Integrating nondestructive inspections with autonomic logistics and structural health monitoring strategies for aeronautic systems
Source abstract
Abstract
In recent years, there has been much activity concerning health management of aviation systems. Many government- and industry-based research projects/programs are focused on integrated vehicle health management strategies that include sensor development for automated or manual fault detection, diagnostics, prognostics to define remaining useful life, as well as mitigation plans for continued safe operation during a fault. The overall objectives for such activities include increased safety as well as efficient and economic operation of an aircraft fleet. Currently, to assess structural faults, visual inspections and/or nondestructive inspection techniques are utilized as a required routine for certain design and life management strategies. The inspections are manually involved and are carried out during aircraft downtime (e.g. on the runway or nightly hangar maintenance) or during a more extensive aircraft overhaul. Even with the potential of automated structural health monitoring within an integrated vehicle health management system, it is foreseen that manual and nondestructive inspections will continue to be an integral part of fleet life management. This article addresses and clarifies the role of nondestructive inspections in aircraft life management and its potential inclusion in future integrated vehicle health management systems.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Structural Health Monitoring Techniques · Advanced Sensor Technologies Research · Fatigue and fracture mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Ohio Aerospace Institute/NASA Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field, Cleveland, OH, USA
References (35)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1177/09673911060140040910.1177/096739110601400409 ↗
2. Amer KB · 1988
3. Arnold SM · 2009
4. Brasche L · Materials Evaluation · 2002 · 60 · 853
5. Bray DE · 1997
6. Bruce DA · 2006
7. Carlson RL · 1996
8. Chaparro A · 2001
9. Christodoulou L · Journal of Materials · 2004 · 56 · 15
10. Cristofani E · 2012 · 806
11. Cruse TA · 1997
12. Drury CG · 1999
13. Drury CG · 2002
14. Federal Aviation Administration · 1998
15. Federal Aviation Administration · 2008
16. Goranson UF · 1983
17. 10.1361/10599490277034427710.1361/105994902770344277 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.compositesb.2005.05.01010.1016/j.compositesb.2005.05.010 ↗
19. Henley S · 2001
20. Kappas J (2002) Review of risk and reliability methods for aircraft gas turbine engines. DSTO-TR-1306 (AR-012–320). Available at: http://www.dsto.defense.gove.au/corporate/reports/DSTO-TR-1306.pdf
21. Kessler SS (2002) Piezo-electric based in-situ damage detection of composite materials for structural health monitoring systems. PhD Dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.10.2514/6.2002-1545 ↗
22. Leverant GR · 2000
23. McEvily AJ · 2002
24. Matzkanin GA · 1997
25. 10.1016/S0266-3538(02)00065-910.1016/S0266-3538(02)00065-9 ↗
26. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) · 1990
27. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) · 1998
28. 10.1016/j.scriptamat.2006.03.03710.1016/j.scriptamat.2006.03.037 ↗
29. Shepherd DP · OMMI · 2004 · 3 · 1
30. 10.1117/12.88202710.1117/12.882027 ↗
31. Thompson RB · Materials Evaluation · 2001 · 59 · 861
32. 10.1117/12.53909110.1117/12.539091 ↗
33. US Department of Defense · 2004
34. Ushakov A · 2002
35. Vukelich S · 2001