. We can set y=800 g/km, for single-end 12k fibers, since in various embodiments, fiber utilization can drop if higher weight fibers are used. We can base max on a =1.5 and g( )=0.0863 (one example optimal value for θs=54.7° as discussed herein), yielding max=1.5/0.0863=17.4. Using these values, we can calculate the maximum allowable rl for various numbers of layers, M, and the required value of N to achieve that value of rl. These values are presented in the following table.
In the table above, the maximum diameter 2rl for various example numbers of layers, assuming single-end 12k fibers is shown. The necessary number of carriers, N, is also presented, though this may be rounded to a multiple of four in accordance with some embodiments.
In the example discussed above, the number of carriers does gets close to the maximum allowable number on conventional braiding machines, which is typically N=144. This number of carriers corresponds to a diameter of 5.8 inches, but would require M=7 layers. However, the level of fiber utilization with this many layers would be unacceptably low for many embodiments.
Non-Axisymmetric Braiding
During bending of an over-braided liner 100B, the braid angle can become larger on the inside of the bend, and smaller on the outside of the bend. This can result in two undesirable effects. Firstly, the braid can jam during the bending process, limiting the bend angle that is achievable and thereby limiting the amount of fiber that can be put in a single braid layer. Secondly, the angles around the circumference of the liner can deviate significantly from the ideal local angles for mechanical equilibrium. For resin-coated braids 300 this can result in significant resin stresses, higher stresses in fibers, and an unbending moment as discussed in greater detail herein.
However, in some embodiments, the small diameter sections can be braided with a non-axisymmetric braid to mitigate these effects. Accordingly to some embodiments, the desired braid pattern, before bending, could have a lower angle on the inside of the bend, and a higher angle on the outside of the bend. After bending, both areas would approach their ideal angle, and be further away from the extreme angles that may cause the previously mentioned issues.
A non-axisymmetric braid can be generated in various suitable ways. For example in one embodiment, a braiding machine can be operated using a non-circular forming ring, and the resulting braid 300 would have a non-axisymmetric distribution of angles. In one specific example implementation, an ellipsoidal forming ring was tested in combination with a cylindrical mandrel. Based on the results of this research, it was determined that a desired pattern of angles can be created by manipulating the relationship between the forming ring and the mandrel of a braiding machine. For example, the mandrel is translated laterally relative to a conventional circular forming ring, it can result in a distribution of angles that generates a desired pattern. One embodiment comprises a flexible forming ring with a plurality of actuators to adjust its shape. This can allow for a greater degree of control over the circumferential distribution of braid angles.
The “Otherbend”
Turning to
In some embodiments, the smaller connector portion 110 of the tank 100 bends outward so that its surface is coplanar with the outer edge of the large diameter tubing portions 130. This is illustrated by the axis X1 and X2 being parallel to the face of the larger diameter tubing portion 130 and coincident with the apex of the bend in the smaller diameter connector portions 110. Accordingly, in such embodiments, the increased bend may not affect how closely the large diameter sections can be packed together. If this condition is satisfied, the bend radius can be calculated as
2R+2rs=4rl (40)
R=2rl−rs, (41)
as opposed to the previous example relationship of R=rl.
Given this relationship, it is possible to obtain an alternative relationship for max/min. For example, combining (27) as (11) before, but substituting (41), we arrive at
The function h(θs,rl/rs) is plotted in
Bend Geometry
In order to attain a desired bend geometry, the flexible section must be a certain length, and the corrugations must have a certain correct stiffness. If these two parameters are not within a desired range, the bend will not form the desired shape. For example, if the flexible section is too short, the tank 100 simply won't be able to bend. In another example, if the flexible section is too long, the bend will either be too long or too wide, thereby taking up a larger volume than may be desired.
In various embodiments, the bend can have a minimum length and width if all segments are bent at the same radius, R. This configuration is illustrated in
In some embodiments, the minimum bend radius can be set either through braid jamming and/or by designing the corrugations such that the tube can only bend a certain amount. In some embodiments, designing the corrugations such that the tube can only bend a certain amount can be desirable since it can allow for more flexibility in choosing a braid for a given liner geometry. Furthermore, the corrugations can be shallow if the minimum bend radius is large. This can provide the benefit of allowing a larger extrusion nozzle during the corrugation process. The maximum bend radius can be set by the length of the flexible section of the tank. If the length matches the length required to attain the minimum bend radius, the shape can be set at the one shown in
The total length of the “Otherbend,” LO, can be written as a function of the angle, φ, shown in
LO=πR+4Rφ.
If we enforce the distance between the two ends to be 2r1, the angle φ can be expressed as
Combining these previous two equations with (41) for the bend radius, we arrive at an expression for length of the corrugated section as a function of the two tube radiuses only,
Volumetric Efficiency
In some embodiments, implementing the “Otherbend” can decrease the volumetric efficiency of the tank as a whole. For example, as a baseline, we can compare the volumetric efficiency of the Otherbend to that of the U-bend described in herein and illustrated in
As discussed in examples above, in some embodiments, it can be desirable for the U-bend to have a ratio rl/rsU=1.92 if both sections are braided at 54.7°. We use this example ratio as a baseline, and compute that for this example Otherbend ratio VU/2π2r2lhU, =0.28.
The volume of the Otherbend, VO, can be VO=πr2sLO. However, the length of the Otherbend, ho, can be greater than the length of the U-bend, hu, so we can take this into account when comparing the volumetric efficiencies. One example comparison is
This equation (46) is plotted in
In this example, the normalized volume of the Otherbend is equal to the volume of the U-bend at rl/rs=1.24. In various embodiments, for ratios that are less than this, the Otherbend has a greater volume.
In further embodiments, for ratios that are greater, the U-bend can have a greater volume. However, this example analysis neglects the volume of the taper, which also changes as a function of rl/rs. In an example modeling, the volume of the two bends were measured in SolidWorks, including the taper, and it was found that the crossover point can be at rl/rs=1.35.
For the braid to be optimized on the Otherbend, in accordance with some embodiments, the ratio should be rl/rs=1.64. However, in such embodiments in order to lose a minimal amount of volume, the ratio should be lower. In addition, in some embodiments, a lower ratio can be better for manufacturing the liner. Since the peak of h(θs, rl/rs) as illustrated in
In one preferred implementation, choosing rl/rs=1.5 is beneficial for the braid, liner, and tank volume. According to example calculations, for rl=2.625″, this ratio loses ˜80 mL of internal volume per bend, which is equivalent to ˜½″ of large-diameter tank length. Since there is a bend on either side of each large-diameter section, the total loss is 1″ of large-diameter tank length.
Method for Choosing a Braid Configuration
A braid configuration can be chosen based on various criteria, including one or more of the criteria discussed above, in accordance with various embodiments. For example, it can be desirable to select an optimal braid for a given liner geometry, braid material, burst pressure, and/or the like. The following illustrates one example selection method 2700 illustrated in
Turning to
Values of rl/rs, for two example liner options, sectioned and corrugated, are shown in the table below. However, these two examples are only two examples of the numerous liner configurations that are within the scope and spirit of the present inventions, and these two examples should not be construed to be limiting.
Step 2710 is to calculate a strength ratio based on the strength of the braid material and the desired strength of an over-braided liner 100B. In various embodiments, such a ratio can be calculated based on characteristics of a selected braid material. For example, in one embodiment, one can calculate the value of β where the parameter β can be defined by
ν=fiber volume fraction in the braid,
η=fiber strength utilization,
σ=tensile strength of the individual fibers in the yarn,
p=desired burst pressure of the tank,
The values of β for two example material options, carbon and Kevlar, are shown in the table below. More specifically, the table below illustrates material properties and calculated values of β. In this example, the value of η=0.63 is from the single-layer carbon burst test discussed above, and v=0.55 is the target fiber volume fraction in the braid.
However, other suitable materials can be used in other embodiments (e.g., Spectra, or the like), and β or other ratio based on the strength of the braid material and the desired strength of an over-braided liner 100 can be calculated empirically, based on observation, or based on reported characteristics of a given material.
Step 2715 is to determine an optimal braid angle on the smallest diameter portions of the tank 100 based on the determined size ratio (i.e., the determined ratio of the size of a largest diameter of the tank 100 and a smallest diameter of the tank 100). For example, in one embodiment, based on the calculated value of rl/rs, one can determine an optimal braid angle on the thin sections, θs, as defined by
Step 2720 is to calculate a jamming value defining a ratio of a minimum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming and a maximum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming, the ratio based on the ratio of the size of a largest diameter of the tank 100 and a smallest diameter of the tank 100 and based on the determined value for optimal braid angle on the smallest diameter portions of the tank 100. For example, in one embodiment, one can calculate the value of g(θs, rl/rs) using the value of rl/rs for the liner and the chosen value of θs. As discussed above, in various embodiments, g(θs, rl/rs) can be defined as
Step 2725 is to identify a target value of a minimum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming (min) that will prevent the braid from jamming. For example, in EXAMPLE 1 above, it was experimentally determined that the braid jammed at min=1.41. A target value for min that will prevent the braid from jamming can be determined in any suitable way, including generating the selected braid over a selected liner. Prior to bending, measuring the angle of the fibers of the braid. Bending the braided liner to the tightest bend radius possible and measuring this bend radius. Identifying a jammed location on the braid and using Eq. (9) above, estimating the aspect ratio at this jammed location.
Step 2730 is to determine a value for maximum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming based on the identified target value of a minimum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming. For example in one embodiment, one can calculate a maximum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming (max) through max=min/g( ) using equation (32) (reproduced below).
Step 2735 is to determine the number of braid layers necessary to obtain full braid coverage on the tank 100. For example, if the calculated value of max is greater than an upper limit that denotes a lack of full coverage, one can determine how many layers, M, would be necessary to ensure full coverage overall. For example, in some embodiments, the maximum achievable value of max, can be 10. Accordingly, if the calculated value of max is 11, two layers may be necessary to ensure full coverage when a braid is applied to the tank 100. In further embodiments, determining the number of layers necessary for full coverage can be done in various suitable ways, including generating a test braid.
Step 2740 is to determine a number of braid carriers based on the determined strength ratio, jamming value, number of layers and the minimum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming. With strength ratio (3, jamming value g( ), number of layers M, and the target value of the minimum aspect ratio on the bend without jamming min, one can use (31) (reproduced below) to select an ideal value of N, the number of carriers.
However, in some embodiments, available braiding machines may not be able to accommodate the identified ideal number of carriers. If the ideal value is unavailable, it can be desirable to choose a braiding machine with a number of carriers N that is less than the identified ideal value, because in various embodiments, a larger number of carriers can be more likely to result in jamming. Where the number of carriers is modified from the determined ideal value, it can be desirable to determine whether the new min still avoids jamming, and that max gives full coverage with the number of layers, M.
Step 2745 is to determine a yarn weight based on the strength ratio, the selected number of carriers and the selected number of layers. For example in various embodiments, one can use Eq. (33) (reproduced below) to select a desired yarn weight, g, based on the calculated value of β, and the chosen values of N and M.
However, in various embodiments, the desired yarn weight may not be available. If the desired yarn weight does not exist or is otherwise not available, in some embodiments it can be desirable to select a yarn weight that is greater than the determined target value, because lower yarn weight can result in a lower likelihood of jamming. Where yarn weight has been modified from the calculated ideal yarn weight, it can be desirable to plug this new value N into Eq. (33), and recalculate min and max and determine if the new values of these aspect ratios still define a braid that is within acceptable parameters.
Alternative Method of for Choosing a Braid Configuration
In an alternative embodiment, after selecting a liner geometry and a fiber/braid material, there are three parameters that can be chosen to specify a braid geometry: number of layers M, number of carriers N, and linear weight of the yarn y. These three parameters can determine three metrics of the tank performance: the burst pressure p, the fiber utilization η, and the minimum aspect ratio on the bend min (the maximum aspect ratio on the straight sections max, can then related to min through g(rl/rs, θs).
In various embodiments, the fiber utilization, η, can also influence the burst pressure, p. In some implementations, burst tests have shown that light weight yarns give better fiber utilization, and that yarns with 12,000 filaments (with y=800 g/km) can provide a desirable balance between light weight for high fiber utilization but still giving enough weight to the braid to achieve a high burst pressure with minimal layers. Accordingly, in various embodiments, linear weight of the yarn, y, can set a value for fiber utilization,
The number of carriers, N, and number of layers, M can then be chosen to achieve a burst pressure, p, that is above a desired threshold and a minimum aspect ratio min that is above the threshold for jamming, but not too high as to cause low coverage on the large sections through an overly high value of max=min/g(rl/rs, θs). In various embodiments, the number of carriers, N, and the number of layers, M, can be chosen together to satisfy these two criteria through the previously derived equations
In some embodiments, the second equation can set carriers N, through jamming considerations, and then an appropriate number of layers M can be used to achieve the target burst pressure. However, in various embodiments, layers M must be an integer, and carriers N can be limited based on available braiding machines. Accordingly, in various embodiments layers M and carriers N can be set by these two limitations, and an exact burst pressure p and exact aspect ratio min may not be specifically achievable due to these limitations.
In further embodiments, an additional tool for tuning the configuration of a braid 300 can be to use layers of differing architecture. In some embodiments, finer tuning of burst pressure p can be achievable by having braid layers of differing architecture. In some embodiments, using layers of differing architecture can make it possible to use heavier yarns in one or more of the layers. For example, initial tests of some implementations have shown that if thin yarns are used on the inner layer, larger yarns may be used on the outer layer, a high fiber utilization can still be reached. In some embodiments, this can allow for fewer layers, thereby decreasing processing costs.
In various embodiments, the burst pressure p can be calculated from layers of mixed architecture by adding the burst pressures of each individual layer together, and the jamming criteria applies to the minimum of all layers,
p=p1+p2+ . . . +pM,
min=min(min,1,min,2, . . . ,min,M).
In this non-limiting example implementation, rl/rs=2.25 was initially defined. With rl/r′s=2.25, we calculated θs 49.7°, and g( )=0.114. We selected min=1.41 as a target, based on the data from EXAMPLE 1 above, and calculated that max.=12.4. Since a yarn is unlikely to flatten out beyond TO, =10, that means that the coverage factor of each layer will be around 10/12.4=0.81. To compensate for this lower coverage factor, we choose an architecture with M=2 layers. With these values of M and min, and a value of β=294 for carbon, we calculated that N=47.5. We selected N=46, under an assumption that there is an available braiding machine with this number of carriers. Additionally, by selecting a fewer number of carriers than the ideal value, we moved further away from the jamming threshold. With all of these values, we calculate a desired yarn yield of y=2141 g/km.
However, this specific yield does not exist, so we choose the next greatest one, which is y=2400 g/km for 3-end of a T700S 12K fiber. As discussed above, choosing a yield greater than the target value allows for fewer carriers, which moved us further away from jamming. Since we have increased the yarn weight by a factor of 1.11, we decreased the carrier number by 1/1.11=0.90, yielding N=42 carriers. With this value of N, and the previously calculated values of β and g( ), we calculated that the actual minimum aspect ratio would be min=1.60, which is above the threshold of 1.41. The actual maximum aspect ratio will be max=14, for which M=2 layers is probably sufficient. Thus, 3-end T700S 12K fibers with M=2 layers and N=46 carriers was the determined braid architecture in this example implementation.
Bending of Braided Liners
As discussed herein, tanks 100 can be bent and equipped with fittings to define a tank that can hold pressurized fluids (e.g. as show in
An additional adverse effect associated with the unbending moment is that the membrane tension in the axial direction on the outside of the bend is higher than it would be for a straight tube. This increased tension must be considered when designing a tank to ensure that it does not burst in this location.
For θs=54.7°, we can now calculate approximations for max(
where both have a relative error of ((rs/R)2). This means that, for R/rs=5, for example, the error is an order-one multiple (⅕)2=4%. The error could be 4%, or it could be 40%.
During previous testing, the 3-layer braid on a liner was observed to burst at 86±3 MPa corresponding to a calculated average fiber utilization of η=78±3%. However, initial testing of a 6-layer braid resulted in a measured burst pressure of 141±3 MPa, corresponding to a calculated average fiber utilization of η=64±1%. The burst pressures of these 6-layer samples are recorded in the table below. This fiber utilization in this example is much less than that measured for the 3-layer braid, so a theoretical study was conducted to determine possible reasons for this decreased efficiency.
As discussed herein, the average fiber utilization can be determined by dividing the measured burst pressure by the theoretical estimation of the burst pressure. This theoretical burst pressure can be calculated using a number of simplifying assumptions, including the thin wall assumption, whereby the tank wall is assumed to be infinitely thin, and the netting analysis assumption, whereby the fibers are assumed to be inextensible and to take the entirety of the load. Possible reasons for fiber utilization failing to reach 100% include damage to fibers during processing, fiber crimp (over-and-under angle), finite thickness effects, and the like.
In transitioning from the 3-layer braid to the 6-layer braid, a change to the composite can be that the thickness of the composite increased, meaning that finite thickness effects could be expected to be responsible for the decrease in measured fiber utilization.
To determine if this was the case, a theoretical model was developed to calculate the 3-dimensional elastic response of a cylinder composed of an arbitrary number of layers of anisotropic elastic laminates (referred to from here on as the “laminate model”).
The laminate model was first applied to the 3-layer braid that burst at 86±3 MPa. The predicted strain profile at 86 MPa is shown in
The maximum fiber strain can also be a useful metric, since the pressure vessel bursts when any fiber reaches its maximum strain. Finite thickness effects can be responsible for the fact that the fiber strain is higher towards the inside of the pressure vessel than the outside. The maximum fiber strain occurs in this example at a fiber utilization of 0.0164/0.02=82%, indicating that for the example 3-layer braid, approximately 5% of the deviation from 100% fiber utilization can be caused by non-constant fiber strain through the thickness of the vessel.
The laminate model was then applied to the 6-layer braid that burst at 141±3 MPa. The resulting strain profiles at 141 MPa are shown in
Another metric is the maximum fiber strain, which is ε=0.0154, corresponding to a maximum fiber utilization of 0.0154/0.02=77%. This fiber utilization is 5% less than the maximum fiber utilization predicted for the 3-layer case, and this difference can be accounted for with further analysis. However, there is a difference of 77%-65%=12% between the maximum and average fiber utilization for the example 6-layer braid, meaning that 12% of the deviation from 100% can be caused by finite-thickness effects.
This analysis predicts that adopting a smarter fiber architecture, which better shares the load among all fibers, can result in a boost in the average fiber utilization of up to 12%.
Using the laminate model, an optimization routine was run to determine a braid architecture that minimizes the difference in fiber strain through the thickness of the tank wall. It was found that architectures with increasing braid angle through the thickness are expected to perform the best in some embodiments.
Based on the best-case optimization, it was found that in some examples a 6-layer braid with optimized braid angles, pressurized to 175 MPa, can exceed the maximum fiber strain at which burst has been observed to occur. Therefore, a 7-layer braid with optimized braid angles was chosen as a candidate for optimized braid testing. The predicted strain profile of this candidate braid is shown in
In some examples, the expected maximum shear strain of this braid architecture is higher than has been tested before, so the composite could fail due to a shear-induced failure mode. However, the estimates of shear strain produced by the laminate model are all highly conservative, since the matrix and shear stiffness in the laminate model is reduced by a multiplier of 0.3, so in various examples, the strain should still be within a range that can be accommodated by the composite.
To calculate an “expected burst pressure” to be used as the denominator in calculating fiber utilization with observed burst pressure in the numerator, we can deduce the burst pressure that would correspond to an average fiber strain of ε=0.02. Since the laminate model only involved linear elasticity in various examples, we can just scale the expected burst pressure from the results at 175 MPa. The average fiber strain expected at 175 MPa is ε=0.0143, the “expected burst pressure” is 175*0.02/0.0143=245 MPa.
As discussed herein, the more sophisticated laminate model can illustrate that in some examples a certain percentage of lost fiber utilization is not accounted for by strain variations through the thickness of the braid. Even for the examples of the 3-layer braid, the fibers that were strained to the greatest extent only reached 82% of their predicted ultimate strain, indicating that other imperfections can be responsible for the last 18% of the predicted fiber utilization.
To test the influence of resin strength, example prototypes can be tested with a uniform braid angle of 55.5°. At this braid angle, the laminate model predicts that the average hoop-axial shear strain will be nearly zero in some examples. This angle also corresponds to the ideal braid angle in some examples that results from treating the pressure vessel with a version of the thin-wall netting analysis that is modified to account for first-order effects of the finite thickness of the pressure vessel.
With an inner radius, r, and a pressure vessel thickness, t, the formula for the braid angle for a thick-walled pressure vessel can be:
θ=tan−1(√{square root over (2+t/r)})
and for the 6-layer braid, with r=22.8 mm and t=2.7 mm, this formula yields 0=55.5°. The predicted strain profile for this example braid is shown in
The results of this test can yield information on whether matrix strength properties are influencing the burst pressure significantly in some examples. If the burst pressure is higher than for the 54.7° case, that can indicate that hoop-axial shear was contributing to lower than expected burst pressures, and if the burst pressure is lower it can implicate matrix strain.
Another possible cause for the lower-than-ideal burst pressure in some examples can be weakening of the fibers themselves, relative to their rated strength. This weakening can be caused by defects introduced during manufacturing, by damage during processing (braiding, winding, resin impregnation), or the like.
In some examples Toray T700S fibers (Toray Industries, Inc. of Japan) can be used since they can have strength comparable to the Hyosung H2550 fibers (Hyosung Corporation of South Korea) that was used before in previous example testing. Previous example testing indicated that the T700S performed less well than the H2550 in some examples, but the difference between the two was within the experimental noise, and the experiments were performed on an earlier example prototype that was created on an earlier version of a pilot production line.
The described embodiments are susceptible to various modifications and alternative forms, and specific examples thereof have been shown by way of example in the drawings and are herein described in detail. It should be understood, however, that the described embodiments are not to be limited to the particular forms or methods disclosed, but to the contrary, the present disclosure is to cover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives. Although specific embodiments are shown and described herein, further embodiments can include or specifically exclude various elements of the embodiments shown and described herein.
This application is a continuation of, and claims priority to, U.S. non-provisional application Ser. No. 15/368,182 entitled SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LINER BRAIDING AND RESIN APPLICATION, filed Dec. 2, 2016, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/262,101 entitled SYSTEMS AND METHODS FOR LINER BRAIDING AND RESIN APPLICATION, filed Dec. 2, 2015, which applications are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety and for all purposes.
This invention was made with Government support under DE-AR0000255 awarded by the US DOE. The Government has certain rights in this invention.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2025038 | Cannon | Dec 1935 | A |
2380372 | Alderfer | Jul 1945 | A |
3579402 | Goldsworthy | May 1971 | A |
3643813 | Noonan | Feb 1972 | A |
4139019 | Bresie et al. | Feb 1979 | A |
4253454 | Warncke | Mar 1981 | A |
4432302 | Farris et al. | Feb 1984 | A |
4901870 | Wright et al. | Feb 1990 | A |
4932403 | Scholley | Jun 1990 | A |
5036845 | Scholley | Aug 1991 | A |
5040933 | Lee et al. | Aug 1991 | A |
5123547 | Koch | Jun 1992 | A |
5127307 | Pimpis | Jul 1992 | A |
5653358 | Sneddon | Aug 1997 | A |
5830400 | Huvey et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5839383 | Stenning et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
6047860 | Sanders | Apr 2000 | A |
6116464 | Sanders | Sep 2000 | A |
6293590 | Ogasa | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6453920 | Izuchukwu et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6494497 | Kertesz | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6513523 | Izuchukwu et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6527075 | Izuchukwu et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6579401 | Izuchukwu et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6676159 | Sellergren | Jan 2004 | B1 |
7080864 | Casteran | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7494308 | Chun | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7757727 | Handa | Jul 2010 | B2 |
8308407 | Praud | Nov 2012 | B2 |
9217538 | Griffith et al. | Dec 2015 | B2 |
9279541 | Cohen | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9850852 | Kondogiani et al. | Dec 2017 | B2 |
10219621 | Wilhelmsen | Mar 2019 | B2 |
10472145 | Lu | Nov 2019 | B2 |
20040145091 | Willig et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040216656 | Fitzpatrick et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040250871 | Bingham et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040256016 | Arima et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050205137 | Pouchkarev | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20060006645 | Mukawa et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20070075085 | Arnold et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070221281 | Takagi | Sep 2007 | A1 |
20080098562 | Tagliaferri et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20090308475 | Stringfellow et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100075200 | Hatta | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20110041518 | Peterson et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20120161434 | Wells | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20130092311 | Kobayashi | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130092561 | Wellnitz | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130125740 | Kang et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130154257 | Ault | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130299503 | Griffith et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20140305951 | Griffith et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20150034233 | Hatta et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150048095 | Sanders | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150177172 | Upasani et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150308621 | Mathison | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20160018057 | Griffith et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160363265 | Griffith et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170145961 | Myers et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
20170159862 | Vizzarri | Jun 2017 | A1 |
20180029465 | Abd Elhamid et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
20180080609 | Abd Elhamid et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180111302 | Kondogiani et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20190264839 | Powell et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2636100 | Dec 2009 | CA |
1036534 | Oct 1989 | CN |
1231639 | Oct 1999 | CN |
2416338 | Jan 2001 | CN |
1306173 | Aug 2001 | CN |
2542907 | Apr 2003 | CN |
1518511 | Aug 2004 | CN |
0767338 | Apr 1997 | EP |
2404872 | Jan 2012 | EP |
3141793 | Mar 2017 | EP |
2005-265138 | Sep 2005 | JP |
2005337272 | Dec 2005 | JP |
2010-167695 | Aug 2010 | JP |
42863 | Dec 2004 | RU |
81568 | Mar 2009 | RU |
2426024 | Aug 2011 | RU |
141427 | Jun 2014 | RU |
9012982 | Nov 1990 | WO |
9814362 | Apr 1998 | WO |
200195967 | Dec 2001 | WO |
2001095966 | Dec 2001 | WO |
0239010 | May 2002 | WO |
2008081401 | Jul 2008 | WO |
2010107317 | Sep 2010 | WO |
2013056785 | Apr 2013 | WO |
2013166452 | Nov 2013 | WO |
2014123928 | Aug 2014 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Machine translation of JP 2005337272 date unknown. |
Guyader et al., “Analysis of 2D and 3D circular braiding processes: Modeling the interaction between the process parameters and pre-form architecture”, 2013. |
DeMiguel et al., “The role of initial tank temperature on refuelling of on-board hydrogen tanks,” Nov. 20, 2015, available online Apr. 22, 2016, retrieved Jul. 18, 2019, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360319915315391, 10 pages. |
Reddi et al., “Impact of hydrogen SAE J2601 fueling methods on fueling time of light-duty fuel cell electric vehicles,” May 16, 2017, retrieved Jul. 18, 2019, from https://www.osti.gov/servlets/purl/1389635, 23 pages. |
Schneider, “SAE J2601—Worldwide Hydrogen Fueling Protocol: Status, Standardization & Implementation,” Jul. 10, 2012, retrieved Jul. 18, 2019, from https://ww2.energy.ca.gov/contracts/notices/2012-07-10_workshop/presentations/SAE_Jesse_Schneider_Fueling_Protocol.pdf, 32 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/887,201, filed May 3, 2013. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/172,831, filed Feb. 4, 2014. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/183,614, filed Jun. 15, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 14/624,370, filed Feb. 17, 2015. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/232,355, filed Aug. 9, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/368,182, filed Dec. 2, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/792,090, filed Oct. 24, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/940,793, filed Mar. 29, 2018. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/940,862, filed Mar. 29, 2018. |
Extended European Search Report issued in EP Patent Application No. 16871653.8, dated Oct. 25, 2018, six pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 27, 2013, International Patent Application No. PCT/US2013/039565, filed May 3, 2013, 13 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 21, 2018, International Patent Application No. PCT/US2017/058068, filed Oct. 24, 2017, 8 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 21, 2018, International Patent Application No. PCT/US2018/025280, filed Mar. 29, 2018, 7 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 28, 2018, International Patent Application No. PCT/US2018/025283, filed Mar. 29, 2018, 8 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 16, 2017, International Patent Application No. PCT/US2016/064796, filed Dec. 2, 2016, six pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 23, 2017, International Patent Application No. PCT/US2016/037633, eight pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion dated May 14, 2014, International Patent Application No. PCT/US2014/014729, filed Feb. 4, 2014, 11 pages. |
Supplementary European Search Report issued in EP Patent Application No. 13784302.5, dated Nov. 24, 2015, 11 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20170291328 A1 | Oct 2017 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62262101 | Dec 2015 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15368182 | Dec 2016 | US |
Child | 15627814 | US |