T-38 FUSELAGE STRUCTURAL LIFE ASSESSMENT

Similar documents
F-22 System Program Office

ASIP on the U-2U. 560 th Aircraft Sustainment Group (C2ISR)

UNCLASSIFIED. UNCLASSIFIED Air Force Page 1 of 5 R-1 Line #15

Effectiveness of ECP Brakes in Reducing the Risks Associated with HHFT Trains

Accelerating the Development of Expandable Liner Hanger Systems using Abaqus

Composites in rotorcraft Industry & Damage Tolerance Requirements

Probabilistic Analysis for Resolving Fatigue Failures of the Connecting Rod Oil Hole

Support for the revision of the CO 2 Regulation for light duty vehicles

Approach for determining WLTPbased targets for the EU CO 2 Regulation for Light Duty Vehicles

Certification Issues for Hybrid Aircraft Structures

PROACTIVE PRODUCT SERVICING

UNCLASSIFIED FY 2017 OCO. FY 2017 Base

Linking the Virginia SOL Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

BLAST CAPACITY ASSESSMENT AND TESTING A-60 OFFSHORE FIRE DOOR

LONG RANGE PERFORMANCE REPORT. Study Objectives: 1. To determine annually an index of statewide turkey populations and production success in Georgia.

NAVAIR Public Release SPR Distribution statement A -- approved for public release, distribution is unlimited.

International Aluminium Institute

RE: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR

Linking the Florida Standards Assessments (FSA) to NWEA MAP

Airworthiness Directive Schedule

Transportation & Traffic Engineering

Improving the Fuel Economy of Heavy Duty Fleets II San Diego, CA February 20th, 2008

Linking the Georgia Milestones Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Optimal Predictive Control for Connected HEV AMAA Brussels September 22 nd -23 rd 2016

Linking the North Carolina EOG Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Initial processing of Ricardo vehicle simulation modeling CO 2. data. 1. Introduction. Working paper

Linking the Kansas KAP Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Aeronautical Engineering Design II Sizing Matrix and Carpet Plots. Prof. Dr. Serkan Özgen Dept. Aerospace Engineering Spring 2014

Propulsion Controls and Diagnostics Research at NASA GRC Status Report

Linking the Alaska AMP Assessments to NWEA MAP Tests

MIT ICAT M I T I n t e r n a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r A i r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n

Linking the Indiana ISTEP+ Assessments to the NWEA MAP Growth Tests. February 2017 Updated November 2017

Linking the New York State NYSTP Assessments to NWEA MAP Growth Tests *

Linking the Mississippi Assessment Program to NWEA MAP Tests

Vertical Loads from North American Rolling Stock for Bridge Design and Rating

AIRCRAFT AND TECHNOLOGY CONCEPTS FOR AN N+3 SUBSONIC TRANSPORT. Elena de la Rosa Blanco May 27, 2010

Date AFTT UH-1? Discrepancy 12/10/ UH-1B LH Upper T-cap fwd of T/B Attach fitting 5/17/ UH-1F LH Upper T/B longeron Assy and fo

Methodology for Distributed Electric Propulsion Aircraft Control Development with Simulation and Flight Demonstration

Linking the Indiana ISTEP+ Assessments to NWEA MAP Tests

Aircraft No. 6 N925AU, T-25; P3-A; Serial Number

Airborne Collision Avoidance System X U

Composite Modification Workshop AC Appendices

Evaluation of Single Common Powertrain Lubricant (SCPL) Candidates for Fuel Consumption Benefits in Military Equipment

Used Vehicle Supply: Future Outlook and the Impact on Used Vehicle Prices

SCC Greenhouse Gas Assessment

STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN CREDIT FOR EMISSION REDUCTIONS GENERATED THROUGH INCENTIVE PROGRAMS (Adopted June 20, 2013)

WHITE PAPER. Preventing Collisions and Reducing Fleet Costs While Using the Zendrive Dashboard

Appendix B CTA Transit Data Supporting Documentation

Virtual Product Development (VPD) deployed on Durability

Adams-EDEM Co-simulation for Predicting Military Vehicle Mobility on Soft Soil

Zero Emission Truck Commercialization Summary of the I-710 Project Zero-Emission Truck Commercialization Study Draft Report

Methodology Validation Report for United Technologies Corporation

EFFICIENT PTO DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM

The Effects of Damage and Uncertainty on the Aeroelastic / Aeroservoelastic Behavior and Safety of Composite Aircraft

RDT&E BUDGET ITEM JUSTIFICATION SHEET (R-2 Exhibit) February 2003

Mr. John Aitken June 6, 2017 Page 2

Proposed Special Condition for limited Icing Clearances Applicable to Large Rotorcraft, CS 29 or equivalent. ISSUE 1

Heavy-Duty Vehicle Efficiency Global status and current research

Copyright 1983 by ASME EAGLE/DTA: A LIFE CYCLE COST MODEL FOR DAMAGE TOLERANCE ASSESSMENT. Edward J. Reed Pratt & Whitney Aircraft

A Proposed Modification of the Bridge Gross Weight Formula

SUMMARY REPORT ON EVALUATION OF A FUEL ADDITIVE AT SOUTHWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS

Aircraft Landing Gear Fluid Level and Landing Energy Monitoring System

Energy Performance Information Request Timeline

Additional Transit Bus Life Cycle Cost Scenarios Based on Current and Future Fuel Prices

Fueling Savings: Higher Fuel Economy Standards Result In Big Savings for Consumers

Industry-Wide Light Duty Hydrogen Vehicle Fueling Protocol up to 70MPa: Created by Math Modeling and Confirmed by System Testing

Technical Memorandum Analysis Procedures and Mobility Performance Measures 100 Most Congested Texas Road Sections What s New for 2015

I-95 Corridor Coalition Vehicle Probe Project: HERE, INRIX and TOMTOM Data Validation. Report for North Carolina (#08) I-240, I-40 and I-26

USABC Development of 12 Volt Energy Storage Requirements for Start-Stop Application

September 2016 Water Production & Consumption Data

The MathWorks Crossover to Model-Based Design

Factors Affecting Vehicle Use in Multiple-Vehicle Households

V&V OF ANALYSIS RESULTS CREATED DURING DEVELOPMENT OF A MINE TRUCK AT ATLAS COPCO ROCK DRILLS AB. By Jari Hyvärinen/RCT

ScienceDirect. Fatigue Life Prediction of Z Type Leaf Spring and New Approach to Verification Method

Summary briefing on four major new mass-reduction assessment for light-duty vehicles

DEPARTMENT OF THE AIR FORCE HEADQUARTERS AIR FORCE LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT CENTER WRIGHT-PATTERSON AIR FORCE BASE OHIO

MODERNIZING MILITARY GROUND VEHICLE RELIABILITY TESTING

Oregon DOT Slow-Speed Weigh-in-Motion (SWIM) Project: Analysis of Initial Weight Data

Research in hydraulic brake components and operational factors influencing the hysteresis losses

Development of a Finite Element Model of a Motorcycle

Appenidix E: Freewing MAE UAV analysis

DRAFT April 9, STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN CREDIT FOR EMISSION REDUCTIONS GENERATED THROUGH INCENTIVE PROGRAMS (Adopted [adoption date])

Qualification of an On-Line Bearing and Gear Health Monitoring Technique for In-Service Monitoring of Aircraft Engines and Helicopter Transmissions

Monitoring of Shoring Pile Movement using the ShapeAccel Array Field

ASTM D4169 Truck Profile Update Rationale Revision Date: September 22, 2016

FMVSS 121 Brake Performance and Stability Testing

Low Speed Design Criteria for Residential Streets Andrew J. Ballard, P.E. and David M. Haldeman, E.I.T.

Analysis of IEC Recommendations in Selected APEC Economies

1 Faculty advisor: Roland Geyer

Tired Iron to Increased Readiness: F/A-18 Super Hornet Renewing the Fleet for the Future Fight

Fatigue and Damage Tolerance in Airframe Structures B. Vos (DO 39160)

Optimizing Performance and Fuel Economy of a Dual-Clutch Transmission Powertrain with Model-Based Design

Appendix E Water Supply Modeling

COLD PLATE SOFTWARE PROGRAM ANALYZES AIRCRAFT

DRP DER Growth Scenarios Workshop. DER Forecasts for Distribution Planning- Electric Vehicles. May 3, 2017

SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE PAVEMENT PROJECTS 2015 TxAPA Annual Meeting September 23, 2015 Austin District Mike Arellano, P.E. Date

UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED

OPTIMAL MISSION ANALYSIS ACCOUNTING FOR ENGINE AGING AND EMISSIONS

Improvements of Existing Overhead Lines for 180km/h operation of the Tilting Train

I-95 Corridor Coalition

Transcription:

T-38 FUSELAGE STRUCTURAL LIFE ASSESSMENT Jon Cutshall, Michael Blinn, Hal Burnside, Zachary Whitman, Roger Howell Southwest Research Institute, San Antonio, TX T-38 ASIP Manager, OO-ALC/558th ACGS/ENI Southwest Research Institute, OO-ALC/558th ACSG/ENI ML Technologies, OO-ALC/558th ACSG/ENI 12-4-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 1

AGENDA Introduction Review of T-38 Fuselage Test Variations in Fleet Usage Severity of Usages Fleet Aircraft and Component Usage Hours Statistical Life Evaluation Future Flying Scenarios Predictions Summary 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 2

Introduction Purpose of this program Determine long-term viability of the T-38 fuselage structure Fatigue test of current configuration aircraft with numerous structural modification Verify current Fatigue Critical Locations (FCL) Determine possible new FCLs Provide information to validate Finite Element Models Following slide presents the general process 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 3

Introduction 1. Fatigue Test T-38C IFF 9. Generate Predictions Using Future Flying Scenarios 2. Test and Post- Test Inspections & Findings Number of Aircraft Number of Anticipated Dorsal Longeron Maintenance Actions each Calendar Time Increment AETC SUPT AETC IFF AETC ENJJPT AETC Total Calendar Time 3. Prior Fleet Usages 4. Severity of Usages Related to T-38C IFF 5. Fleet A/C & Component Hours in Prior Usages 8. Formulate Future Flying Scenarios 7. Stat. Eval. of Fleet/Test Component Hours (T-38C IFF) 6. Fleet/Test Component Hours in T-38C IFF 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 4

Review of Fuselage Test Four phase program began in July, 2002. Initiated by OO-ALC Phase 1: Test Setup Phase 2: Testing Phase 3: Teardown Phase 4: Analysis Aircraft was received from AMARC Brought up to current structural configuration at Randolph AFB 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 5

Review of Fuselage Test Vertical Loads: 14 Hydraulic Actuators (8.25g Max) Horizontal Loads:7 Hydraulic Actuators (0.7g Max) Cockpit Pressurization up to 5 psig 272 Strain Gage Channels New FCLs Found Tested Structural Modifications 8,500 hours of Simulated Introduction to Fighter Fundamentals (IFF = severe usage) 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 6

Steel Dorsal Longeron FS 401-403 (right and left) found at 4500 test hours found at 5500 test hours found at 7500 test hours Review of Fuselage Test 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 7

Cockpit Longeron (CEM) FS 269 (left and right side); these cracks ended the test found at 8500 test hours Review of Fuselage Test Cockpit Longeron Bathtub Fitting FS 283 (left side) appears in strain data at 7200 test hours Upper Longeron (splice straps and original longeron segment) FS 291-300 (right side) appears in strain data at 7200 test hours 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 8

Variations in Fleet Usage There has been different usages, utilizing different aircraft configurations, at different gross weights Aircraft has been fielded for over 45 years SAC TAC Thunderbird LIF DACT SUPT- PMP IFF ATC IFF- PMP SUPT ENJJPT 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 9

Severity of Usages Need a baseline usage to compare aircraft on a 1:1 basis The IFF usage for the fuselage test was chosen for the baseline IFF (test) Most components will have different crack growth curves thus severity is also component specific Only need to go back to 1981 when first steel dorsal longeron (SDL) was installed Need a crack growth curve (or assumed curve) for each usage for both the SDL and CEM 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 10

Severity of Usages 0.3 0.25 Crack Length (in.) 0.2 0.15 0.1 Baseline Usage 0.05 Other Usage Other Usage * 0.5 0 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000 18000 Flight Hours 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 11

Fleet Aircraft and Component Usage Hours Due to SDL cracking discovered during the course of testing, a number of fleet aircraft were inspected by TCTO Given the release date and rescission date it was assumed that all were inspected in August 2005 All results negative, no cracks found in the fleet Gathered the usages and hours for all aircraft between SDL installation and August 2005 Gathered usages and hours for all aircraft between CEM/284 Splice installation and August 2005 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 12

Fleet Aircraft and Component Usage Hours Component Prior Usage Hours (1) Test Hours (2) Prior Usage & Test Hours (3) SDL 1045 4500 5500 7500 CEM 265 7200 8500 5545 6545 8545 7465 8765 284 Splice 265 7200 7465 (1) Equivalent T-38C IFF (Test) Hours (2) Times Cracks were Found or Estimated from Fuselage Test (3) Total Hours Used for Statistical Life Evaluation 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 13

Fleet Aircraft and Component Usage Hours Steel Dorsal Longeron Equivalent Hours in 2005 Aircraft AETC IFF AETC SUPT AETC ENJJPT ACC AFMC 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 Equivalent IFF (Test) Hours 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 14

Statistical Life Evaluation Inputs- 3 SDL cracks Fleet aircraft inspected, all results negative 2 CEM cracks 1 284 Splice crack WinSMITH Weibull software used for the analysis The cracks found are failures The longerons on the aircraft inspected are suspensions or censored data (2 longerons each) Assumed that CEMs were inspected at same time with no findings (also suspensions) 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 15

Statistical Life Evaluation Perform Weibayes analysis on 284 Splice assuming same Beta as CEM (due to similarities between the structure and location in airframe) Reduced Bias Adjustment (RBA) was employed due to large number of suspensions relative to failures Best fit for the SDL was the lognormal distribution Best fit for the CEM was the Weibull 2-parameter distribution 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 16

Statistical Life Evaluation Probability of Repair/Replacement 1.00 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 SDL Lognormal - Reduced Bias Adjustment (RBA) SDL Test Data CEM Weibull - Reduced Bias Adjustment (RBA) CEM Test Data 284 Splice Weibull- Weibayes Analysis 284 Splice Test Data 0.10 0.00 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 T-38C IFF (Test) Equivalent Flight Hours 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 17

Statistical Life Evaluation Steel Dorsal Longeron Equivalent Hours in 2005 Aircraft AETC IFF AETC SUPT AETC ENJJPT ACC AFMC Mean Time To Failure (MTTF = 7050) 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 Equivalent IFF (Test) Hours 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 18

Future Flying Scenarios Currently, there are 5 distinct AF fleets based on usage and configuration Historical data for the past 3 years were used to determine flying hours by fleet Scenarios need to consider configuration and usage Assume all AETC aircraft are fully modified by current ongoing TCTOs (higher gross weight = more severe crack growth) Some fleets fly a mix of aircraft configuration and/or usages - conservatively assume worst case 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 19

Future Flying Scenarios Steel Dorsal Longeron Hours at: 2005, 2015, 2025 Number of Aircraft AETC IFF AETC SUPT AETC ENJJPT ACC 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 Equivalent IFF (Test) Hours AFMC Mean Time To Failure (MTTF = 7050) 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 20

Predictions Can estimate number of maintenance actions (either repair or replacement) need by fleet based on calendar time Predictions are dependent on replacement methodology Statistical results are based on a single component The risk due a component set (left and right sides) is: Risk = 1-(1-Risk Left )*(1-Risk Right ) If multiple components are replaced during the same maintenance visit then risk is a function of each component being replaced: Risk = 1-(1- Risk SDL )*(1-Risk CEM )*(1-Risk 284 Splice ) 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 21

Predictions Cumulative Number of Anticipated Dorsal Longeron Maintenance Actions AETC SUPT AETC IFF AETC ENJJPT Number of Aircraft AETC Total Calendar Time 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 22

Predictions Number of Anticipated Dorsal Longeron Maintenance Actions each Calendar Time Increment AETC SUPT AETC IFF AETC ENJJPT AETC Total Number of Aircraft Calendar Time 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 23

Two scenarios Predictions All components are repaired separately as needed The SDL, CEM and 284 Splice are all fixed at once If all three items are repaired at once then the maintenance action would be needed if any of the six individual components needed replacement However, if replaced separately it could mean up to three different times each aircraft must go to depot for maintenance 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 24

Predictions Reduction in Maintenance Actions due to Multiple Replacements Number of Maintenance Actions Maintnence Actions - All 3 Components are Replaced Seperately Maintenance Actions - All 3 Components are Replaced Simultaneously % Reduction in Maintenance Actions 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% Percent Reduction in Maintenance Actions 10% Calendar Time 0% 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 25

Summary Performed fuselage fatigue test Used test findings in analysis Analysis considered fleet inspection results Aircraft historical data was gathered regarding usage, flying hours, component replacement, configuration changes Usages compared by severity Information was applied across the fleet to predict problems Results were presented by T-38 ASIP to AETC for planning purposes Proactive effort underway to gather engineering and parts for repair and modification of the fleet 12-04-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 26

Questions? 12-4-07 T-38 Fuselage Structural Life Evaluation 27