Probabilistic Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Medical Plastic Moulded Components Subject to Large Scale Production

Tim Brix Nerenst, Martin Ebro, Morten Nielsen, K. Bhadani, Gauti Asbjörnsson, T. Eifler, Kim Lau Nielsen
{"title":"Probabilistic Performance Evaluation and Optimization of Medical Plastic Moulded Components Subject to Large Scale Production","authors":"Tim Brix Nerenst, Martin Ebro, Morten Nielsen, K. Bhadani, Gauti Asbjörnsson, T. Eifler, Kim Lau Nielsen","doi":"10.1115/imece2021-68918","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n A new medical device can take years to develop from early concept to product launch. The long development process can be attributed to the severe consequences for the patient if the device malfunctions. Three approaches are often combined to mitigate risks: rigorous simulation and modeling, physical test programs, and Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) — all of which are time-consuming. Physical test programs are often carried out on prototype components from the same batch and, therefore, limited in revealing the actual distribution of performance. The risk probabilities are subsequently based on educated guesses. Furthermore, simulation and modeling are usually performed on nominal geometry — not accounting for variation — and only provide a safety factor against failure. The traditional use of safety factors in structural analysis versus the probabilistic approach to risk management presents an obvious misfit. Therefore, these three approaches are not ideal for addressing the two key questions that the design engineer has: 1) How often will the design fail, and 2) How should the design be changed to improve robustness and failure rates. The present work builds upon the existing Robust and Reliability-Based Design Optimization (R2BDO) and adjusts it to address the key questions above using finite element analysis. The key feature of the new framework is the focus on minimal use of computational resources while being able to screen feasible design concepts early in the embodiment phase and subsequently optimize their probabilistic performance. A case study in collaboration with a medical design and manufacturing company demonstrates the new framework. The case study includes FEA contact modeling between two plastic molded components with twelve geometrical variables. The optimization focuses on minimizing the failure rate (and improving design robustness) concerning three constraint functions (contact pressure, strain, torque). The study finds that the new framework achieves significant improvements to the component’s performance function (failure rate) with minimal computational resources.","PeriodicalId":113474,"journal":{"name":"Volume 2B: Advanced Manufacturing","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Volume 2B: Advanced Manufacturing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1115/imece2021-68918","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A new medical device can take years to develop from early concept to product launch. The long development process can be attributed to the severe consequences for the patient if the device malfunctions. Three approaches are often combined to mitigate risks: rigorous simulation and modeling, physical test programs, and Failure Mode Effect Analysis (FMEA) — all of which are time-consuming. Physical test programs are often carried out on prototype components from the same batch and, therefore, limited in revealing the actual distribution of performance. The risk probabilities are subsequently based on educated guesses. Furthermore, simulation and modeling are usually performed on nominal geometry — not accounting for variation — and only provide a safety factor against failure. The traditional use of safety factors in structural analysis versus the probabilistic approach to risk management presents an obvious misfit. Therefore, these three approaches are not ideal for addressing the two key questions that the design engineer has: 1) How often will the design fail, and 2) How should the design be changed to improve robustness and failure rates. The present work builds upon the existing Robust and Reliability-Based Design Optimization (R2BDO) and adjusts it to address the key questions above using finite element analysis. The key feature of the new framework is the focus on minimal use of computational resources while being able to screen feasible design concepts early in the embodiment phase and subsequently optimize their probabilistic performance. A case study in collaboration with a medical design and manufacturing company demonstrates the new framework. The case study includes FEA contact modeling between two plastic molded components with twelve geometrical variables. The optimization focuses on minimizing the failure rate (and improving design robustness) concerning three constraint functions (contact pressure, strain, torque). The study finds that the new framework achieves significant improvements to the component’s performance function (failure rate) with minimal computational resources.
大规模生产医用塑料模塑件的概率性能评价与优化
一种新的医疗设备从最初的概念发展到产品发布可能需要数年时间。如果设备发生故障,对患者的严重后果可归因于漫长的开发过程。三种方法通常结合在一起来降低风险:严格的模拟和建模、物理测试程序和失效模式影响分析(FMEA)——所有这些都很耗时。物理测试程序通常是在同一批次的原型组件上进行的,因此,在揭示性能的实际分布方面受到限制。风险概率随后基于有根据的猜测。此外,模拟和建模通常在标称几何上进行-不考虑变化-并且只提供防止故障的安全系数。在结构分析中使用安全系数的传统方法与风险管理的概率方法存在明显的不匹配。因此,这三种方法对于解决设计工程师的两个关键问题并不理想:1)设计失败的频率,以及2)如何更改设计以提高稳健性和故障率。目前的工作建立在现有的基于鲁棒和可靠性的设计优化(R2BDO)的基础上,并对其进行调整,以使用有限元分析来解决上述关键问题。新框架的主要特点是专注于最小限度地使用计算资源,同时能够在实施阶段早期筛选可行的设计概念,并随后优化其概率性能。与一家医疗设计和制造公司合作的案例研究展示了新的框架。案例研究包括两个具有12个几何变量的塑料成型部件之间的有限元接触建模。优化的重点是在三个约束函数(接触压力、应变、扭矩)下最小化故障率(并提高设计鲁棒性)。研究发现,新框架以最小的计算资源实现了组件性能功能(故障率)的显著改进。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信