Practical Application of Structural Repair Fatigue Life Determination on the AP-3C Orion Platform

James Ayling; Adam Bowler; Gregory Brick; Mladen Ignjatovic

doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.891-892.1065

Paper Titles

Localized Fatigue Failure Analysis of Aluminium Crewboats due to Propeller Pulse Loads: A Case Study
p.1041

Bayesian Updating of Aircraft Risk Assessments Using Results of Inspection
p.1047

Structural Integrity – Yesterday – Today – Tomorrow
p.1053

Pseudo Fatigue Testing for Rapid Certification to Service
p.1059

Practical Application of Structural Repair Fatigue Life Determination on the AP-3C Orion Platform
p.1065

C-130H Centre Wing Lower Surface Tang Blend Repair Management
p.1071

QinetiQ Aircraft Structural Integrity Experience and Lessons Learnt
p.1077

Cost Effective Safety from Full System Teardowns
p.1084

Development of a Probabilistic Model for the Prediction of Fatigue Life in the Very High Cycle Fatigue (VHCF) Range Based on Inclusion Population
p.1093

HomeAdvanced Materials ResearchAdvanced Materials Research Vols. 891-892Practical Application of Structural Repair Fatigue...

Practical Application of Structural Repair Fatigue Life Determination on the AP-3C Orion Platform

Abstract:

The AP-3C Orion aircraft is the oldest aircraft in the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) inventory. The planned fleet withdrawal has been extended far beyond the original design service objective. Continued safe and effective operation has required the development of a robust ageing aircraft management approach. A fundamental aspect was supplementing the structural certification basis with appropriate standards in the form of fatigue management requirements from Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) 25.571 and Federal Aviation Administration Advisory Circular (FAA AC) 120-93. To develop and underpin the ageing aircraft management plan and transition to the supplementary fatigue management standards, the RAAF collaborated with the Original Equipment Manufacturer, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, the United States Navy (USN) and other operators to form the P-3C Service Life Assessment Program (SLAP). This program provided Full Scale Fatigue Test (FSFT) data, associated analyses and analysis tools to support management in accordance with FAR 25.571. An important element of the ageing aircraft management plan included the introduction of a rigorous Safety By Inspection (SBI) maintenance regime to assure structural airworthiness. FAA AC 120-93 requires assessment of structural repairs to determine revised fatigue management and inspection requirements. Often, this information is derived using tailored analysis tools and detailed models on a case-by-case basis. This approach is specialized, expensive and usually occurs after the repair has been designed and installed. To avoid these limitations, the AP-3C Repair Assessment Manual (RAM) was developed to provide the repair designer with a design handbook approach to fatigue analysis. In conjunction with some simple Finite Element (FE) models, the RAM supports complete repair analysis prior to an aircraft leaving the maintenance venue. This paper will present the history of the SBI program, the genesis of the RAM and actual examples of assessing structural repairs on the P-3 platform using the RAM.

You might also be interested in these eBooks

View Preview

Info:

Periodical:

Advanced Materials Research (Volumes 891-892)

Pages:

1065-1070

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.891-892.1065

Citation:

Cite this paper

Online since:

March 2014

Authors:

James Ayling*, Adam Bowler, Gregory Brick, Mladen Ignjatovic

Export:

RIS, BibTeX

Price:

Permissions:

Request Permissions

* - Corresponding Author

References

[1] US Federal Aviation Regulations 25. 571, Airworthiness Standards -Transport Category Airplanes, Damage-Tolerance and Fatigue Evaluation of Structure, Amendment 25-96, March (1998).

Google Scholar

[2] Federal Aviation Administration, Advisory Circular (AC) 120-93– Damage Tolerance Inspections for Repairs and Alterations, U.S. Department of Transportation, 20 November (2007).

Google Scholar

[3] RAAF, P-3 Orion, AP-3C Repair Assessment Manual, Issue 5, DAVENG - DGTA.

Google Scholar

[4] Defence Science and Technology Organisation, P-3C Australian Test Interpretation Report for 2010 Structural Management Plan Review, DSTO-TR-2655, Draft, 20 April (2012).

Google Scholar

[5] RAAF, P-3 Orion Structural Management Plan, Volumes 1 and 2, Issue 2, 31 January (2013).

Google Scholar

[6] S. D. Manning and J. N. Yang, USAF Durability Design Handbook, AFWAL-TR-83-3027.

Google Scholar

[7] QinetiQ AeroStructures, Development of the RAAF AP-3C Repair Assessment Manual Issue 5, ER-P3-51-ASM946, Revision 1, 28 June (2013).

Google Scholar

[8] QinetiQ AeroStructures, RAAF AP-3C Repair Assessment Manual – Follow-On Validation, ER-P3-51-ASM772, Revision 1, 21 June (2010).

Google Scholar

[9] QinetiQ AeroStructures, RAAF AP-3C Repair Assessment Manual – Cubic Rule Validation, ER-P3-51-ASM712, Revision 2, 12 July (2010).

Google Scholar

[10] Defence Science and Technology Organisation, DSTO P-3 Repair Assessment Methodology (RAM) Coupon Testing to Validate the Cubic Rule, DSTO-CR-2010-0367, March (2011).

Google Scholar

[11] G. C. Brown, Repair and Overhaul Instructions, Orion P3 Aircraft, Australian Air Publication 7215. 001-3-1(AM1)B1.

Google Scholar