| 3240644 | Method of making pressure vessels | Wolff | 220/590X | |
| 3321347 | Method of making a metallic-lined pressure vessel | Price et al. | 220/590X | |
| 3460233 | ROLL-WELD PROCESS FOR SHAPE FORMING BODIES OF REVOLUTION | Pfaffenberger et al. | 228/181 | |
| 3504820 | SPACED WALL RECEPTACLE HAVING WOUND COMPOSITE INSULATION BETWEEN THE WALLS | Barthel | ||
| 3815773 | CYCLIC PRESSURE VESSEL | Duvall et al. | 220/590 | |
| 3843010 | METAL LINED PRESSURE VESSEL | Morse et al. | 220/590 | |
| 3969812 | Method of manufacturing an overwrapped pressure vessel | Beck | 220/590X | |
| 4053081 | Reinforced filament-wound cut-port pressure vessel and method of making same | Minke | 220/590X | |
| 4225051 | Containers for storing fluids under pressure | Faudou et al. | 220/590 | |
| 4369894 | Filament wound vessels | Grover et al. | 220/590 | |
| 4835359 | Method of manufacturing hemispherical tank heads | Sciortino | 219/121.59 | |
| 4835975 | Cryogenic tank | Windecker | ||
| 4913310 | Storage tanks with secondary containment | Sharp | 220/445 | |
| 5024715 | Method for fabricating secondary containment capsule for underground storage tank | Trussler | 156/245 | |
| 5167352 | Double wall tank system | Robbins | 220/402 | |
| 5228585 | Variable capacity vehicle-mounted cryogenic storage vessels and method of making same | Lutgen et al. | 220/586X | |
| 5235837 | Fabrication of pressure vessels | Werner | 72/69 | |
| 5257761 | Assembly and method for attaching a pressure vessel to another object | Ratz et al. | 244/172 | |
| 5284996 | Waste gas storage | Vickers | 220/590X | |
| 5287988 | Metal-lined pressure vessel | Murray | 220/589 | |
| 5323953 | Pressurised storage for gases | Adderley et al. | 228/157 | |
| 5341638 | Low cost segmented structure for pressure vessels, rocket motors, piping | Van Name et al. | 220/589X | |
| 5379507 | Method of manufacturing a tank | Lindahl | 29/460 | |
| 5385262 | Vessel for storing fluid under pressure able to undergo rupture without fragmentation | Coquet | ||
| 5385263 | Compressed gas mobile storage module and lightweight composite cylinders | Kirk et al. | 220/586X | |
| 5405036 | Cylindrical large liquid container in the form of a multipart tank | Haase | 220/4.13 |
This is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/595,371, filed Feb. 1, 1996, now abandoned, and incorporated herein by reference.
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPV's) and their method of manufacture. More specifically, the present invention relates to high-performance COPV's including liners made of metals which exhibit high moduli of elasticity and high ductility, such as titanium alloys.
2. General Background
The basic technology for composite overwrapped pressure vessels with metal liners dates back to the late 60's and early 70's.
High-performance fibers offer very high strength-to-weight ratios and are ideal for making lightweight pressure vessels. However, composite laminates fabricated with these fibers have relatively high permeability and cannot contain high pressure liquids or gasses or low pressure gasses for extended periods of time. Therefore, composite pressure vessels must have a liner to prevent leakage. The tank efficiency, as measured by its pressure multiplied by its volume divided by its weight (PV/W), increases as the liner weight decreases. For low pressure and/or liquid containment, elastomeric or polymeric liners are used—these liners are strictly non-structural. For high pressure or gas containment, metal liners are typically used. Metal liners may be structural or non-structural.
For lightweight, high-pressure gas containment, there are basically two primary technologies (a) graphite/epoxy composite with a yielding aluminum liner, and (b) Kevlar/epoxy with load-sharing liners (typically stainless steel, titanium alloy, or inconel) The aluminum-lined, graphite/epoxy tank is the most prevalent technology, but it has limitations. First, the liner yields on each pressure cycle because the strain capability of the fibers is much higher than the elastic capability of the liner. This limits cycle life to around 100 cycles (depending on the specific design) and means that the liner is basically non-structural—it adds weight and a permeation barrier but very little load-carrying capability. PV/W (burst pressure of the tank in p.s.i. times volume in cubic inches, divided by weight in pounds) for these tanks is typically about 1.0×10
The second type of tank makes use of a liner which has a higher elastic range and remains elastic during operating pressure cycles.
The present invention is a COPV with a high PV/W (preferably at least 1.05 million inches, more preferably at least 1.25 million inches, and even more preferably at least 1.45 million inches, more preferably at least 1.80 million inches, and most preferably at least 2.00 million inches). The present invention is able to achieve such a high PV/W in part because it uses a liner made of a high-strength metal which has a low modulus of elasticity and good ductility. The preferred metals are titanium alloys. More preferably, the metal is from the group consisting of titanium alloyed with Al, Cb, Cr, Fe, Mo, Si, Sn, Ta, V, and/or Zr. The most preferred material to use for the metal liner of the tank of the present invention is Ti—6Al—4V.
The apparatus of the present invention is a composite overwrapped pressure vessel, comprising a liner made of a metal having a tensile yield strength in p.s.i. divided by tensile modulus of elasticity in p.s.i. (F
More preferably, the metal has a F
The ductility is more preferably at least 10%, even more preferably at least 15%, even more preferably at least 20%, even more preferably at least 25%, and more preferably at least 30%.
While other types of welds might work, the welding steps used to make the liner are preferably done with an autologous fusion process. More preferably, the welding process is electron beam welding, and most preferably, pulsed electron beam welding.
There is preferably an adhesive between the liner and the overwrap, and the adhesive is preferably a film adhesive. Preferably, the COPV includes a protective coating over the overwrap.
Preferably, the liner of the COPV of the present invention has a ratio of thickness in inches over diameter in inches of about 1.7×10
The overwrap can comprise a graphite/epoxy composite.
The present invention also comprises a method of manufacturing a composite overwrapped pressure vessel. The method preferably comprises the following steps:
(a) using spin forming, making a liner having first and second dome portions and a cylindrical portion made of a metal having a F
(b) forming first and second bosses made of the metal, the first boss being connected to the first dome portion and the second boss being connected to the second dome portion; and
(c) applying a composite overwrap over the liner, applying filaments of the overwrap onto the liner.
Welding steps are preferably done with an electron beam weld process.
It is an object of the present invention to produce a COPV which, when used in spacecraft, launch vehicles, or aircraft, effects significant savings as compared to current COPV's.
It is an object of the present invention to produce a COPV with a high PV/W.
It is also an object of the present invention to produce a COPV with a liner made of a metal having a high F
It is another object of the present invention to provide a method of producing a COPV with a high PV/W.
As used herein, including in the claims, PV/W stands for tank burst pressure in p.s.i. times volume of the tank in cubic inches, divided by the weight of the tank in pounds. PV/W is expressed in inches.
For a further understanding of the nature and objects of the present invention, reference should be had to the following detailed description taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, in which like parts are given like reference numerals, and wherein:
The following table lists the part numbers and part descriptions as used herein and drawings attached hereto. The preferred materials, if any, follow in parentheses.
| PARTS LIST | ||
| Part | ||
| Number | Description | |
| 10 | COPV of the first embodiment of the present invention | |
| 20 | liner (titanium-alloy) | |
| 20M | maximum thickness of domes 21, 23 | |
| 21 | spun-formed dome (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 22 | liner cylinder (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 23 | spun-formed dome (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 24 | machined boss (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 25 | machined tube (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 26 | machined boss (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 27 | fitting used to test tank | |
| 28 | holes in boss 24 | |
| 29 | holes in boss 26 | |
| 30 | EB welds | |
| 31 | preferred region for boss/dome weld | |
| 40 | adhesive (AF-191) | |
| 50 | filament-wound graphite-epoxy overwrap | |
| (T-1000/EPON 862- | ||
| Curing Agent W) | ||
| 51 | graphite windings of filament-wound graphite-epoxy | |
| overwrap 50 | ||
| 60 | epoxy coating (EPON 862-Curing Agent W) | |
| 120 | liner (titanium-alloy) | |
| 120M | maximum thickness of domes 121, 123 | |
| 121 | spun-formed dome (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 123 | spun-formed dome (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 124 | machined boss (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 126 | machined boss (Ti-6Al-4V) | |
| 130 | interface of cylindrical part of domes 21, 23, | |
| 121, 123 and non-cylindrical part thereof | ||
The COPV of the first embodiment of the present invention, COPV
One key feature of the present invention is the method of manufacturing of the liner. The approach used is novel in the industry and offers significantly improved performance and decreased cost. The key features of the preferred liner fabrication process are listed below.
The preferred liner approach is to 1) spin form domes
1. Spun Formed Domes—Spun titanium domes have not previously been used in composite overwrapped pressure vessels (although there is some history in using them in all titanium tanks). The use of spin forming significantly reduces cost and lead time over the prior art—primarily forging. To achieve the desired performance in an overwrapped tank application, special processing steps, namely spinning temperature, machining practices (i.e., machining after the heat treatment to remove all oxygen-enriched material from the domes), and heat treating, were implemented; the steps are above and beyond what is typical for titanium dome spinning for non-composite overwrapped tanks.
2. Formed and Welded Cylinder—Formed and welded cylinders have not previously been used in composite overwrapped pressure vessels (although there is some history in using them in all titanium tanks). Similarly to the domes, an optimum process had to be developed for the overwrapped pressure vessel application. The standard TIG weld process was abandoned for a pulsed electron beam weld process.
3. Assembly Welding—A liner fabricated with an assembly method of welding domes to cylinders has not been used for composite overwrapped pressure vessels. Electron beam welding was used in these operations also due to the high ductility and minimal distortion required of the weld in this application.
Several additional factors are key to the success of the vessel and are somewhat innovative in their own right, but are probably considered dependent claims to the primary innovation, i.e. the liner fabrication approach. Some of these are listed below
1. Bonding the liner to the overwrap. This should be done to achieve proper vessel performance. The approach of using a high performance film adhesive has been used before on metal lined pressure vessels, but is not prevalent and the present inventors are not aware of prior use with titanium. In fact, some metal lined pressure vessel manufacturers make sure the liner is not bonded to the composite overwrap.
2. The basic vessel design. In particular, the dome shape and thickness contour are important parameters to vessel performance. Also the configuration of the overwrap in the regions around end fittings and at the dome/cylinder interface is important. The present design is optimized; however the basic design approach is not foreign to the industry.
3. The materials and manufacturing process for the composite overwrap. The selection of materials and the composite manufacturing process are important components to the success of tank
4. The thickness of the liner. The 0.025″ titanium liner
With the present invention, to make domes
The pressure vessel technology developed herein represents a significant advantage over the current state of the art.
The construction of the tank
The primary innovative feature of the titanium liner
The performance demands for the titanium in overwrapped pressure vessels are much greater than in a typical titanium application. This is because the liner is yielded biaxially (i.e., the liner
A discussion of the key components and assemblies involved in the subject invention follows. A schematic of the fabrication flow is shown in FIG.
For dome fabrication, a spin-forming process was selected. Spin forming offered a low cost, readily available option for dome fabrication as compared to conventional forging technologies. Although spin forming is not a new process, the use of spin forming to form domes for overwrapped tanks is innovative, as well as is the complete dome-fabrication process. Initial attempts to use industry-standard spun-dome processing (developed for all metal tanks) proved inadequate for this application. The key steps to fabricating a dome are spin forming the dome, heat treating it, and machining it.
In spin forming the domes
The spun domes
After this heat treatment, the dome
The bosses, or end fittings,
Cylinder
The liner is assembled by EB welding. First the bosses
The adhesive and surface-preparation technique are essential to the success of this design concept. Once the liner
The liner
The composite overwrap
The tank overwrap can advantageously be cured as follows. (1) At an average rate of 1±0.5 degrees F. per minute, the part is raised to 160±10 degrees F. and held for 20-25 minutes. (2) Excess resin is removed after the 160 degree F. hold. The part temperature may drop as much as 20 degrees F. during resin removal. (3) At a rate of 1-10 degrees F. per minute, the temperature of the part is raised back to 160±10 degrees F. (4) At an average rate of 1±0.5 degrees F. per minute, the temperature of the part is raised to 200±10 degrees F. Excess resin is removed from the part surface. (5) At an average rate of 1±0.5 degrees F. per minute, the temperature of the part is raised to 250±10 degrees F. and held for 50-70 minutes. (6) At an average rate of 1 to 4 degrees F., the part or reference panel temperature (a reference panel may be used to determine temperature to prevent damage to the part by thermocouples) is raised to 350±10 degrees F. and held for 105-135 minutes. (7) At a rate not exceeding 5 degrees F. per minute, the part is cooled to below 150 degrees F.
A protective coating
COPV
There are many variations of the winding process which may be employed. One such variation makes use of a “prepreg”, which is fiber impregnated with resin and partially cured into a ribbon or band, in place of fiber impregnated with liquid resin. Another variation is to use more sophisticated equipment which physically places the fiber or prepreg band into place using computer-aided machinery—this process is generally referred to as “fiber placement” or “tape placement”.
A test article was designed and fabricated to demonstrate the technology. For this activity, a new satellite program and Mil Std. 1522A requirements were selected because they (a) were typical for spacecraft applications for overwrapped tanks, and (b) the new satellite program was a potential application of the technology.
The primary goal of this program was to develop a tank design which met all requirements with sufficient margins, repeatable processing, and high quality materials.
The primary design drivers of this tank were the burst pressure and weight requirements. Structurally, the tank designed to meet burst pressure requirements was adequate for all other load cases (e.g. maximum expected operating pressure (MEOP)+vibration loads, MEOP+thermal, etc.). Other design considerations included: (a) cycle life; (b) the high-temperature environment (approximately 300° F.) encountered because of the proximity of the tank to a spacecraft engine, (c) mechanical interface requirements (as referenced in SCD 20032541, Rev. A); (d) vacuum outgassing requirements; (e) chemical resistance to hydrazine.
The fundamental design concept, a thin metal liner with a high-performance graphite/epoxy overwrap, was selected early in development trade studies. Graphite/epoxy, due to its high strength-to-weight ratio, was required for the overwrap to meet the weight requirements. Initially, three liner systems were considered, aluminum—the current state of the art, electroplated copper—a developmental technology with limited success in preliminary development with the potential for very low weight, and titanium alloy. The titanium alloy was selected over aluminum because it offered higher reliability and lower weight. The titanium was selected over electroplated copper because of the high design/fabrication risk associated with the copper lined tank development.
The basic design was defined by using netting analysis which provided the minimum quantity of both hoop (circumferential) and helical (end-to-end) plies for the overwrap and also defined the basic dome geometry. The basic details of the boss design and dome thickness profile were defined based on sound engineering principles. The overwrap configuration, specifically the termination of the hoop plies at the dome/cylinder interface, and the method of terminating helical plies in the boss region, were defined by a combination of sound engineering practice and conducting developmental testing of tanks under the Lockheed Martin IR&D program. The final details of the design were optimized using finite element analysis methods. Numerous parametric analyses were performed to arrive at the final configuration.
The basic tank
The titanium alloy, Ti—6Al—4V, was selected because of its high elastic capability. Unlike aluminum or copper, titanium alloy can remain elastic during operating cycles as shown in FIG.
All required validation testing for the technology program was successful. A brief description of all validation tests is listed below.
The test article configuration is as discussed above.
The tank was pressurized to 4830, −0, +30 psi., the volume was determined, the pressure was increased to 6030, −0, +30 psi. and held for 5 minutes for proof test, the tank pressure was decreased to 4830, −0, +30 psi. and the volume and dimensional growth measurements were recorded. The volume of the tank was 5086 in.
To leak test the tank
Sine and random vibration testing were performed on a tank pressurized to 4,800 p.s.i. with helium according to the vibration levels shown below in Tables 1 and 2.
| TABLE 1 | ||
| Tank Sinusoidal Sweep Vibration Schedule | ||
| Axis | Frequency Range (Hz) | Acceleration Level (G*s) |
| X-Axis | 4-17 | 0.5* D.A. |
| 17-65 | 7.0 | |
| 70-100 | 3.0 | |
| Y and Z Axes | 2-20 | 0.5* D.A. |
| 20-80 | 10.0 | |
| 85-100 | 4.0 | |
| TABLE 2 | ||
| Tank Random Vibration Schedule | ||
| Power Spectral Density | ||
| Frequency Range (Hz) | Slope (dB/Oct.) | (G |
| 20 | .00246 | |
| 20-100 | +6.0 | |
| 100-1000 | .06 | |
| 1000-2000 | −6.0 | |
| 2000 | .015 | |
MEOP cycling was conducted by pressurizing tank
Proof cycling was conducted by cycling tank
Thermal cycling was conducted by pressurizing tank
A de-tanking test was also performed. The purpose of the de-tanking test was to verify the tank could withstand the external heat encountered during service while the tank is being de-pressurized. Because of the difficulty in simulating the exact tank surroundings, accurately monitoring and controlling a heat source based on heat flux, and not being able to simulate the effects of a no-gravity environment, the tank test was devised to monitor and control tank temperature, as predicted by analysis, rather than perform an exact simulation. A margin of 18° F. was added to the maximum temperature for test purposes to account for any inaccuracies in the analysis.
The test was a three-stage blow down of the tank where the mass flow out of the tank was regulated at 0.001 lbm/sec and the temperature of the tank was raised using heater pads bonded to the appropriate areas of the tank. There were two 50-minute de-pressurization cycles and one 22-minute cycle. Between cycles, initial tank and chamber temperatures were restored. The tank temperatures were maintained to within a few degrees of the predictions (with final maximum temperatures always meeting or exceeding predictions) and the mass flow rate was easily maintained between 0.0009 and 0.0011 lbm/sec. At the end of the final 22-minute de-pressurization cycle, the tank pressure was 750 psi, the maximum tank temperature in the center of the heated section was 275.6° F., and the minimum temperature on the tank cylinder directly opposite the heated part of the tank was 67.3° F. At this point the heaters were turned off and the tank was allowed to continue to de-pressurize at 0.001 lbm/sec to 400 psi., at which time the maximum tank temperature was 147.8° F. The tank was subsequently completely de-pressurized, at which time the maximum temperature was 94.1° F.
The de-tanking test was successful and there was no detectable damage to the tank.
To conduct a leak check, the tank was placed in a vacuum bag attached to a helium leak detector. The bagged tank was placed in an altitude chamber and the chamber pressure was brought below one torr. The tank was pressurized with helium to 4830, −0, +30 psi. After the tank pressure had been stabilized for 30 minutes, the leak rate was measured. The leak rate was 1.4×10
Regarding volumetric expansion, the tank was pressurized to 4830, −0, +30 psi. and the tank volume was measured. The tank volume was 5112 in.
The tank was pressurized to 7230 psi., held for 15 seconds, then pressurized to failure, which occurred at 9339 psi.
The exact mode of failure cannot be determined because, despite efforts to suspend the tank with elastic cords to prevent secondary damage, there was significant secondary damage to the tank which masked the exact failure initiation site.
The failure scenario, as constructed from examination of the failed article and video tape, occurs as follows.
(1) There was a failure in the dome region of the tank on the end with the pressure inlet. This is evidenced by a visual indication of water in the video. The impulse of this failure instantly sheared the bolts holding the tank to the plates attached to the elastic cords. (It is known that the bolts were sheared because the plate to which the tank was attached at the failure initiation end did not move with the tank and the scar from the impact of the opposite boss opposite on the other mounting plate to which it was attached is not concentric to the bolt pattern.)
(2) The tank was propelled into the wall opposite the failure location which imploded the dome opposite the failure and exploded the dome where the failure initiated.
(3) The entire boss and upper portion of the dome from the failure initiation end of the tank (to a diameter of approximately 8″) was separated from the tank after the tank impacted the wall. Also there was extensive fiber and liner damage in both domes.
Although there is no way to be certain exactly what happened, it is likely that the failure initiated in the liner dome at a radius of approximately 4″ from the longitudinal centerline. Stress analysis shows this is the region where there is extensive yielding of the liner and that the strains at burst pressure are over 4.4% in the meridional direction and 1.4% in the hoop direction, which are sufficient to fail the metal. In a previous development test of an identical tank which achieved a similar pressure (9368 psi) and did not fail catastrophically (it failed by fiber failure in outer hoop plies only—the remainder of the overwrap and liner remained intact), there was visible indication of extreme yielding in this region.
The initial failure probably released a propulsive jet of water which failed the bolts holding the tank in the elastic-cord-supported fixture and propelled the tank into the wall, thereby creating the extensive secondary damage.
Although failure above 9000 psi. is considered a burst, previous development tanks of essentially identical overwrap configuration (same exact configuration of the six helical plies but had two fewer hoop plies, 16 as opposed to the current 18), but with different liner designs leaked at above 6800 psi. In one of these tanks, the liner had a different design in the boss and dome region and failed at 6870 psi. with a large crack in the dome (at approximately 7.5″ diameter from longitudinal axis), which only leaked—this was a pneumatic test with nitrogen. In another test of the present liner design with a different longitudinal cylinder weld, a tank leaked at above 6800 psi by cracking along the entire length longitudinal cylinder weld, (this weld was a TIG weld which was used only in development and abandoned prior to fabrication of flight or final technology validation tanks). This demonstrates that the tank overwrap design is sufficient to produce leak before burst failures in liner failures below 6800 psi, which encompasses MEOP (4800 psi) and Proof pressure (6000 psi).
The technology discussed herein could be extended to a tanks of a variety of sizes, shapes, and pressure requirements. In addition, other metals, such as other titanium alloys. Inconel, or Stainless steel could be used as the liner material with similar results. Similarly, other fibers, resins, and adhesives may be used with similar results.
This technology offers cost-effective performance enhancement to a number of applications where weight is critical. Some of the specific advantages are significantly lower weight, short lead time, high cyclic life potential, and cost-effective performance enhancement. These advantages are discussed in detail below.
The typical weight reduction is about 20% over competitive aluminum-lined tanks and 40% over comparable steel-lined tanks or titanium-lined tanks, 40% over low-pressure titanium tanks, and 60% over high-pressure titanium tanks as shown in FIG.
a) Ability to deliver a larger payload. Satellite propulsion busses and launch vehicles can deliver a finite mass to the proper orbit. Reduction of the mass of the tanks allows more mass for the electronics or other components of the spacecraft.
(b) Increased life on orbit. Satellites must expend propellant in some type of thrust-producing engine to maintain a proper orbit. Satellite life is limited by the amount of propellant which the spacecraft can deliver to orbit. Reducing tank weight can increase the amount of propellant taken to orbit, and therefore increase the life of the satellite.
(c) Reduced launch costs. As the mass of the spacecraft increases, so does the size and cost of the launch vehicle required to launch the spacecraft. Reduction in tank weight can mean the difference in launching with one class of launch vehicle versus another, which one mean dramatic differences in launch costs. In addition, some launches are priced on a per-pound basis, so every pound can save $5000 to $15,000 or more.
Typical lead time for tank
Because the liner
When compared to aluminum-lined tanks, tank
When compared to other titanium-lined or steel-lined technologies, the COPV
The technology of the present invention is a breakthrough in weight and cost efficiency for COPVS. The technology, utilizing a thin titanium liner, (utilizing spinning technology, off-the-shelf materials, and electron-beam welding) combined with a high-performance graphite/epoxy overwrap, offers the following advantages:
1. At least a 20% weight savings over traditional aluminum-lined vessels with comparable lead time and availability.
2. Cost-effective performance enhancement over aluminum-lined vessels for launch vehicle/spacecraft applications. For example, for a typical 4800 psi., 5000 in.
3. Approximately 40 to 45% weight savings over comparable technologies for multi-use tanks, such as those used on the Space Shuttle. If implemented on Space Station, the number of launches required could be reduced or the capability increased.
4. Approximately 30 to 50% cost savings and a 50% or greater reduction in lead time over prior technologies (e.g. forged/machined liners). These features are critical in the very competitive commercial satellite market.
COPV
Exemplary dimensions for the COPV
diameter of cylinder
16.0 inches;
length of cylinder
length of domes
length of COPV
thickness of cylinder
maximum thickness of domes
average thickness of overwrap
minimum thickness of overwrap
maximum thickness of overwrap
the hoop plies can advantageously be wound at 8 tows per 0.58±0.010 inches tow spacing;
the helical plies can advantageously be wound at 8 tows per 0.55±0.010 inches tow spacing;
with these exemplary dimensions, the plies can terminate as shown in Table 3;
weight of liner
burst pressure of COPV
volume of COPV
weight of COPV
PV/W for COPV
F
ductility of liner
Domes
The composite overwrap can, for example, consist of 24 plies applied as shown in Table 3 (ply
| TABLE 3 | ||
| Angle (In | ||
| Degrees) | ||
| with Respect | ||
| to Long- | ||
| itudinal Axis | Location (In Inches) of Termination of Ply | |
| Ply | of Cylinder | at Each End |
| | ||
| 24 | 88-92 | 1.000 + .00, −.20 towards the center from a |
| reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 towards the | ||
| center from the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) | ||
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical portion | ||
| of the dome | ||
| 23 | 88-92 | .750 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference linespaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at | ||
| 130 in | ||
| elliptical portion of the dome | ||
| 22 | 88-92 | .500 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 21 | 88-92 | .250 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 20 | 11-19 | adjacent the bosses, along a circle of radius |
| 2.80 inches, created on the longitudinal axis of the | ||
| liner | ||
| 19 | 88-92 | .500 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 18 | 88-92 | .250 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 17 | 88-92 | .250 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 16 | 10-17 | adjacent the bosses, along a circle of radius |
| 2.20 inches, centered on the longitudinal axis of the | ||
| liner | ||
| 15 | 88-92 | .300 + .20 − .00 towards the center |
| from the interface (indicated at 130 in | ||
| cylindrical portion and the elliptical portion of the | ||
| dome | ||
| 14 | 88-92 | .250 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 13 | 88-92 | .300 + .20 − .00 towards the center |
| from the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) | ||
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 12 | 10-17 | adjacent the bosses, along a circle of radius |
| 2.20 inches, centered on the longitudinal axis of the | ||
| liner | ||
| 11 | 88-92 | .250 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 10 | 88-92 | .300 + .20 − .00 towards the center |
| from the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) | ||
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 9 | 8-13 | adjacent the bosses, along a circle of radius |
| 1.80 inches, centered on the longitudinal axis of the | ||
| liner | ||
| 8 | 88-92 | .250 + .00, −.20 towards the center |
| from a reference line spaced .300 + .20 − .00 | ||
| towards the center from the interface (indicated at 130 | ||
| in | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 7 | 88-92 | the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) |
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical portion | ||
| of the dome | ||
| 6 | 88-92 | .300 + .20 − .00 towards the center |
| from the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) | ||
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 5 | 7-12 | adjacent the bosses, along a circle of radius |
| 1.80 inches, centered on the longitudinal axis of the | ||
| liner | ||
| 4 | 88-92 | the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) |
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical portion | ||
| of the dome | ||
| 3 | 88-92 | .300 + .20 − .00 towards the center |
| from the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) | ||
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical | ||
| portion of the dome | ||
| 2 | 88-92 | the interface (indicated at 130 in FIG. 15) |
| of the cylindrical portion and the elliptical portion | ||
| of the dome | ||
| 1 | 6-10 | adjacent the bosses, along a circle of radius |
| 1.80 inches, centered on the longitudinal axis of the | ||
| liner | ||
The typical length of cylinder
The composite overwrap takes most of the load. The portion of domes
The present invention can be used as pressurant tanks for satellites and spacecraft and as fuel and oxidizer tanks for satellites and spacecraft.
Vehicles/spacecraft applications which require tanks which could directly use this technology include: (1) various satellites (pressurant, fuel and oxidizer), (2) Space Station (life support and station reboost), (3) Space Shuttle (Life support, orbital maneuvering), (4) Re-useable Launch Vehicle (life support, primary/secondary fuel/oxidizer tank pressurization, secondary fuel and oxidizer), (5) Hybrid Rockets (oxidizer tank pressurization), (6) Space Station/Shuttle Extra-Vehicle Activity—Pressurized gas proposed as propulsion media for most applications (manned and unmanned).
Liner
The machining and inspection step which is eliminated was initially planned into the program to determine if there was any cracking of the spun domes before they were annealed and final machined. After processing of many domes, there has never been any indications of cracking at this step, so it is eliminated in the construction of liner
As can be seen by reviewing FIG.
Though the liners
Because many varying and different embodiments may be made within the scope of the invention concept herein taught, and because many modifications may be made in the embodiments herein detailed in accordance with the descriptive requirement of the law, it is to be understood that the details herein are to be interpreted as illustrative and not in a limiting sense.