Evaluation of a Stochastic Approach for Reliability Centered Maintenance Airframes
A reliability centered maintenance analysis (RCMA) method for metallic airframes is described, demonstrated and evaluated. This method is useful for evaluating aircraft structural maintenance and supportability requirements and options in terms of risk. It can be used to estimate the average maintenance manhour per flight hour (MMH/FH) and life-cycle-costs. The RCMA method, based on a stochastic crack growth approach, can be implemented using deterministic crack growth analysis (DCGA) results, an estimate of the crack growth life dispersion (e.g., material and service usage), σ z, allowable risk rate, Ra, limit and conditional probability of a class A mishap, Pa. The sensitivity of RCMA inspection predictions (initial and reinspection intervals) to variations in analysis variables is investigated using a cutout in an aluminum-lithium cheek frame. Results are presented in useful formats for evaluating options in terms of risk. For comparable percentage variations in the baseline RCMA variables, the stress level, followed by σ z, affects the RCMA inspection predictions more than either Ra or Pa.
KeywordsService Time Service Usage Crack Growth Rate Crack Size Crack Growth Curve
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Matteson, T.B., “The Origin of Reliability Centered Maintenance”, Institute of Industrial Engineers (HE), Proc. 6th Inter. Maintainability Conf., Atlanta, GA, Oct. 11–13, 1989.Google Scholar
- 3.Yang, J.N. and Manning, S.D., “Application of Probabilistic Approach for Crack Growth Damage Accumulation in Metallic Structures”, Structural Safety and Reliability, Vol. II.,Ed. by A. H-S. Ang, M. Shinozuka and G.I. Schueller, Pub. ASCE, NY, pp. 1475–1482, 1990.Google Scholar
- 5.Yang, J.N., Hsi, W.H., Manning, S.D. and Rudd, J.L.,”Stochastic Crack Growth Models for Application to Aircraft Structures”, Probabilistic Fracture Mechanics and Reliability, Chapter IV, Ed. by J. W. Provan, Pub. Martinus Nijhoff, Dordrecht, pp. 171–212, 1987.Google Scholar
- 6.Manning, S.D., Yang, J.N., Pretzer, F.L. and Marler, J.E., “Reliability Centered Maintenance for Metallic Airframes Based on a Stochastic Crack Growth Approach”, Advances in Fatigue Lifetime Predictive Techniques, ASTM STP 1122, Ed. by M.R. Mitchell and R.W. Landgraf, ASTM, Philadelphia, 1991.Google Scholar
- 7.Pretzer, F.L. et al., “F-16 Reliability Centered Maintenance Analyses”, General Dynamics/Fort Worth Division, Final Report 16PR8829, July 1, 1989.Google Scholar
- 8.“Aircraft Structural Integrity Program, Airplane Requirements”, Military Standard MIL-STD-1530A, Air Force Aeronautical Systems Division, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, Dec. 1975.Google Scholar
- 9.Manning, S.D. and Yang, J.N., “Evaluation of Two Stochastic Crack Growth Analysis Methods for Aircraft Structural Maintenance”, paper to be submitted to J. of Eng. Fracture Mech., 1991.Google Scholar
- 10.Roach, G.R., McComb, T.H. and Chung, J.H., “ADAMSys User’s Manual,” Structural and Design Dept., General Dynamics/Fort Worth Division, July 1987.Google Scholar
- 11.Gallagher, J.P., Giessler, F.J., Berens, A.P. and Engles, Jr., R.M., “USAF Damage Tolerant Design Handbook: Guidelines for the Analysis and Design of Damage Tolerant Aircraft Structures”, AFWAL-TR-82-3073, Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH, pp. 10.4.1–10.4.13, May 1984.Google Scholar
- 12.Yang, J.N. and Chen, S., “Fatigue Reliability of Gas Turbine Engine Components Under Scheduled Inspection Maintenance,” J. of Aircraft, AIAA, Vol. 22, No. 5, May 1985.Google Scholar
- 13.Yang, J.N. and Chen, S., “An Exploratory Study of Retirement-For-Cause for Gas Turbine Engine Components”, J. of Propulsion and Power, AIAA, Vol. 2, No. 1, Jan. 1986.Google Scholar