Interpreting fatigue test results using a probabilistic fracture approach

International Journal of Fatigue

Volumn 27, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 752-767

  White, Paul ^a   Molent, Loris ^a   Barter, Simon ^a  

^a DEFENCE SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY ORGANISATION   (Australia)

Author keywords

Fatigue crack growth; Fractography; Full scale fatigue testing; Probabilistic analysis; Risk assessment

Indexed keywords

CRACK PROPAGATION; CRACKS; FRACTOGRAPHY; FRACTURE; FRACTURE MECHANICS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MILITARY AIRCRAFT; PROBABILITY; RISK ASSESSMENT;

FATIGUE CRACK GROWTH; FATIGUE MONITORING SYSTEM; FULL SCALE FATIGUE TESTING; PROBABILISTIC ANALYSIS;

FATIGUE TESTING;

EID: 16244375515     PISSN: 01421123     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2005.01.006     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. White P, Barter S, Molent L. Probabilistic fracture prediction based on aircraft specific fatigue test data. In: Proceedings of the sixth joint FAA/DoD/NASA aging aircraft conference, San Diego, USA, 16-19 Sept. 2002.
2. Simpson DL, Landry N, Roussel J, Molent L, Graham AD, Schmidt N. The Canadian and Australian F/A-18 international follow-on structural test project. In: Proceedings of the ICAS 2002 Congress, Toronto, Canada, 2002.
3. Molent L, Stimson M, Inan S, Whiteroad I, Dickinson T, Anderson I. F/A-18 structural refurbishment project assessment activity, vol. 1. Technical report DSTO-TR-1238, Melbourne, Australia, 2002.
4. Hovey PW, Berens AP, Loomis JS. Update of the probability of fracture (PROF) computer program for aging aircraft risk analysis. Technical report AFRL-VA-WP-TR-1999-3030, Air Force Research Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, 1998.
5. Berens AP, Hovey PW, Skinn DA. Risk analysis for aging aircraft fleets, vol. 1, Analysis. Technical report WL-TR-91-3066 OH 45433-6553, Flight Dynamic Directorate, Wright Laboratory, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson AFB, 1991.
6. Manning SD, Yang JN. USAF durability design handbook: guidelines for the analysis and design of durable aircraft structures. Technical Report AFFDL-TR-84-3027, Air Flight Laboratory, Wright Patterson AFB, 1984.
7. British Ministry of Defence, Design and airworthiness requirements for service aircraft, Defence Standard 00-970, vols. 1 and 2, leaflet 201, Amdt. 6, 1987.
8. Cardrick AW, Mew AB. Scatter considerations in the interpretation of major fatigue tests. In: Proceedings of the ICAF symposium, Seattle, USA, 1999.
9. Cardrick AW, Mountfort A, Reed S. Advice to the Canadian forces on matters affecting the fatigue testing of combat aircraft. Directorate of Technical Airworthiness, Ottawa, Canada, 2000.
10. Payne AO. Determination of fatigue resistance of aircraft wings by full-scale testing. In: Full-scale fatigue testing of aircraft structures. UK: Pergamon Press; 1961, 1959.
11. J.W. Lincoln Risk assessment of an aging military aircraft J Aircraft 22 8 1985 687 691
12. Aircraft Structures. Joint service specification guide JSSG-2006. US Department of Defence, 1998.
13. Barter S, Molent L, Sharp K, Clark G. Repair and life assessment of critical fatigue damaged aluminium alloy structure using a peening rework method. In: Proceedings of the USAF structural integrity program conference, San Antonio, TX, USA, 2000.
14. Barter SA. Fatigue crack growth in 7050T7451 aluminium alloy thick section plate with a surface conditions simulating some regions of the F/A-18 structure. DSTO-TR-1458, Melbourne, Australia, 2003.
15. S. Barter, L. Molent, N. Goldsmith, and R. Jones An experimental evaluation of fatigue crack growth J Eng Fract Mech 12 1 2005 99 128
16. Harter J. AFGROW users guide and technical manual. Air Vehicles Directorate, Air Force Research Laboratory OH, AFRL-VA-WP-TR-2003, June 2003 [available for download at http://afgrow.wpafb.af.mil/downloads/afgrow/techman. zip ].
17. Skinn DA, Gallgher JP, Berens AP, Huber PD, Smith J. Damage tolerance design handbook, vol. 4. Dayton: University of Dayton Research Institute, 1994.
18. Gumbel EJ. Statistical theory of extreme values and some practical applications. Technical report series 33, National Bureau of Standards, 1954.
19. Rooke DP, Cartwright DJ. Compendium of stress intensity factors. Procurement executive, Ministry of Defence, 1976.
20. Aktepe B. Review of the RAAF F/A-18 structural appraisal of fatigue effects (SAFE) Version 112, vol. 2. Review of F/A-18 mission severity monitoring program. Technical report DSTO-TR-381/2, Melbourne, Australia, 1995.
21. Molent L. A review of strain and flight parameter data based aircraft fatigue usage monitoring system. In: Proceedings of the USAF structural integrity program conference, San Antonio, TX, 1996.
22. L. Molent, and B. Aktepe Review of fatigue monitoring of agile military aircraft J Fatigue Fract Eng Mater Struct 23 2000 767 785
23. Molent L, Ogden R, Pell R. F/A-18 FS488 bulkhead fatigue coupon test program, DSTO-TR-0941, Melbourne, Australia, 2000.
24. Molent L, Mills T, Pell R. F/A-18 FS488 bulkhead fatigue coupon test program - Part 2, DSTO-TR-1464, Melbourne, Australia, 2003.
25. Pell RA, Molent L, Green AJ. The fractographical comparison of F/A-18 aluminium alloy 7050-T7451 bulkhead representative coupons tested under two fatigue load spectra at several stress levels, DSTO-TR-1547, Feb 2004.
26. R. Ihaka, and R. Gentleman R: a language for data analysis and graphics J Comput Graph Stat 5 3 1996 299 314
27. Molent L, Dixon B, Barter S. Flaw identification through the application of loading. Proceedings of structural integrity and fracture conference 2004, Brisbane, 26-29 Sept. 2004.
28. Aicher W, Branger J, et al. A description of a fighter aircraft loading standard for fatigue evaluation, FALSTAFF, F+W (Switzerland), LBF (Germany), NLR (Netherlands), and IBG (Germany), 1976.