Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Airbus Alters A380 Wing Due To Crack Issues  
User currently offlinePlaneInsomniac From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 681 posts, RR: 0
Posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 17290 times:

Airbus has announced that they will alter the design of the A380 wing in order to address the wing crack issues:

- new metal alloy will be used
- weight will not increase
- performance will be unaffected
- new wings will be in planes delivered from late 2013 / early 2014 onwards

Source: spiegel.de (in German):
http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/unt...dert-fluegel-am-a380-a-831692.html

They quote Financial Times Deutschland.

[Edited 2012-05-07 01:09:34]


Am I cured? Slept 5 hours on last long-haul flight...
14 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently onlinesomeone83 From Norway, joined Sep 2006, 3500 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 17235 times:

They are not changing the design, but the production method......

User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13516 posts, RR: 100
Reply 2, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 13858 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting PlaneInsomniac (Thread starter):
- new wings will be in planes delivered from late 2013 / early 2014 onwards

So the question is, does this mean stress analysis is complete or that drawings are released? (Well... CATIA models with process notes...). I suspect the former and not the later.

Quoting someone83 (Reply 1):
They are not changing the design, but the production method......

Google translation states a new alloy. While the exterior shape might not change, are they changing any manufacturing methods? e.g., adding shot peening to the process? By our company process, the drawing would be revised (or CATIA model release revision updated).

Fatigue is still as much of an art as a science. It is an area where subtle material changes can triple service life. Little manufacturing process variations can change a parts life by a factor of ten.

So will QR Accept a 2014 A380 now?  

Now to go over to:
A380 Production Thread Part 11 (by SA7700 Nov 28 2011 in Civil Aviation)

References this article (hattip N14AZ): http://www.industryweek.com/articles...ar_end_26891.aspx?Page=2?ShowAll=1

A new manufacturing process is being tested and certified by engineers, and then repair kits will be produced and should be available for airlines as soon as in October.

Airbus has insisted that the cracks do not pose a safety risk, and envisages that the repairs can be made in 2013 when the aircraft undergo regular servicing.


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlinevoar From Canada, joined Jul 2008, 95 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 12267 times:

I wonder if this change will require new certification tests such as fatigue testing and ultimate load destruction tests.

User currently offlinePlaneInsomniac From Canada, joined Nov 2007, 681 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 12041 times:

Quoting voar (Reply 3):
I wonder if this change will require new certification tests such as fatigue testing and ultimate load destruction tests.

Here is the original FTD article (also in German):
http://www.ftd.de/unternehmen/handel...a380-fluegel-aendern/70033195.html

This article states that EASA still has to "agree to" the changes.

Further interesting points in this article:
- Airbus has so far listed 105 million EUR as costs associated with the wing cracks
- Construction rate for the A380 was reduced from 2.7 to 2.3 planes per month
- Due to reduced availability of already delivered planes to the airlines, further payments are likely
- Change affects the installation of new "clamps" ("klammern")



Am I cured? Slept 5 hours on last long-haul flight...
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31375 posts, RR: 85
Reply 5, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11912 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting voar (Reply 3):
I wonder if this change will require new certification tests such as fatigue testing and ultimate load destruction tests.

It will certainly not require a new ultimate load test. There might be fatigue tests, but I expect those would be "small scale" and performed with a smaller, representative section and not an entire wing.


User currently offlinezeke From Hong Kong, joined Dec 2006, 9228 posts, RR: 76
Reply 6, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 11352 times:

Quoting voar (Reply 3):
I wonder if this change will require new certification tests such as fatigue testing and ultimate load destruction tests.

It should not require anything of the kind. OEMs change the manufacturing process, materials used, even suppliers based upon in service experience. It is one of the reasons why air travel is so safe, the OEMs react to in service discoveries, and are proactive in getting them rectified.

The OEMs have approved engineers in house that can certify changes, this would be initially be done to the production of new wings, and then transferred to in service aircraft. This is mainly a details design issue, added to a change in manufacturing process. Nothing has been mentioned to suggest that the certified wing loads need adjusting.

OEMs would typically issue a service bulletin (SB) outlining the changes, and these are typically picked up by the regulators like EASA/FAA and made into an Airworthiness Directive (AD). The SBs are typically “suggested” fixes as OEMs cannot really compel an operator to carry them out, and ADs are normally made compulsory by the regulators.



We are addicted to our thoughts. We cannot change anything if we cannot change our thinking – Santosh Kalwar
User currently offlineIL96M From United Kingdom, joined Jun 2005, 139 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 10561 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 2):
the drawing would be revised (or CATIA model release revision updated).

CATIA 3D models are directly used for production. 2D Drawings would only be produced for explanatory purposes, if at all, but play no role in production nowadays.

  


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13516 posts, RR: 100
Reply 8, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7245 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting zeke (Reply 6):
It should not require anything of the kind. OEMs change the manufacturing process, materials used, even suppliers based upon in service experience. It is one of the reasons why air travel is so safe, the OEMs react to in service discoveries, and are proactive in getting them rectified.
Quoting IL96M (Reply 7):
CATIA 3D models are directly used for production. 2D Drawings would only be produced for explanatory purposes, if at all, but play no role in production nowadays.

I think I know that.   But the models will have details (e.g., shot peening). Even though this is the rule, most of us still say 'drawing release:'   

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 2):
(Well... CATIA models with process notes...)

An interesting side note, one of the major aerospace companies is about to leave CATIA.    Back to UG!   
(Side note, I really like what I've seen with NX.)

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9664 posts, RR: 68
Reply 9, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 3 hours ago) and read 7162 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Quoting IL96M (Reply 7):
2D Drawings would only be produced for explanatory purposes, if at all, but play no role in production nowadays.

Lots of aerospace parts are manufactured off of 2D drawings.


User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13516 posts, RR: 100
Reply 10, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6861 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting clickhappy (Reply 9):
Lots of aerospace parts are manufactured off of 2D drawings.

Large or small shop? Large shops do not want the paper and pens (FOD issues) nor keeping track of which paper has the correct effectivity for each airframe going down the line. CATIA/UG make life easier when multiple variations are in production.

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineclickhappy From United States of America, joined Sep 2001, 9664 posts, RR: 68
Reply 11, posted (2 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6814 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
PHOTO SCREENER

Large. As large as it gets. Also, just because it is 2D, doesn't mean it is on paper, lol.

User currently offlinebikerthai From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 2189 posts, RR: 4
Reply 12, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 18 hours ago) and read 4869 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):

Large or small shop?

With CATIA V5 being modular and runs on Windows, even small shops can afford to buy/lease it.

And if you want to work for the 787, you will need to have V5 no matter if you are large or small.

Even if the parts are/were on 2D drawing, most likely every shop now-a-days would want a 3-D model just so they can program their NC machine. I mean, if the guys who build those custom motorcycle have their own 3-D system with their NC machine, then it would be prehistoric if an aerospace machine shop don't have any 3-D capabilities today.

As for parts lists and process/production notes . . . PDF have made great strides . . .   

bt



Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 13516 posts, RR: 100
Reply 13, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4503 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 12):
I mean, if the guys who build those custom motorcycle have their own 3-D system with their NC machine, then it would be prehistoric if an aerospace machine shop don't have any 3-D capabilities today.

IMHO, many aerospace machine shops are behind automotive and other industries.

I'm not arguing that 3D models are the primary way to do it. I do not see paper in the large shops anymore. I would like to see every shop go to a 3D model. However, some good shops have stuck to paper.   

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 12):
And if you want to work for the 787, you will need to have V5 no matter if you are large or small.

Subs of vendors are not on Catia always. The vendor creates the V5 for Boeing, but the actual part production is often done to paper. I do not agree, but it is being done.

I think we're 'talking past' each other. I would like every shop to be 3D based NC machining in a 'dark shop' environment where 1st shift services the machines and everything else happens overnight. That has been true in automotive vendors for a dozen years.

Quoting bikerthai (Reply 12):
then it would be prehistoric if an aerospace machine shop don't have any 3-D capabilities today.

Some of the shops are. I'm not talking 1st tier vendors for the most part.

1st tier vendors and the big aerospace companies are all 3-D models. 2nd tier vendors have Catia, but do 'mixed work.' 3rd tier vendors are often 'prehistoric.' They are 3rd tier for a reason...

Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4700 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (2 years 7 months 1 week 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 3586 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 10):
Large or small shop? Large shops do not want the paper and pens (FOD issues) nor keeping track of which paper has the correct effectivity for each airframe going down the line. CATIA/UG make life easier when multiple variations are in production.

I can tell you that for example the factory where the rear pressure bulkhead for the 787 is produced uses both. All NC machines use 3D Catia models, but in the shop these are supplemented with 2D drawings on paper for easier reference and manufacturing documentation is attached to them.



Exceptions confirm the rule.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Airbus To Strengthen A380 Wing posted Mon May 22 2006 09:46:41 by Scbriml
Airbus VP -Will Need Years For A380 Wing Cracks posted Mon Mar 19 2012 15:27:55 by cubastar
A380 Wing Documentary BBC2 13th Nov posted Thu Nov 10 2011 11:59:18 by GDB
Airbus, Boeing PAY Attention! Design A New N/B. posted Fri Apr 23 2010 20:42:23 by 747400sp
A380 Wing Flex Compared To The 787 posted Sun Jan 31 2010 17:46:40 by A380900
MRJ Wing Design Change-Implications For 787? posted Thu Sep 17 2009 04:18:00 by Cerecl
EK In Talk With Airbus About A380 Deliveries posted Fri Mar 13 2009 03:57:45 by N14AZ
Is This An A380 Wing? posted Thu Nov 20 2008 04:40:48 by Carls
Airbus Reviewing A380 Schedule - DJ posted Tue Apr 29 2008 06:34:27 by Pilot21
Airbus Allocates A380 Testbeds posted Wed Jan 23 2008 02:03:23 by Flying-Tiger
FlightAware Down Due To FAA Issues posted Tue Jul 7 2009 12:52:17 by Mikey711MN
QF A380 Grounded Due To Fuel Tank Problems? posted Mon Mar 2 2009 04:05:09 by Fab747
Qantas Grounds 737-400s Due To Maintenance Issues posted Tue Aug 12 2008 05:50:30 by FlyingKangaroo
AP - DL/NW Deal "in Jeopardy" Due To Pilot Issues posted Tue Feb 19 2008 22:25:23 by EA CO AS
CX Grounds Four 777-300s Due To Trent Issues posted Wed Dec 8 2004 16:26:33 by N328KF
767 Wing Started To Crack During Flight.. posted Sat May 25 2002 12:35:04 by Alessandro
Airbus To Miss A380 Delivery Target Due To Qantas posted Thu Dec 16 2010 08:57:10 by cloud4000
Airbus To Strengthen A380 Wing posted Mon May 22 2006 09:46:41 by Scbriml
Qantas Grounds One A380 Due To New Cracks posted Tue Feb 7 2012 14:04:03 by airnorth