Failure Mode and Effects Analysis on the Hydraulic System of Aircraft Ilyushin-76

Document Type : Case study

Authors

1 Department of Aerospace Engineering, Shahid Sattari Aeronautical University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

2 Department of Graduate Studies, Shadid Sattari Aeronautical University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran

10.30699/IJRRS.5.1.7

Abstract

The emergence of accidents in industrial and aerospace environments has increased with the increase of activities in this field and the use of machinery. In traditional systems, after accidents and irreparable damage occur, research is done to investigate the defects and their causes. But today, due to the existence of different methods of hazard identification and risk assessment, before the occurrence of accidents, it is possible to identify accident hotspots and critical areas and to prevent and control them. Reviewing the analysis of failure modes and their effects (FMEA) is one of the industry's common risk assessment methods. Its purpose is to analyze the failure to obtain a comprehensive repair program that leads to the continuation of the operation of physical assets. In this study, with the help of the FMEA method, the risk priority number of the Ilyushin-76 aircraft hydraulic system was calculated, and its critical parts were identified. Due to the shortcomings of the usual risk priority number in the FMEA method, side methods of aggregation of ideas and Schaefer evidence theory were used to calculate the risk priority number. Using these methods, involving probabilities in the expression of opinion, the results of determining critical components became closer to reality. From the results obtained from the study and evaluation of critical components by the two usual RPN methods and Schaefer evidence theory, nine highly critical components are obtained jointly.

Keywords

Main Subjects


  1. Mohammad fam, Risk assessment and management, Tehran, Fanavaran, (In Persian), pp. 23-28, 2007.
  2. G. Zhang, G. M. Lin, Analysis of Aircraft Hydraulic System Failures. Department of graduate Xiging University, China. doi.org/10.4028/www. scientific.net /AMR. 989-994.2947, 2014.
  3. N. Luo, Y. Yang, “Reliability Analysis for the Hydraulic Booster Control Surface of Aircraft,” Jiangtao Harbin Engineering University of China: doi.org/10.2514/1.C033500, 2017.
  4. Lališa, S. BolĨekováa, O. Štumbauer, “Ontology-based reliability analysis of aircraft engine lubrication system”, Transportation Research Procedia, Vol. 51: pp. 37–45, 2020.
  5. Gao, Tao. yu, Y. Zhang, J. Wang, J. Zhai, “Vibration Analysis and Control Technologies of Hydraulic Pipe line system in aircraft: A review,” Chinese Journal of Aerpnautics, Vol. 34(4):  pp. 83-114, 2021. 
  6. Mohammad pour, P. Mohamad, J. Ilkandi, “Risk Assessment for the Lubrication Filter of Turbo-Jet by Modified FMEA,” Conference Proceedings of 3rd International Conference on Reliability Engineering (IREC2014), Tehran, Iran, 2014.
  7. S. Khezrpour, A. Fayazi, “Influence RCM on teetering main rotor hub assembles in iran’s helicopters fleet,” Indian J. SCI. RES. 1(2): pp. 230-235, 2014.
  8. T. Ostrom, C. A. Wilhelmsen, “developing risk models for aviation inspection and maintenance tasks,”, International Journal of Aviation Psychology18(1): pp. 30-42, 2008.
  9. Jiang, X. Chunche, W. Boya, Z. Deyu, “A modified method for risk evaluation in FMEA of aircraft turbine rotor blades,” Advances in mechanical engineering vol. 8(4): pp. 1-16. 2016.
  10. T. Jou, K. H. Yang, L. L. Ming, S. L. Cheng, “Multi-Criteria Failure mode Effects and Critically analysis method: a Comparative case study on aircraft braking system,” international Journal of Reliability and Safety10(1): DOI:10.1504/IJRS.2016.076338, 2016.
  11. Mehmood, A. Hameed, A. Javed, A. Hussain, “Analysis of Premature Failure of aircraft Hydraulic pipes”, Engineering Failure Analysis, Vol. 109: pp.104356, 2020.
  12. S. Oveisi, M. A., Farsi, “Software Safety Analysis with UML-Based SRBD and Fuzzy VIKOR- Based FMEA”, International Journal of Reliability, Risk and Safety: Theory and Application, Vol. 1, No. 1, 2: pp. 35-44, 2018.
  13. Ilyushin-76 Aircraft Hydraulic System, Ilyushin-76 Aircraft Technical Instruction, Book 33.
  14. S. Carlson, “Understanding and applying the Fundamentals of FMEAs,” Reliability and Maintainability Symposium. IEEE: pp. 1-35, 2015.
  15. Pinnarat, N. Santirat, P. Adisak, “Risk Assessment in the Organization by using FMEA Innovation: A Literature Review,” Conference: Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Educational Reform, 2014.
  16. Jiang, X. Chunche, W. Boya, Z. Deyun, “A modified method for risk evaluation in FMEA of aircraft turbine rotor blades,” Advances in Mechanical Engineering, vol. 8(4): pp. 1-16, 2016.
  17. Pasha, H. R. Mostafaei, M. Khalaj, F. Khalaj “Calculation of uncertainty distance based on Chaton entropy and Dempster-Schaefer theory of evidence,” International Journal of Industrial Engineering and Production Management, Vol. 24(2): pp.216-223, 1392,
  18. Aven, “Risk Assessment and Risk Management Review of Recent Advance on their Foundation,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 253(1): pp.1-13. 2016.
  19. Yang, H. Z. He, L. P. Huang,  S. P. Zhu, D., Wenc,  “Risk evaluation in failure mode and effects analysis of aircraft turbine,”  Engineering Failure Analysis, (8):  pp. 2084-2092, 2011.
  20. Sharma,  R. Nandan Rai, “Modified failure modes and effects analysis model for critical and complex repairable systems,” Safety and Reliability Modeling and its Applications, book chpter 9: pp.245-260,2021.
Volume 5, Issue 1
June 2022
Pages 49-58
  • Receive Date: 01 September 2022
  • Revise Date: 02 October 2022
  • Accept Date: 02 October 2022
  • First Publish Date: 02 October 2022