The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Development of ReliabilityDevelopment of Reliability--Based Damage Tolerant Based Damage Tolerant Structural Design Methodology:Structural Design Methodology:
Progress ReportProgress Report
Dr. Kuen Y. Lin and Dr. Andrey Styuart Dr. Kuen Y. Lin and Dr. Andrey Styuart Department of Aeronautics and AstronauticsDepartment of Aeronautics and Astronautics
University of WashingtonUniversity of WashingtonOctober 13, 2005October 13, 2005
2The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Development of Reliability-Based Damage Tolerant Structural Design Methodology
Motivation and Key Issues: Composite materials are being used in aircraft primary structures such as 787 wings and fuselage. In these applications, stringent requirements on weight, damage tolerance, reliability and cost must be satisfied. Presently there is no industry-wide standard to establish appropriate inspection intervals for a damage-tolerant structure based on the consideration of structural reliability, inspection methods, and quality of repair. An urgent need exists to develop a standardized methodology for establishing anoptimal inspection schedule that provides minimum maintenance cost and maximum structural reliability.
Objective: Develop a probabilistic method to estimate structural component reliabilities suitable for aircraft design, inspection, and regulatory compliance.
3The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Research Team
Principal Investigator:Dr. Kuen Y. Lin, Aeronautics and AstronauticsResearch Scientist: Dr. Andrey StyuartResearch Assistants: Cary Huang, Crystal Simon
FAA Technical Monitor: Peter Shyprykevich
Other FAA Personnel: Dr. Larry Ilcewicz, Curtis Davies
Industry Participants: Dr. Alan Miller, Dr. Cliff Chen, Dr. Hamid Razi (Boeing)
4The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Approach
The present study is based on a probabilistic failure analysis with the consideration of parameters such as inspection intervals, statistical data on damages, loads, temperatures, damage detection capability, residual strength of the new, damaged and repaired structures.The inspection intervals are formulated based on the probability of failure of a structure containing damage and the quality of a repair. The approach combines the “Level of Safety” method proposed by Lin, et al. and “Probabilistic Design of Composite Structures” method by Styuart, at al.No damage growth is assumed in the present model.
5The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Phase I Research Tasks
Develop a Probabilistic Method to Determine Inspection Intervals for Composite Aircraft Structures
Develop Computing Tools and Algorithms for the Probabilistic Analysis
Establish In-service Damage Database from FAA SDR and Other Sources
Demonstrate the Developed Method on an Existing Structural Component
6The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Typical In-service Damage– Hail Damage
7The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
PDF of Detected Damages
LogNormal Probability Density Fuctions for Baseline Fleet Damage Data, Ref. AR-95/17
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Damage Size a (in)
Det
ecte
d D
amag
e D
ensi
ty p
o(a
) HolesDelamsCracks
⎥⎦⎤
⎢⎣⎡−= )/(ln
21exp
21)( 22 θσπσ
aa
ap o
8The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
PDF of Detected Damages
9The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Visual Inspection PODfor Shiny Surface at 20 ft Distance
Pro
babi
lity
of D
etec
tion
Damage Diameter (inches)
10The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Identification of Critical Parameters
Various Failure ModesVarious Failure Modes
Strength vs. TemperatureStrength vs. Temperature
Moisture Content vs. TimeMoisture Content vs. Time
Maximum Load vs. Time of Damage Existence
Maximum Load vs. Time of Damage Existence
Damage Size & Damage Type Spectra
Damage Size & Damage Type Spectra
Structural Temperature Spectra
Structural Temperature Spectra
Probability of Detection vs. Damage Size & Damage TypeProbability of Detection vs.
Damage Size & Damage Type
Lifetime
W,%
Damage Size
Failure Load
Maximum Load
Damage Size
T°
R
2L
R
Strength Degradation due to Environmental Exposure
Strength Degradation due to Environmental Exposure
Life time
R
Inspection Intervals, Repair Criteria, Structural Risk
Inspection Intervals, Repair Criteria, Structural Risk
Probability of FailureProbability of Failure
Residual Strength vs. Damage Size & Damage Type
Residual Strength vs. Damage Size & Damage Type
Temperature
11The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Work Accomplished
Two methods, based on Importance Sampling and Monte-Carlo Simulation, have been developed for determining the inspection intervals.
Computer software (Version 1.2) for calculating the inspection intervals has been completed.
Database for Reliability-Based Damage Tolerance Analysis has been established.
Three sample problems with parametric studies have been demonstrated on existing structural components.
Results from the present study have been compared with those obtained by other methods and software (NESSUS).
Effect of environmental aging and chemical corrosion added
12The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Reliability Formulation 1
Load Exceedance Curve
1.00E-051.00E-04
1.00E-031.00E-021.00E-011.00E+00
1.00E+011.00E+021.00E+031.00E+04
1.00E+051.00E+06
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Load
Num
ber o
f Exc
eeda
nces
per
Life
Load Exceedance Curve
1.00E-051.00E-04
1.00E-031.00E-021.00E-011.00E+00
1.00E+011.00E+021.00E+031.00E+04
1.00E+051.00E+06
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Load
Num
ber o
f Exc
eeda
nces
per
Life
3
1
1 [1 ( , )]N
f f i ii
P P R t=
=
= − −∏Interval # Probability of Failure
1 (new structure) 6.12E-06
2 (damaged structure) 4.26E-02
3 (repaired structure) 6.12E-06
Total POF = 4.26E-02
13The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Reliability Formulation 2
1 5 8
ith interval of constant damage size:Width (time) ti[T1,T2…,D],Damage type TDi,Residual strength Si(D,TDi),
Probabilistic Input Parameters:
• Type of damage TD
• Number of damages per life
• Initial failure load (initial strength)
• Damage size
• Time of damage initiation
• Time to detect Damage
• External load
• Structural Temperature T°
• Effects of environmental aging and chemical corrosion
Probabilistic Input Parameters:
• Type of damage TD
• Number of damages per life
• Initial failure load (initial strength)
• Damage size
• Time of damage initiation
• Time to detect Damage
• External load
• Structural Temperature T°
• Effects of environmental aging and chemical corrosion
First, we simulate random time histories of residual strength as a sequence of intervals between damage initiation and detection/repair. The probability of failure (POF) can then be evaluated as the sum of POF for all intervals.
First, we simulate random time histories of residual strength as a sequence of intervals between damage initiation and detection/repair. The probability of failure (POF) can then be evaluated as the sum of POF for all intervals.
14The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Reliability Formulation 3
Combined Damage+Aging
0
0.2
0.40.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
T ime
Res.S
treng
thDelamination
Hole
-0.1
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.7
0.9
1.1
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Ti me
Dam
age
Size
Delaminat ion
Hole
Res. Strength degradation due to aging
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
1.1
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Ti me
Res
.Str
engt
h
Delaminat ion
Hole
Res. Strength degradation vs. Damage Size
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Damage Size
Res
.Str
engt
h
Delamination
Hole
15The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
The Integration Model
Res
idua
l Str
engt
h
Time
12
3
45
67
8
∏∏==
−−=−=N
iiit
N
iiiLfixed tSHtSFPOF
11max ])(exp[1),(1
°=
°°= ∫Ω
dTdTDdTDdtdtdSdSdNvd
vdTTDTDttSSNfTTDTDttSSNPOFTTPOF
I
IIfixed
.........
),...,,...,,...,,,(),...,,...,,...,,,(,...),(
212121
21212121212121
ρ
ρ
The Integration Technique:
• Monte-Carlo Integration + Importance Sampling
The Integration Technique:
• Monte-Carlo Integration + Importance Sampling
16The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Simulation Algorithm
Life 1 Strength
Load
Load
Snew
L1max tex
Sdamaged
L2max
Srep
Time
L3max
Damage type 1
Life 2 Strength
ti
TemperatureT°
Time
17The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
The Integration andFull Monte-Carlo Models
Integration -> Features Covered:
Random External Load ___Random Damage Sizes & NumberRandom Failure Load ____Random Damage Detection Time vs. Damage Size ___Random Properties Degradation due to Temperature ___Multiple Load Cases _____Multiple Damage Types __Multiple Inspection Types __Various Repair Types & Repair Logic Multiple Damage Interaction _____ Effects of environmental aging
?
Full M-C -> Features Covered:
Random External Load ___Random Damage Sizes & NumberRandom Failure Load ____Random Damage Detection Time vs. Damage Size ___Random Properties Degradation due to Temperature ___Multiple Load Cases _____Multiple Damage Types __Multiple Inspection Types __Various Repair Types & Repair Logic Multiple Damage Interaction _____Effects of environmental aging
? ??
Integration -> Advantages:High SpeedHigh Accuracy
Full M-C -> Advantages:Consistent Temperature Presentation Detailed Failure Data Output
18The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Algorithm Implementation
Directory to Run Simulation
Full M-C P.O.F. = 3.1794095E-04Integration P.O.F. = 1.0158544E-04
Interval Integration Full M-C1 7.82E-07 8.62E-07
10 7.58E-06 7.97E-0650 4.04E-05 3.80E-05
100 7.27E-05 7.63E-05200 1.50E-04 1.48E-04500 3.20E-04 3.18E-04
1000 5.74E-04 5.70E-04
Run Simulation
Check Data Consistency
C:\projects\ProDam Find Directory with Monte-Carlo.exe and IProDam.exe
Generic Demonstration Example
Run IntegrationPOF vs. Interval Comparison
1.00E-07
1.00E-06
1.00E-05
1.00E-04
1.00E-03
1.00E-02
1.00E-01
1.00E+001 10 100 1000
Inspection interval, Flights
POF Intergal
Full M-CMake7Points
MS Excel (Data) +
Excel Macro (VBA) +
Automation DLL (Fortran 95)
MS Excel (Data) +
Excel Macro (VBA) +
Automation DLL (Fortran 95)
19The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Results of Parametric Study
Variable
DDPD
==
⎟⎟⎠
⎞⎜⎜⎝
⎛−−=
βαβ
α
;4.1
;exp1)(
Inspection Interval determined corresponds to Probability of Failure = 1e-4 per life
PercentRecovery Strength Variable
Effect of Average Detected Damage
50.0000
150.0000250.0000
350.0000
450.0000
550.0000650.0000
750.0000
850.0000
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0
Beta parameter, in
Insp
ectio
n in
terv
al, F
light
s
Effect of Strength Repair Quality
259
553
695746 748 748
0100200300400500600700800
60% 70% 80% 90% 100% 110%
% of Strength Restoration after Repair
Insp
ectio
n In
terv
al. F
light
s
20The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Sample Problem 1:Comparison With NESSUS
NESSUS Model feature: Exactly one damage per lifeRandom variables:1. Load Lmax, LmaxD, LmaxR for undamaged, damaged and repaired item; Gumbel
distribution2. Initial Strength Rini; Normal distribution3. Damage size D; Exponential distribution; 4. Random inspection Interval Cv=10%
Comparison with NESSUS FORM
0.00E+00
1.00E-04
2.00E-04
3.00E-04
4.00E-04
5.00E-04
6.00E-04
7.00E-04
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Inspection Interval, Flights
POF FORM
ProDeCompos
Satisfactory comparison with NESSUS
21The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Sample Problem 1:Sensitivity Study from NESSUS
22The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Sample Problem 1: Probabilistic Sensitivity Factors from
NESSUS
23The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Summary
What we have:
The preliminary method for determining POF and the inspection intervals for no growth concept.
Basic computer software for calculating POF and and the inspection intervals.
Some restricted database for Reliability-Based Damage Tolerance Analyses.
What we will have:
The established method for determining POF and the inspection intervals including material degradation.
User friendly computer software for commercial use in probabilistic design.
Acceptable database for Reliability-Based Damage Tolerance Analyses.
24The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
A Look Forward
Benefit to Aviation– The present method allows engineers to design damage tolerant
composite structures for a predetermined level of reliability, as required by FAR 25.
– The present study makes it possible to determine the relationship among the reliability level, inspection interval, inspection method, and repair quality to minimize the maintenance cost and risk of structural failure.
Future needs– A standardized methodology for establishing an optimal
inspection schedule for aircraft manufacturers and operators. – Enhanced damage data reporting requirements regulated by
the FAA.
25The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Phase 2: Analysis Refinement and Methodology Implementation
(September 1, 2005 – August 31, 2007)
The primary objective of Phase 2 is to apply the developed methodology to the maintenance of current fleet and design of future aircraft.
Major tasks to be accomplished in Phase 2:
Analysis Method Enhancement
Analysis Method Implementation
26The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Task 2.1:Analysis Method Enhancement
The analysis method developed in Phase I will be enhanced to include:
1. Effects of environmental aging and chemical corrosion. The mathematical model of aging will be represented by an Arrenius type equation to include the empirical UV and fuel degradation. The aging effects will be incorporated into computer software and algorithm that help designers to compare various aging environments and impact of aging/corrosion on the structural reliability.
27The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Task 2.1:Analysis Method Enhancement
2. Development of optimum inspection schedule to minimize maintenance cost and risk. Typical algorithms for minimum LCC design will bestudied and incorporated into the software. The developed computer program will take into account the factors such as inspection cost and associated repair and downtime costs, cost of consequence of failure and possibly acquisition and operating costs.
28The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Task 2.1:Analysis Method Enhancement
3.3. Development of database and tools to automate the entire evaluatDevelopment of database and tools to automate the entire evaluation process. ion process. Such tools may be used as production tools for maintenance plannSuch tools may be used as production tools for maintenance planning.ing.
Database on impact damage condition: The goal is to establish a set of standard design damage types along with their frequencies. Each of them has distinct characteristics such as geometry, energy (or any invariant metric), and density. The specific work items for this task may include:
(1) Data mining and grouping, (2) Reverse engineering to estimate impact energy with known or best assumed
geometry and density, (3) Establishment of frequencies or exceedances.
These tasks need to be performed for each primary structural locations. Engineering judgment and assumptions will play a big role here; nevertheless, it should be acceptable as long as we take every measure conservatively. To do reverse engineering, we may try to simplify the process by making some parametric analyses for both metal and composite structures based on a conservative representative configuration for each structural area (e.g., fuselage skin-stringer panels). As such, for a given damage record, we may do interpolation to get an energy estimate based on the descriptions of the reported damage.
29The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Task 2.1:Analysis Method Enhancement
3.3. Development of database and tools to automate the entire evaluatDevelopment of database and tools to automate the entire evaluation process. ion process. Such tools may be used as production tools for maintenance plannSuch tools may be used as production tools for maintenance planning.ing.
Tools: In order to conveniently apply the developed reliability method to industry, we need to develop "self-explanatory" software with built-in initial data sets, "transparent" simplified solutions, expert help system and clear sample results. Ideally, the tool should be applicable not only to maintenance but also to design as well.
With full characterization of damage, loads, environments, materials and costs available, the developed code can be used as a single design tool for a unified design (i.e., combining static strength, damage tolerance, inspections and fail-safety). The developed reliability code can be integrated into standard structural analysis and design optimization programs.
30The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Task 2.2:Methodology Implementation and
Regulatory Compliance
This task will focus on the application of the developed methodology. Key to the implementation of the reliability methods is the development of an accidental damage rating system (ADR) that is compatible with the methodology and complies with MSG-3 guidelines.
The developed reliability method may help the industry in two ways:Finding rational inspection intervals. Establishing more reasonable design requirements compared to the present requirements derived from AC-107 and so on. In fact, AC-107 regulates the residual strength curve depending on the probability of damage detection only. It seems that Boeing’s approach is also based on the assumption that composite design is primarily driven by damage detectability. There is no connection with real impact conditions. Using results of this research, we can demonstrate to the FAA that in some cases the AC-107 requirements are too conservative, but in other cases they may be inadequate.
31The Joint Advanced Materials and Structures Center of Excellence
Phase 2 Milestones (September 1, 2005 – August 31, 2007)
9/1/05-11/30/0512/1/05-2/28/06 3/1/06-5/31/06 6/1/06-8/31/06
Task 2.1
Subtask 1 Subtask 2
Subtask 3
Task 2.2
Development of Reliability-Based Damage Tolerant Structural Design Methodology:Progress ReportDevelopment of Reliability-Based Damage Tolerant Structural Design MethodologyResearch TeamApproachPhase I Research TasksTypical In-service Damage– Hail DamagePDF of Detected DamagesPDF of Detected DamagesVisual Inspection PODfor Shiny Surface at 20 ft DistanceIdentification of Critical ParametersWork AccomplishedReliability Formulation 1Reliability Formulation 2Reliability Formulation 3The Integration ModelSimulation AlgorithmThe Integration andFull Monte-Carlo ModelsAlgorithm ImplementationResults of Parametric StudySample Problem 1:Comparison With NESSUSSample Problem 1:Sensitivity Study from NESSUSSample Problem 1: Probabilistic Sensitivity Factors from NESSUSSummaryA Look ForwardPhase 2: Analysis Refinement and Methodology ImplementationTask 2.1:Analysis Method EnhancementTask 2.1:Analysis Method EnhancementTask 2.1:Analysis Method EnhancementTask 2.1:Analysis Method EnhancementTask 2.2: Methodology Implementation and Regulatory CompliancePhase 2 Milestones (September 1, 2005 – August 31, 2007)