Comparative Study for Inspection Planning of Aircraft Structural Components
- PDF / 1,927,874 Bytes
- 10 Pages / 595.276 x 790.866 pts Page_size
- 1 Downloads / 202 Views
ORIGINAL PAPER
Comparative Study for Inspection Planning of Aircraft Structural Components Sung Jin Kim1 · Joo-Ho Choi2 Received: 19 June 2020 / Revised: 11 August 2020 / Accepted: 2 September 2020 © The Korean Society for Aeronautical & Space Sciences 2020
Abstract In the aircraft operation, the metallic airframes are usually exposed to the extreme loading conditions during the flights due to which the risk of failure should be assessed and held to an allowed level to prevent the associated loss. If the components are inspectable, the components should be inspected routinely so that the fatigue damage can be detected before failure, which usually requires non-destructive inspection (NDI) techniques to evaluate the damage growth during the maintenance action. There have been several methods to determine the inspection plan in the aircraft industry for this purpose. In this study, four methods: Aircraft Structural Integrity Program (ASIP), Reliability Centered Maintenance Analysis (RCMA), Modified RCMA and Stochastic Life APproach (SLAP), are selected to evaluate the performance in comparative manner for a couple of crack growth problems with the aim to help the maintenance planning engineers select their own inspection plan properly based on the performance of each method. The methods are briefly reviewed, implemented, and examined in comparison for the fatigue test data of the fastener hole specimen under an aircraft load spectrum. Keywords Aircraft structural integrity program (ASIP) · Reliability centered maintenance analysis (RCMA) · Modified reliability centered maintenance analysis (MRCMA) · Stochastic life APproach (SLAP) · Inspection plan · Crack growth · Fastener hole specimen
1 Introduction In the aircraft operation, the metallic airframes are usually exposed to extreme loading conditions during the flights, due to which the risk of failure should be assessed and held to an allowed level to prevent the associated loss. If the components are not inspectable in the field, it should be designed so robust that the inspection is not necessary. Otherwise, the components should be inspected routinely so that the fatigue damage can be detected before failure, which usually requires non-destructive inspection (NDI) techniques to evaluate the damage growth during the maintenance action [1, 2]. Determination of the interval is of great importance
B
Joo-Ho Choi [email protected] Sung Jin Kim [email protected]
1
Department of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, Korea Aerospace University, Goyang-si 10540, Republic of Korea
2
School of Aerospace and Mechanical Engineering, Korea Aerospace University, Goyang-si 10540, Republic of Korea
since it affects the efficiency and safety together: Too frequent inspection will lead to the increased cost, whereas the opposite will result in the higher risk of failure. Traditionally, the inspection plan was made by the aircraft structural integrity program (ASIP), which determines the inspection interval based on the deterministic crack growth analysis using the average
Data Loading...
