Group 14671Expansion Joint Active Monitoring

Team MembersJoe Savino

Mechanical Engineer

Adam RemickElectrical Engineer

Andrew Hintermeier Mechanical Engineer

Expansion JointsBolted between pipesMade of Rubber, Fabric and

MetalsDiameters of 2’’ to 130’’Factors that contribute to

failure:Axial DisplacementWearPressure/Temperature

BenchmarkingNo system in the marketDifficult to measure composite/rubber

degradationMultiple reasons for degradationCurrent method is regular preventative

maintenanceVisual InspectionQualitative data no quantitative data

Our GoalDeliverablesSensor package for

EJ’s 4in and largerBe able to predict

impending EJ failureMeasure axial

displacement, wear, pressure and temperature

Stretch Goals:Mountable on any type of EJMeasure difference in vibration across EJIntegrate with previous software group’s package

ApproachUse one model of EJ

for development and testing

206 EZ-FLO 8” Diameter

If a proven method is demonstrated we will move on to testing on other types/sizes

Customer Requirements

Customer Rqmt. # Importance Description

CR1 1 Monitor losses in integrity

CR2 1 Withstand working environment

CR3 1 Easy data access

CR4 2 Compatible with existing hardware

CR5 1 Alterations must not significantly affect the strength of the EJ

CR6 1 Fit on the EJ

Engineering Requirementsrqmt. # Importance Source Engr. Requirement (metric) Unit of Measure Marginal

ValueIdeal Value

S1 5 CR1 Measure Pressure PSI 1 1

S2 5 CR1 Measure Temperature °F 400 450

S3 5 CR1 Measure Axial Displacement in 2 4

S4 5 CR1 Measure Wear in 3 5

S5 5 CR2/CR5 Temperature cycles to Fail cycles 500 750

S6 5 CR2/CR5 Pressure cycles to fail cycles 1000 1500

S7 5 CR2/CR5 Mechanical cycles to fail cycles 3000 4500

S8 2 CR6 Small Size in 2 4

S9 4 CR4 Sensors connect to old system Binary 1 1

S10 3 CR6 Easily Mountable number of steps 8 1

S11 3 CR3 Analog Votage output Binary 1 1

Functional Decomposition

Detect EJ Failure

Sense EJ’s Current state

Sense Localized

DefectSense

General Wear

Process Data

Collect Data

Determine Dangerous Conditions

Concept Development

Measure PressureMeasure

TemperatureMeasure Axial Displacement Measure Wear Mount sensors to EJ

Manometer Thermocouple IMU/Accelerometer Ultrasound Built into EJ

Diaphragm (strain) sensor Thermometer Ruler/caliper Hardness tester Glued on outside

Diaphragm (capacitance) sensor Little Black chip Ultrasound Force sensor Zip Ties

Diaphragm (piezoelectric) sensor Thermistor Laser sensor Strapped to outside

EM Proximity sensor Spacer part

Linear Potentiometer

Pugh Chart for Axial Displacement

Axial Displacement DecisionLinear Potentiometer

• Worried about interference with EJ expansion

Accelerometer eliminated due to effects from vibrationUltrasound was picked for measuring wear, worried about interference

Pugh Chart for Wear

Wear Measurement DecisionUltrasonic Thickness

SensorPossible difficulties:

Mounting challenges Must be on outside of EJ

Engineering challenges Ability to use probe

without digital outputBenefits

No impact on fluidNo impact on EJ

Pugh Chart for Pressure

Pressure Measurement DecisionDiaphragm (strain )

sensor Possible difficulties

Requires contact with fluid Impact integrity Fluid’s impact on sensor

Pugh Chart for Temperature

Temperature Measurement DecisionThermocoupleBenefits

Previously tested successfully

Fits between layers within EJ

DifficultiesCalculating

temperature difference between inner layer of EJ and fluid

Selected Mounting OptionsSpacer addition

Potentially one per sideAllows access to fluid without

altering EJUse with Pressure Sensor

and potentially vibration sensor

Outside MountUsed with displacement and

thickness sensorInside Mount

Used with ThermocoupleAlready been tested by

previous iteration

Risk AnalysisID Risk Item Effect Cause

Likelihood

Severity

Importance Action to Minimize Risk

1Weaken EJ Doesn’t past test

cyclesPoor design implementation

3 3 9 Consult Garlock design Engineers

2 Sensors fail earlyDoes not measure failure criteria

Sensors not rated for EJ requirements 1 3 3

Pick sensors with high safety factor

3 Scope too large

Not able to accomplish all requirements

More goals than team is capable of 2 2 4 Discussed with customer

4 Parts ordered too lateNot enough time to build and test Late deign choices 1 3 3

Identify and order long lead time parts early in design process

5 Poor team work ethicDo not complete work on time

Poor communication/motivation 1 2 2

Bonding activities/high communication

6 Not sensing local failureFailure to measure failure criteria Insufficient research 3 3 9

Research rubber failure degradation thoroughly

7 Mounting failure

Ease of mounting/cycle failure/ doesn’t measure failure Poor construction 2 3 6 Consult Garlock Engineers

Project Schedule (near future)

• System Design Review – Today

• Subsystem – 10/24/13• Sensors selected and Quoted – 10/31/13

• Detailed Design - 12/5/13• Custom parts designed w/ Engineering Drawings• Test Plans

• Final Review – 12/12/13

Questions?