Atch_4_CAStLE_TeardownAnalysisProtocols.pdf

For the best experience, open this PDF portfolio in

Acrobat X or Adobe Reader X, or later.

Get Adobe Reader Now!

http://www.adobe.com/go/reader

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER

FOR AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL LIFE EXTENSION, HQ USAFA/DFME, USAF ACADEMY CO 80840.

CAStLE-TR-2020-01

CAStLE TEARDOWN ANALYSIS

PROGRAM PROTOCOL 1: DATA

MANAGEMENT SYSTEM

May 2020

CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL LIFE EXTENSION (CAStLE)

HQ USAFA/DFME

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

2354 FAIRCHILD DR, STE 6L-173

USAF ACADEMY CO 80840-6240

DEAN OF THE FACULTY

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY

COLORADO 80840

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

STRUCTURAL LIFE EXTENSION, HQ USAFA/DFME, USAF ACADEMY CO 80840.

ii

CAStLE-TR-2020-01

This technical report, “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 1: Data Management System,” is presented as a competent treatment of the subject, worthy of publication. The United States Air Force Academy Department of Mechanical Engineering vouches for the quality of the research, without necessarily endorsing the opinions and conclusions of the authors. Therefore, the views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

Using Government drawings, specifications, or other data included in this document for any purpose other than Government procurement does not in any way obligate the U.S. Government. The fact that the Government formulated or supplied the drawings, specifications, or other data does not license the holder or any other person or corporation; or convey any rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented invention that may relate to them.

This report is releasable to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) subject to the distribution limitations indicated on the cover of this document.

GREGORY A. SHOALES, GS-15

Teardown Analysis Programs Technical Lead Director, Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension

JAMES M. GREER, JR., AD-23

Technical Director, Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension

CORY A. COOPER, Colonel, USAF Permanent Professor and Head Department of Mechanical Engineering United States Air Force Academy

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT iii

Qualified Requestor Statement

Qualified requestors may obtain copies of this document from the Director, USAFA Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension, HQ USAFA/DFME, USAF Academy CO 80840. U.S.

Government Agency contractors must have “need to know” certified by the cognizant government agency for their project or contract. When U.S. Government drawings, specifications, or any other data are reused for any purpose other than a definitely related Government procurement operation, the Government thereby incurs no responsibility nor any obligation whatsoever; and the fact that the Government may have formulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or any other data is not to be regarded by implication or otherwise, as in any manner licensing the holder or any other person or corporation or conveying any rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented invention that may in any way be related thereto. Do not return this copy; retain or destroy.

DESTRUCTION NOTICE

For classified documents, follow the procedures in DOD 5220.22.M, Industrial Security Manual, Section II-19 or DOD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program Regulation, Chapter IX. For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT iv

Abstract

The Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension (CAStLE) has planned and executed multiple structural teardown analyses of multiple weapon systems to determine the current structural condition and long-term structural viability of the respective fleets. Such teardown analysis programs (TAPs) continue to be of great interest as the average age of the in-service systems continues to rise. Depending on the system; TAPs focus on a variety of structural types and material degradation mechanisms. Regardless of the focus, CAStLE recognized the need to establish best practices and leverage lessons learned from the past TAPs.

A TAP consists of five primary execution elements: extraction, disassembly, coating removal, nondestructive inspection (NDI), and root cause analysis (often referred to as failure analysis). These elements serve to efficiently and economically focus the analysis efforts to those findings which would be of greatest interest to fleet managers. The first and most critical step in the process is to establish program goals. Program goals lead to the definition of structural regions of interest called Teardown Sections (TS). Extraction of a given TS is followed by its precision disassembly with the goal of preventing further damage to the parts comprising the TS. In order to take the best advantage of NDI methods, the part is then stripped of all coatings using methods specifically designed to not damage the part’s substrate material. Nondestructive inspection methods are then used to achieve the level of fidelity required by the program goals. Again, using the program goals as the guide, root cause analysis is performed of prioritized NDI indications. This analysis determines all characteristics which are pertinent to the program goals for each prioritized NDI indication within the program’s schedule and fiscal constraints.

CAStLE published a series of “Protocols” to support the “C/KC-135 Teardown Analysis Program”. They included two administrative protocols to describe the required secure process control/data archival database system, and subject identification and tracking procedures; the five execution protocols which captured best practices for the processes discussed above; and a separate protocol to evaluate structural lap joints.

As is often required by the large scope of many TAPs, CAStLE Protocols enable the required TAP elements to be reliably and repeatably executed by a number of contractor and government organizations. The protocols are sufficiently detailed such that each major TAP task can be performed in a robust, error-free, uniform and unbiased manner without unduly restricting user processes. The eight CAStLE Protocols reflect typical TAP process requirements, the current state of best practices, and the lessons learned from previous TAPs.

The procedures in each protocol have been successfully used by CAStLE and other research organizations on far more than 50 TAPs. Protocol 1, documented herein, was formerly developed as a user’s manual for the CAStLE web-based Teardown analysis program Data Management System which was known as TDMS. The TDMS was hosted by CAStLE on USAFA servers and available to all programs that followed CAStLE protocols. Regrettably, DoD database restriction necessitated the removal of this system from USAFA servers. Even so, best practices for process tracking, data capture and archival are still relevant and reflected throughout the protocols. The TDMS nomenclature is therefore retained when referencing the recommended program database system—now left up to the development of the individual users and/or TAP managers.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT v

Acknowledgement

Protocol 1 was originally drafted as being specific to the C/KC-135 by Valdez International Corporation through the Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension (CAStLE) support contract FA7000 10-D-0003, task order 0001. Funding for this support was provided by the National Institute for Aviation Research (NIAR) at Wichita State University (WSU) from their Congressional program “Inspection and Analysis Methods in Aging Military Aircraft: KC 135 Teardown Protocol Development, Validation, and Examination of Structural Details”, Contract F33615-03-D-5204. Multiple Valdez team members contributed to the review and edit of this first Protocol 1 publication.

A CAStLE update was published in 2014 to incorporate lessons learned since the KC-135 specific protocols were developed with inputs from by Sabreliner Corporation under CAStLE support contract FA7000-10-D-0014, Task Order 0004.

The current update was accomplished by the CAStLE government staff with editorial assistance from Aleut Aerospace Engineering LLC under support contract FA7000-18-D- 0008, task order FA700019FA143. This 2020 publication further captures lessons learned and removes specific instructions to the use of the formerly government hosted CAStLE

TDMS.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT vi

Contents

Qualified Requestor Statement ............................................................................................. iii

Abstract ................................................................................................................................. iv

Acknowledgement ..................................................................................................................v

Contents ................................................................................................................................ vi

Terms and Acronyms ........................................................................................................... vii

Protocol 1 Data Management System ............................................................................ 1-1

Task 1.1 TDMS Description ....................................................................................... 1-1

1.1.1 Scope of Protocol 1 ...................................................................................... 1-1

1.1.2 System Characteristics ................................................................................. 1-2

1.1.3 System Availability ...................................................................................... 1-2

1.1.4 Minimum Computer Requirements .............................................................. 1-2

1.1.5 User Accounts .............................................................................................. 1-3

Task 1.2 TDMS Functions and Terminology ............................................................. 1-4

1.2.1 TDMS Functional Requirements ................................................................. 1-4

1.2.2 Terminology and Functional Flow ............................................................... 1-5

1.2.3 References .................................................................................................... 1-6

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT vii

Terms and Acronyms

The following terms and acronyms are common to CAStLE Teardown Analysis Programs and may or may not have been used in this Protocol.

Terms Definition

Protocol ..................................documentation of procedures to be followed for each of the primary execution elements of the teardown analysis program which reflect both best practices and specific program requirements.

Task ........................................a specific step to be accomplished within a Protocol which contributes to the satisfaction of the Protocol goals. Tasks may be required in a specific sequence or on an as needed basis as specified by the Protocol.

Teardown Section ..................region of assembled structure which contains one or more Teardown Subjects

Lap Joint Section....................region of assembled structure containing lap joints selected for evaluation by the tasks defined in the Lap Joint and CPC Evaluation Protocol

Lot ..........................................discrete piece of structure which has been cut from the whole aircraft for ease of transport and storage and may or may not contain one or more Teardown Sections

Part .........................................constituent elements resulting from the disassembly (per the Section Disassembly Protocol) of a Teardown Section

Sub-Part..................................the result of a Part being sub-sectioned to suit program requirements; examples include a part being cut to fit into a coating removal immersion tank and a portion removed from a larger part which contains an NDI indication which has been designated to be forwarded for root cause analysis.

Teardown Subjects .................focus of the teardown analysis program; these are the precise regions of structure which have been designated to be inspected and which may contain the damage (corrosion, cracks, etc.) that is of interest to the program.

Structural Section ...................Airframes are commonly built in smaller sections in parallel during the manufacturing process, and then assembled together during final assembly. Structural section typically references these pre-final assembly sections, normally defined by the original manufacturer.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT viii

Acronyms Definition

AC ..........................................alternating current

ACSG .....................................aircraft sustainment group

AES ........................................auger electron spectroscopy

AFB ........................................Air Force Base

ASNT .....................................American Society for Nondestructive Testing

BHEC .....................................bolt hole eddy current

BL ..........................................buttock line

BS ...........................................body station

CAStLE ..................................Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension

CR ..........................................computed radiography

CPC ........................................corrosion preventive compound

CVI .........................................close visual inspection

DoD ........................................Department of Defense

EBSD .....................................electron backscatter diffraction

ECSS ......................................eddy current surface scan

EDXS .....................................energy dispersive X‑ray spectroscopy

EIS..........................................electrochemical impedance spectroscopy

EVI .........................................enhanced visual inspection

FA ..........................................failure analysis

FPI ..........................................fluorescent penetrant inspection

FRA ........................................frequency response analyzer

FSH ........................................full scale height

FTIR .......................................Fourier transformed infrared spectroscopy

IAW........................................in accordance with

IP ............................................inspection procedure

IQI ..........................................image quality indicator

LEIS .......................................localized electrochemical impedance spectroscopy

LHS ........................................left hand side

LJS .........................................lap joint section

LJSS .......................................lap joint simulated solution

LRS ........................................laser Raman spectroscopy

MAUS ....................................mobile automated ultrasonic scanning

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT ix

MDS .......................................mission design series

MIA ........................................mechanical impedance analysis

MPI ........................................magnetic particle inspection

MSDS .....................................Material Safety Data Sheet

NAS........................................National Aerospace Standard

NDI ........................................nondestructive inspection

NDT .......................................nondestructive testing

NIAR ......................................National Institute for Aviation Research

NSN........................................national stock number

OES ........................................optical emission spectroscopy

PE ...........................................pulse echo

PEU ........................................pulse echo ultrasonic

PM ..........................................Government Program Manager

PTP .........................................peak to peak

QQI ........................................quantitative quality indicators

RBS ........................................Rutherford back scattering

RHS ........................................right hand side

SALI .......................................surface analysis by laser ionization

SAXS .....................................small angle X‑ray scattering

SCC ........................................stress corrosion cracking

SEM .......................................scanning electron microscope

SIMS ......................................secondary ion mass spectroscopy

SwRI ......................................Southwest Research Institute

T.O. ........................................technical order

TAP ........................................Teardown Analysis Program

TAPSID..................................Teardown Analysis Program Subject Identification Document;

the data package required to locate and define TS and LJS.

TDMS ....................................Teardown analysis program Data Management System, a generic reference to the TAP database which is used to communicate requirements, track status, and archive all generated data of a given TAP as detailed in the CAStLE Protocols.

TR ..........................................technical report

TS ...........................................teardown section

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT x

TTU ........................................through-thickness ultrasonic

TSPB ......................................teardown section parts breakdown

USAF .....................................United States Air Force

USAFA ..................................USAF Academy

UT ..........................................ultrasonic thickness

VOC .......................................volatile organic compound

WL .........................................water line

WP..........................................work package (e.g. from T.O. 33B‑1‑2)

WS..........................................wing station

WSU .......................................Wichita State University

XPS ........................................X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

1-1

Protocol 1 Data Management System

This protocol describes the purpose, basic features, commands, and functions of a Teardown analysis program Data Management System (TDMS). A TDMS database must serve as a permanent, electronic record of the entire teardown analysis program (TAP).

However, it is far more than just an electronic database. In order to facilitate program status and asset tracking, every step in a given TAP should involve interacting with TDMS. It is therefore the obligation of all authorized TAP personnel to follow this protocol in its entirety inclusive of quality assurance duties as well as the TDMS related elements of all CAStLE protocols. Additionally, it is important for TAP personnel to understand that although failure to follow this protocol may not adversely impact their specific TAP process activity, downstream TAP processes, which rely on their upstream TDMS data and actions, may be severely hindered. As such, the methods and procedures specified in this protocol were established and verified based on their ability to create and maintain continuity of data visibility and control through every stage of the TAP.

Instructions in this document do not in any way supersede guidance given in the published execution element protocols (Protocols 3 through 8). In the case of any conflict between the instructions herein and those given in the execution element protocols, the user shall always default to the execution element protocol. If the user has any doubt of the program requirements, contact the applicable Protocol Lead Engineer or the Government Program Manager (PM) for clarification before proceeding. Contact information should be included in TDMS.

Task 1.1 TDMS Description

1.1.1 Scope of Protocol 1

Since every TAP step interacts with TDMS, the Protocols 2 through 8 contain specific TDMS instructions for their protocol data entry requirements. The intent of each execution protocol is to provide a single document to direct the execution of that protocol (extraction, disassembly, coating removal, NDI, etc.). Therefore, protocol 1 is not a complete guide to TDMS. However, it contains general TDMS information, system requirements, functionality, and basic terms that every TDMS user will need. This approach minimizes redundancy between the protocols.

This protocol is written from the user perspective. So, system administration information regarding server configuration, database software, memory capacity, and other “back end” information is not discussed.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

1-2

1.1.2 System Characteristics

TDMS user access shall be available throughout a network, such as the internet, which is readily available to ALL program participants. This means that there is:

Easy access for authorized users, no special computer software or hardware required, secure data transfer between multiple vendors and program participants, searchable TAP analysis data results, ability to review shared TAP protocols and other common documents, and data archiving on a secure and “backed-up” server rather than on a local personal computer (PC) in order to prevents duplication of data on multiple PCs.

The original CAStLE TDMS was developed specifically for the KC-135 TAP, although lessons learned were later incorporated from the C-5 TAP database system, the CAStLE TDMS was not commercial software; it was CAStLE developmental software. The software is still owned and used internally by the Government (CAStLE). CAStLE's original TDMS served well to execute over 50 different TAPs. Resource constraints ended Government hosting of the system in 2018. Advances in hardware and software since TDMS was originally deployed in 2006 probably make development of new software and/or programming and system hosting methodologies appropriate going forward. If a new developer would find it useful, the latest version of the CAStLE TDMS software could be made available to authorized recipients "as-is" for background information purposes. As of this writing, the original TDMS developer (LexTech, Inc., Dayton OH) is still in existence and could be contracted for consultation. Should a TAP choose to use the CAStLE TDMS software the developer can aid installation and use on the program server, incorporate new features, improve current functions, and fix any software bugs. Since the use of CAStLE TDMS rather than a new program office implemented software/hardware platform is not the recommended approach, the 2020 revision to the CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocols have all detailed TDMS date entry instructions removed.

1.1.3 System Availability

TDMS shall be available during any time that program protocols are to be executed or program status and uploaded data may need to be accessed. In past experience with CAStLE TDMS, scheduled outages normally occurred due to software updates, hardware repair and updates, or scheduled power outages. Any such controllable outage should be scheduled outside normal duty hours to minimize any user impact. Reasonable attempts will be made to notify all users and vendors of scheduled TDMS outages. Some outages due to uncontrollable events such as hardware failure, system updates, security patches, or hardware failure cannot be planned. In such a case, TDMS users must endeavor to update system data immediately upon system availability.

1.1.4 Minimum Computer Requirements

The TDMS component of the TAP must specify minimum system requirements for TDMS use and access. Such specifications include but are not necessarily limited to PC hardware requirements and internet operability characteristics.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

1-3

1.1.5 User Accounts

Granting user accounts and setting permission levels in TDMS should be the responsibility of the Government Program Manager (PM) or designee. User login and access level shall be verified by means of a login security system such as multi-step strong password verification, CAC/PIV, etc. Users shall be fully identified in TDMS for data integrity and traceability. The following minimum information should be required to be associated with each user account:

full name official email address official phone number organization their TAP duties, i.e., which protocols they will execute, which weapon system serial numbers, what level of access they require (data entry, data access, quality assurance, supervisory, etc.)

Only the PM or designee shall be permitted to create new accounts or modify existing accounts. Similarly, the PM or designee shall control the TDMS system to change pass words, disable accounts, or address other account access issues.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

1-4

Task 1.2 TDMS Functions and Terminology

1.2.1 TDMS Functional Requirements

CAStLE TDMS was designed to perform several inherently separate functions within a single web-enabled database program. This approach meant users only had to learn one program, but it also made TDMS perhaps less straight forward to use than single-purpose programs or more recent software development. TDMS as referenced in the protocols may represent multiple systems employed by the TDMS solution of a given program office.

TDMS shall be deployed to perform the following primary functions:

1) Shipping, receiving, and TAP subject accountability and tracking

2) TAP requirements communication and control to execution sites

a. The required inspections for each teardown section (TS) and part

b. The NDI indications which require root-cause analysis per Protocol 8

c. Positive control to ensure 100% compliance with TAP requirements

3) TAP data entry

a. Defining and documenting all TS, parts, and sub-parts

b. Documenting all TAP data and results to include uploading all supporting files and photographs as required by the protocols

4) Current stage and status and tracking of each TS, part, and sub-part

5) Data searching, retrieval, and reporting

Regarding item 1, all shipping and receiving actions shall be recorded in TDMS, to include uploading shipping documents and recording when shipped and when received. This is essentially a asset (TS and part) tracking function, designed to positively control and document the location and shipment of all assets. Given that the analysis of a single aircraft via the protocols can easily result in tens of thousands of individual parts, tracking is not a trivial task but 100% accountability is absolutely essential for program success.

Regarding item 2, access to TAP requirements is crucial to the execution of most protocols.

TDMS serves as an efficient, accessible means of communicating program requirements and guidance. It is equally essential that TDMS implementation positively controls 100% compliance with all TAP requirements.

Regarding item 3, TAP data entry is by far the most detailed of all TDMS functions. Data requirements are specified in each of the execution protocols.

Regarding item 4, the current location, stage, and status of any section or part is required to be tracked at all times. TDMS shall also record the location and protocol stage history for all TSs and parts.

Regarding item 5, these functions are a basic requirement of any database program. In order to provide timely support to the PM, TDMS shall be implemented with data search and report generation functions tailored to the needs of the program.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

1-5

1.2.2 Terminology and Functional Flow

The following describes basic terminology and functional flow used throughout the protocols.

Stage .......................................is the current TAP process of the TS or part. TS stage choices could include: storage, shipping/receiving status, extraction, TS level NDI, and disassembly. Part stage choices could include:

storage, shipping/receiving status, coating removal, part level NDI, and root cause analysis.

Status ......................................records the progress of a section or part through a stage (protocol process, shipping/receiving, or storage). Choices for stage progress are: in-progress and completed.

Since the protocols provide a very structured sequence of actions that apply to every TS and part, TDMS implementation shall mimic that sequence in order to provide a logical step-wise data interface as well as serve to help guide the TAP. Said another way, TDMS should be structured in the order of actions—TS are defined, extracted, inspected and documented;

parts are identified, disassembled and documented; and then parts continue to flow through the remaining TAP protocol process steps of coating removal, part level NDI, and root cause analysis of prioritized NDI indications. Figure 2-1 in Protocol 2 shows the major stages and flow of subjects through a typical TAP. TDMS implementation shall prevent a subject, TS or part, progressing from one stage to the next until the required data are entered into TDMS.

Data entry into TDMS should be implemented via a common set of commands and/or command icons. Commands such as save, delete, submit, undo, and update are just a few recommended. Data entry, particularly for complex fields, is recommended to be implemented via some form of autosave such that progress is not lost prior to completing the formal submission of any entry. To that end it is also recommended that data entry be a simple as possible without losing desired fidelity. Suggested entry methods include drop down menus, radio buttons, data entry fields with stated entry format requirements, and file upload capability.

As TAP subjects are defined at the Lot, TS, part, sub-part level, TDMS shall facilitate the digital “creation” of those subjects in the database each having its own unique identification to be used for protocol process control and traceability. Once created these digital identifications serve to connect TDMS to the physical subjects. It is imperative that all TDMS data is always associated with and therefore can be traced back to the physical (TS, part, sub-part, etc.) source of the data. It is likewise imperative for the validity of the TAP that any sub-part or part can be traced back through the higher levels of subject assemblies (i.e. sub-parts traced to parent parts, parts traced to parent TS, TS traced to parent lots, lots traced to weapon system serial number).

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 May 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

1-6

1.2.3 References

Supporting and additional details referenced in this protocol are available in the following protocols:

[1] “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 2: Identification and Tracking,” CAStLE-TR 2020-02, USAF Academy, CO, May 2020.

[2] “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 3: Teardown Section Extraction,” CAStLE-TR 2020-03, USAF Academy, CO, May 2020.

[3] “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 4: Teardown Section Disassembly,” CAStLE-TR 2020-04, USAF Academy, CO, May 2020.

[4] “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 5: Part Coating Removal,” CAStLE-TR 2020-05, USAF Academy, CO, May 2020.

[5] “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 6: Lap Joint and CPC Evaluation,” CAStLE-TR 2020-06, USAF Academy, CO, May 2020.

[6] “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 7: Nondestructive Inspection,” CAStLE- TR 2020-07, USAF Academy, CO, May 2020.

[7] “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 8: Root Cause Analysis,” CAStLE-TR 2020-08, USAF Academy, CO, May 2020.

2020-05-29T13:22:47-0600

SHOALES.GREGORY.ALAN.1022084298

2020-06-02T15:22:32-0600

GREER.JAMES.MCKAY.JR.1127709439

2020-06-05T12:04:35-0600

COOPER.CORY.A.1055538928

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2020. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT

CAStLE-TR-2020-02

CAStLE TEARDOWN ANALYSIS

PROGRAM PROTOCOL 2:

IDENTIFICATION AND TRACKING

May 2020

CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT STRUCTURAL LIFE EXTENSION (CAStLE)

HQ USAFA/DFME

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

2354 FAIRCHILD DR, STE 6L-173

USAF ACADEMY CO 80840-6240

DEAN OF THE FACULTY

UNITED STATES AIR FORCE ACADEMY

COLORADO 80840

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2014. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT ii

CAStLE-TR-2020-02

This technical report, “CAStLE Teardown Analysis Program Protocol 2:

Identification and Tracking,” is presented as a competent treatment of the subject, worthy of publication. The United States Air Force Academy Department of Mechanical Engineering vouches for the quality of the research, without necessarily endorsing the opinions and conclusions of the authors. Therefore, the views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not reflect the official policy or position of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

Using Government drawings, specifications, or other data included in this document for any purpose other than Government procurement does not in any way obligate the U.S. Government. The fact that the Government formulated or supplied the drawings, specifications, or other data does not license the holder or any other person or corporation; or convey any rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented invention that may relate to them.

This report is releasable to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC) subject to the distribution limitations indicated on the cover of this document.

GREGORY A. SHOALES, GS-15

Teardown Analysis Programs Technical Lead Director, Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension

JAMES M. GREER, JR., AD-23

Technical Director, Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension

CORY A. COOPER, Colonel, USAF Permanent Professor and Head Department of Mechanical Engineering United States Air Force Academy

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2014. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT iii

Qualified Requestor Statement

Qualified requestors may obtain copies of this document from the Director, USAFA Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension, HQ USAFA/DFME, USAF Academy CO 80840. U.S.

Government Agency contractors must have “need to know” certified by the cognizant government agency for their project or contract. When U.S. Government drawings, specifications, or any other data are reused for any purpose other than a definitely related Government procurement operation, the Government thereby incurs no responsibility nor any obligation whatsoever; and the fact that the Government may have formulated, furnished, or in any way supplied the said drawings, specifications, or any other data is not to be regarded by implication or otherwise, as in any manner licensing the holder or any other person or corporation or conveying any rights or permission to manufacture, use, or sell any patented invention that may in any way be related thereto. Do not return this copy; retain or destroy.

DESTRUCTION NOTICE

For classified documents, follow the procedures in DOD 5220.22.M, Industrial Security Manual, Section II-19 or DOD 5200.1-R, Information Security Program Regulation, Chapter IX. For unclassified, limited documents, destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2014. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT iv

Abstract

The Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension (CAStLE) has planned and executed multiple structural teardown analyses of multiple weapon systems to determine the current structural condition and long-term structural viability of the respective fleets. Such teardown analysis programs (TAPs) continue to be of great interest as the average age of the in-service systems continues to rise. Depending on the system; TAPs focus on a variety of structural types and material degradation mechanisms. Regardless of the focus, CAStLE recognized the need to establish best practices and leverage lessons learned from the past TAPs.

A TAP consists of five primary execution elements: extraction, disassembly, coating removal, nondestructive inspection (NDI), and root cause analysis (often referred to as failure analysis). These elements serve to efficiently and economically focus the analysis efforts to those findings which would be of greatest interest to fleet managers. The first and most critical step in the process is to establish program goals. Program goals lead to the definition of structural regions of interest called Teardown Sections (TS). Extraction of a given TS is followed by its precision disassembly with the goal of preventing further damage to the parts comprising the TS. In order to take the best advantage of NDI methods, the part is then stripped of all coatings using methods specifically designed to not damage the part’s substrate material. Nondestructive inspection methods are then used to achieve the level of fidelity required by the program goals. Again, using the program goals as the guide, root cause analysis is performed of prioritized NDI indications. This analysis determines all characteristics which are pertinent to the program goals for each prioritized NDI indication within the program’s schedule and fiscal constraints.

CAStLE published a series of “Protocols” to support the “C/KC-135 Teardown Analysis Program”. They included two administrative protocols to describe the required secure process control/data archival database system, and subject identification and tracking procedures; the five execution protocols which captured best practices for the processes discussed above; and a separate protocol to evaluate structural lap joints.

As is often required by the large scope of many TAPs, CAStLE Protocols enable the required TAP elements to be reliably and repeatably executed by a number of contractor and government organizations. The protocols are sufficiently detailed such that each major TAP task can be performed in a robust, error-free, uniform and unbiased manner without unduly restricting user processes. The eight CAStLE Protocols reflect typical TAP process requirements, the current state of best practices, and the lessons learned from previous TAPs.

The procedures in each protocol have been successfully used by CAStLE and other research organizations on far more than 50 TAPs. Protocol 2, documented herein, details the best practice procedures required to identify and securely track the subjects of a typical TAP.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2014. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT v

Acknowledgement

Protocol 2 was originally drafted as being specific to the C/KC-135 by Valdez International Corporation through the Center for Aircraft Structural Life Extension (CAStLE) support contract FA7000 10-D-0003, task order 0001. Funding for this support was provided by the National Institute for Aviation Research (NIAR) at Wichita State University (WSU) from their Congressional program “Inspection and Analysis Methods in Aging Military Aircraft: KC 135 Teardown Protocol Development, Validation, and Examination of Structural Details”, Contract F33615-03-D-5204. Multiple Valdez team members contributed to the review and edit of this first Protocol 2 publication.

A CAStLE update was published in 2014 to incorporate lessons learned since the KC-135 specific protocols were developed with inputs from by Sabreliner Corporation under CAStLE support contract FA7000-10-D-0014, Task Order 0004.

The current update was accomplished by the CAStLE government staff with editorial assistance from Aleut Aerospace Engineering LLC under support contract FA7000-18-D- 0008, task order FA700019FA143. This 2020 publication further captures lessons learned and removes specific instructions to the use of the formerly government hosted CAStLE

TDMS.

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2014. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT vi

Contents

Qualified Requestor Statement ................................................................................................ iii

Abstract .................................................................................................................................... iv

Acknowledgement .....................................................................................................................v

Contents ................................................................................................................................... vi

List of Figures ......................................................................................................................... vii

List of Tables .......................................................................................................................... vii

Terms and Acronyms ............................................................................................................. viii

Protocol 2 Identification and Tracking ........................................................................ 2-12

Task 2.1 General Requirements .................................................................................... 2-14

2.1.1 Summary ........................................................................................................ 2-14

2.1.2 Physical Part Marking .................................................................................... 2-14

2.1.3 Photographic Documentation......................................................................... 2-23

2.1.4 Paper Records ................................................................................................ 2-30

2.1.5 Storage and Protection ................................................................................... 2-31

2.1.6 Shipping ......................................................................................................... 2-32

Task 2.2 Lot, Teardown Section & Part Identification Convention ............................. 2-34

2.2.1 Summary ........................................................................................................ 2-34

2.2.2 Authorized Personnel ..................................................................................... 2-34

2.2.3 Identification Naming Convention ................................................................ 2-34

Appendix A: Example of an Orientation Block Template ................................................... 2-35

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2014. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT vii

List of Figures

Figure 2-1: Major stages and flow of TAP assets (Lots, TS, Parts and Sub-Parts) through program processes as they relate to Protocol 2. The arrows indicate potential transport between process participants which may require protective packaging. ............................. 2-13

Figure 2-2: Example showing paint marking of TS 009 extraction cut-lines [NIAR photo] .............................................................................................................................................. 2-15

Figure 2-3: Lot and TS marking requirements to support photo documentation (this is a close-up view of orientation system looking right; physical boundary limits are omitted from this figure). For Lot marking, replace the TS ID above, “082-012,” with the Lot ID (i.e. “082- Lot 6” for Lot 6 from serial number 082) ............................................................................ 2-16

Figure 2-4: Lettering and numbering standard for labeling Lots, TSs and Parts. ................ 2-17

Figure 2-5: Abbreviations for orientation arrow labeling. ................................................... 2-17

Figure 2-6: Example of Lot and TS coordinate identification. This illustration is labeled “505-081” for TS 081 from aircraft 505. In the case of Lot identification, the TS designation in this figure would be replaced with “Lot XX” where “XX” is the Lot ID number. This is a view looking right. ............................................................................................................... 2-18

Figure 2-7: Engraving requirements for Part and Sub-Part identification. This is a view looking right of Sub-Part 001, Part 010, TS 021 from serial number 886. .......................... 2-20

Figure 2-8: Part/Sub-Part implicit coordinate engraved identification (left stringer 14). .... 2-21

Figure 2-9: Adhesive bar code label layout and minimum size. .......................................... 2-22

Figure 2-10: Photographic segmentation illustration for program assets which are larger than the MTFV for a given camera. ............................................................................................. 2-25

Figure 2-11: Camera position to provide a uniform focal plane. ......................................... 2-26

Figure 2-12: Example Photograph Quality Assurance Compliance Log. ............................ 2-30

Figure 2-13: Content and format of label and the meaning of each field. ........................... 2-33

List of Tables

Table 2-1: Maximum True Field of View (MTFV) illustrations for various camera pixels/image capacities to meet TAP photograph resolution requirements. ........................ 2-24

Table 2-2: TAP process stage abbreviations for inclusion in photographic file names (protocol number omitted). .................................................................................................. 2-29

Table 2-3: An example of an orientation plane definition with respect to orientation cube standards for an orthogonal TAP axis system. Appendix A is a orientation cube template for such an axis system. ............................................................................................................. 2-29

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: DISTRIBUTION AUTHORIZED TO U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES AND THEIR CONTRACTORS, OPERATIONAL USAGE, 12 MAY 2014. OTHER REQUESTS FOR THIS DOCUMENT SHALL BE REFERRED TO THE DIRECTOR, USAFA CENTER FOR AIRCRAFT viii

Terms and Acronyms

The following terms and acronyms are common to Teardown Analysis Programs and may or may not have been used in this Protocol.

Terms Definition

Protocol ..................................documentation of procedures to be followed for each of the primary execution elements of the teardown analysis program which reflect both best practices and specific program requirements.

Task ..........