Development Of Advanced Risk Assessment Methodologies For Aircraft Structures Containing Msd/Med

Liu, Min; Bombardier, Yan; Renaud, Guillaume; Bellinger, Nicholas C.; Cheung, Terence

doi:10.1007/978-90-481-2746-7_44

Cited by 4 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The subscript NR refers to the Newman-Raju solution, and β i(c=a) is the solution defined in Eqn. (7) and Eqn. (8).…”

Section: Corrections For Quarter-elliptical and Semi-elliptical Crmentioning

confidence: 98%

Improved Stress Intensity Factor Solutions for Surface and Corner Cracks at a Hole

Renaud¹,

Liu²,

Bombardier³

2012

53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials ConferenceSelf Cite

0
0
0
0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Detailed three-dimensional finite element (FE) modeling and analysis of quarter-elliptical and semi-elliptical cracks at a hole were carried out. Comparison cases showed that the accuracy of the classical Newman-Raju closed-form stress intensity factor solutions can be improved, especially for the surface crack case and in the thickness direction for the corner crack case. Using the developed FE models, improved stress intensity factor solutions for quarter-circular and semi-circular cracks at a hole were obtained for uniaxial tensile loading. A simple correction approach is also proposed to improve the accuracy of the Newman-Raju solutions for more general cases of quarter-elliptical and semi-elliptical cracks at a hole. Nomenclature a = crack depth (surface length in the hole bore in the thickness direction) c = crack length (in-plane direction) K = stress intensity factor K t = stress concentration factor L = plate length Q = ellipse shape factor r = hole radius t = plate thickness W = plate width β = geometric stress intensity correction factor β cc , β ca = β factor for a corner crack in the c and a direction β sc , β sa = β factor for a surface crack in the c and a direction β s0 , β c0 = limiting β factor for a short surface and a short corner crack φ = angle along crack front σ = applied remote tensile stress ν = Poisson's ratio

show abstract

“…The subscript NR refers to the Newman-Raju solution, and β i(c=a) is the solution defined in Eqn. (7) and Eqn. (8).…”

Section: Corrections For Quarter-elliptical and Semi-elliptical Crmentioning
confidence: 98%

Improved Stress Intensity Factor Solutions for Surface and Corner Cracks at a Hole
Renaud¹,
Liu²,
Bombardier³
2012
53rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials ConferenceSelf Cite
0
0
0
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…National Research Council Canada [12,24] uses a similar mathematical approach for reliability analysis of aircraft structure in its ProDTA (PRObabilistic Damage Tolerance Anylisis) software.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%

Reliability at the checkpoints of an aircraft supporting structure
Woch
¹
,
Kurdelski
²
,
Matyjewski
³

2015
EiN
11
0
1
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Article citation info: (*) Tekst artykułu w polskiej wersji językowej dostępny w elektronicznym wydaniu kwartalnika na stronie www.ein.org.pl IntroductionThis contribution presents a reliability prediction as well as sustainability methods for selected areas of the airframe in terms of fatigue processes and the aging process. Supporting structure may be classified as an element with a high correlation between the airworthiness parameter values and adequate fatigue life of the aircraft [27].One of the most important issues associated with aircraft maintenance is analysing durability of their structure components [10,20]. The previous experience in operation confirms that exhaustion of aircraft service life cannot be unambiguously identified with its unserviceability for further, reliable flights. Not always does the service life exhaustion result in the loss of aircraft technical condition and in the reliability parameters exceedance. The inadequacies of the traditional (service life) approach to aircraft maintenance used were the reason for developing new methods for assessing the durability of the aircraft structure, which are presented in the new study [21,22].The presented mathematical model is implemented with the use of specialized software known as PRobability Of Fracture (PROF) [13] and is commonly used by United States Air Force [4,6]. National Research Council Canada [12,24] uses a similar mathematical approach for reliability analysis of aircraft structure in its ProDTA (PRObabilistic Damage Tolerance Anylisis) software.The presented method and the research results make it possible to extend aircraft service life. Discussed procedures are not performed for aircraft owned by Polish Air Force, particularly for PZL-130 TC II ORLIK aircrafts. The exceptions are the F-16, for which such analyses are performed by Lockheed Martin. The reliability prediction method of support structure pointsFailure rate function [5, 9] is defined as the limit, if it exists, of the ratio of the conditional probability that the instant of time, T, of a failure of an item falls within a given time interval t t + ∆ and the length of this interval, t ∆ , when t ∆ leads to zero, given that the item is in an up state at the beginning of the time interval, which can be described as:where T is a continuous positive random variable of device operation time.If T has a density f(t) and the distribution F(t) equation (1) will take the form [1÷3]:whereGiven the failure rate λ(t) the life distribution can be calculated by the equation:Woch M, KurdelsKi M, MATyjeWsKi M. reliability at the checkpoints of an aircraft supporting structure. eksploatacja i NiezawodnoscMaintenance and reliability 2015; 17 (3): 457-462, http://dx

show abstract

“…A brief survey of available MSD or WFD analysis guidelines and methods was performed at NRC by focusing on the major aircraft authorities and manufacturers [2]. Some useful technical guidelines were found in working documents from the airworthiness assurance working group [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%

“…A brief survey of available *Corresponding author: Institute for Aerospace Research, National Research Council Canada, 1200 Montreal Road, Building M-14, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1A 0R6. email: min.liao@nrc-cnrc.gc.ca MSD or WFD analysis guidelines and methods was performed at NRC by focusing on the major aircraft authorities and manufacturers [2]. Some useful technical guidelines were found in working documents from the airworthiness assurance working group [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%

Advanced damage tolerance and risk analysis methodologies and tools for aircraft structures containing multiple-site and multiple-element fatigue damages
Liu
¹
,
Bombardier
²
,
Renaud
³

et al. 2011
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part G:
2
0
0
0
View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents the results obtained from the development of advanced damage tolerance analysis (DTA) and risk analysis methodologies and tools for aircraft structures, including build-up structures containing multiple-site fatigue damage (MSD) and multiple-element damage, to support the Canadian Forces aircraft structural life cycle management. The DTA methods developed include new closed-form solutions and generic finite element (FE) based tools to calculate the stress intensity factors and the b-solutions for build-up structural configurations. To facilitate the risk assessment, an in-house crack growth analysis program, CanGROW, was developed to simultaneously grow multiple cracks. Guidelines were established to calculate the residual strength of structures with MSD and multiple-element damage using global and/or local FE models, considering load redistribution among adjacent components. For the MSD risk analysis, an efficient Monte Carlo simulation technique was developed to determine the crack size distributions at different inspection intervals, which were then used in National Research Council Canada's risk analysis code probabilistic damage tolerance analysis to calculate the single flight hour probability of failure. Case studies on critical locations of the CC-130 centre wing structure are presented to demonstrate the capability of the developed methods and tools.

show abstract

Development Of Advanced Risk Assessment Methodologies For Aircraft Structures Containing Msd/Med

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

Improved Stress Intensity Factor Solutions for Surface and Corner Cracks at a Hole

Improved Stress Intensity Factor Solutions for Surface and Corner Cracks at a Hole

Reliability at the checkpoints of an aircraft supporting structure

Advanced damage tolerance and risk analysis methodologies and tools for aircraft structures containing multiple-site and multiple-element fatigue damages

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About