Section 3.0. Damage Size Characterizations
The damage tolerance approach to structural integrity assumes
that cracks are present in all critical locations and demonstrates that these
cracks will not grow undetected to a critical length during a period of service
usage. Since the rate of crack growth depends on the crack length, the
structural service lives or periods between inspections are greatly influenced
by the crack lengths assumed at the beginning of a usage period. From the
safety viewpoint, these initial crack lengths must be longer than any
equivalent damage that could be present in the structure after passing quality
inspections. From a practical viewpoint, however, the degree of conservatism
introduced by assuming long cracks must be limited to reach realistic usage
lives or periods of operation without inspections. This trade-off results in
great emphasis being placed on quantifying the damage sizes that may be present
in the structure at the beginning of an operational period.
The distribution of crack lengths in any given structure can be
considered to consist of the composite of the several distributions shown in Figure 3.0.1. The material as received from the vendor
will contain very small flaws or defects such as inclusions, cracks, porosity
and surface pits, scratches, and machine marks. These inherent material flaws
are considerably below the detection capability of the non-destructive
inspection (NDI) and should be sufficiently small to not grow appreciably in service.
These small flaws form the basis of the continuing damage crack size assumption
and are characterized by a single crack length, ai, which is assumed to be an upper bound on the
distribution.
Figure 3.0.1. The Effect of Defects Distribution in Structural
Integrity Planning [Walker, et al., 1979]
A distribution of larger defects can exist as a result of the
fabrication process or as large inherent flaws.
The production quality control process is designed to detect and eliminate as
many of these cracks as possible but those which are not detected will
propagate due to fatigue mechanisms during service. The largest crack
size that could remain undetected in the newly fabricated structure after the
final inspection is designated as ao.
This crack length provides the starting point for crack growth projections
which demonstrate adequate service life or the necessity for an in-service
inspection.
Cracks smaller than ao
will propagate in service operations and others, due to fatigue crack
initiation, corrosion, and foreign object damage, will be initiated. If any of
these cracks can propagate to critical size, acr, before the end of the service life, they must be
detected and repaired at scheduled maintenance intervals. The largest crack
size that can remain undetected after an inspection is designated as aNDI and becomes the initial
crack size for the next usage period. Figure 3.0.2
is a schematic of the projected crack growth of the critical crack lengths and
illustrates the resetting of the potential crack to aNDI after the inspection. In this figure, the inspection was scheduled at one-half the
usage time required for an initial crack (ao
or aNDI) to grow to
critical.
Figure 3.0.2. Crack Growth-Life Curve after Second
Inspection
JSSG-2006 specifies the type and size of cracks that must be
assumed during design. These are
summarized in Section 1.3.4. The assumed crack sizes depend on:
1) the
design concept (slow crack growth or fail safe);
2) inspectability
level (inspectable or non-inspectable) with and without component removal; and
3) continuing
damage after initial primary damage.
In the current version of the Specification Guide, smaller
initial crack sizes (ao)
may be assumed for slow crack growth structures based on the contractors
demonstrated capability to eliminate all cracks
greater than the smaller value. This demonstration may be based on an NDI
system or on a proof test. These qualification processes are shown
schematically in Figure 3.0.3(a) and 3.0.3(b).
The continuing damage crack size assumption can also be reduced
if the contractor can demonstrate an improved manufacturing quality. One method
for such a demonstration is based on the determination of the distribution of
equivalent initial flaws as shown schematically in Figure
3.0.3(c).
Since NDI, proof testing, and the equivalent initial quality
method can be applied under the current airplane damage tolerance requirements
and may receive greater emphasis in future specifications, they are reviewed in
the following subsections. Section 3.1
describes the major NDI methods currently in use and discusses statistically
based demonstrations program for measuring NDI capability. Sections 3.2 and 3.3
describe and give examples of the proof test and equivalent initial quality
methods, respectively.
Figure 3.0.3. Various Qualification Processes