Airworthiness verification method for supplier change of composite material structural member

Abstract

The invention belongs to the technical field of aircraft manufacturing, and discloses an airworthiness verification method for supplier change of a composite material structural member. According to the airworthiness verification method for supplier change of the composite material structural component, model design data of the composite material structural component are defined, change types are distinguished, and on the basis of classification of the composite material structural component, change contents related to suppliers are distinguished into model design data change and non-model design data change; therefore, airworthiness verification work needing to be carried out by the supplier is determined, a method and thought are provided for cost reduction and benefit improvement of the composite material structural member supplier, repeated verification work can be remarkably reduced, and a large amount of time and economic cost are saved.

Description

TECHNICAL FIELD

[0001] The present application relates to the technical field of aircraft manufacturing, and particularly relates to an airworthiness verification method for a change of a composite material structural part supplier. BACKGROUND

[0002] After a civil aircraft completes initial airworthiness verification and obtains a type certificate, it enters a type batch production stage. In the manufacturing process of a composite material structural part, due to the complexity of the material properties and manufacturing process, the production capacity of the existing supply chain is often difficult to meet the growing batch production demand. The original supplier may need to adjust the production mode, such as changing the manufacturing location, updating the manufacturing equipment, or redesigning the production process, due to the limitation of production capacity or the demand for cost optimization. In addition, in order to further improve the production efficiency or share the production capacity pressure, the aircraft manufacturer may need to add a new supplier to participate in the manufacturing process of the composite material structural part.

[0003] At present, the standard method for airworthiness verification of a civil aircraft composite material structure mainly depends on relevant documents for implementation. These methods mainly focus on how to verify and ensure the airworthiness of the composite material structural part in the initial production stage, and do not propose specific solutions or implementation ideas for airworthiness verification of a change of a composite material structural part supplier. If the original verification method is used to deal with the situation of a change of a supplier, the manufacturing supplier will need to complete more verification work to show that the product still meets the airworthiness requirements after the change of the supplier, resulting in a prolonged verification period and a substantial increase in cost.

[0004] Therefore, there is an urgent need for an airworthiness verification method for a change of a composite material structural part supplier to solve the above problems. SUMMARY

[0005] The purpose of the present application is to provide an airworthiness verification method for a change of a composite material structural part supplier, which can significantly reduce repeated verification work, thereby saving a large amount of time and economic cost.

[0006] To achieve this purpose, the present application adopts the following technical solutions:

[0007] The airworthiness verification method for a change of a composite material structural part supplier comprises:

[0008] S100, classifying the composite material structural parts, and merging the composite material structural parts with the same material, the same curing period, the same manufacturing process, and the same structural configuration into the same part family in each level of the composite material structural parts;

[0009] S200, defining the tooling, the numerical model of the process scheme, the drawings, and the related documents for manufacturing the composite material structural parts as type design data;

[0010] S300, determining that the content of the supplier change does not involve a change in the material of the composite structure, performing equivalence verification based on data of the same family part group, and determining the influence of the change on the performance of the composite structure;

[0011] S400, dividing the content involving the change of the type design data into design major changes and supplementary verification design minor changes, the design major changes need to be verified and airworthiness approved according to airworthiness standards, and the supplementary verification design minor changes need to carry out supplementary verification tests to determine whether the changed composite structure meets the airworthiness requirements;

[0012] S500, dividing the content involving the change of the non-type design data into design minor changes without supplementary verification and changes without classification, and directly approving the changes.

[0013] Optionally, the composite structure includes a sandwich structure assembly.

[0014] Optionally, in step S100, the classification of the composite structure includes:

[0015] The composite structure is divided into three levels of main load-bearing parts, secondary load-bearing parts and non-load-bearing parts according to the type of load bearing.

[0016] Optionally, in step S300, when performing equivalence verification based on the data of the same family part group, a combination of comparative experiments, numerical simulation analysis and historical operation data is used to verify whether the performance of the changed composite structure meets the design requirements.

[0017] Optionally, in step S400, the supplementary verification design minor change includes process verification, environmental adaptability test and reliability evaluation to ensure that the changed composite structure meets the airworthiness requirements.

[0018] Optionally, in step S500, the design minor change without supplementary verification in the change of the non-type design data includes a design minor change of supplementary research and development data, the design minor change of the supplementary research and development data uses research and development data under the quality system control as the basis for equivalence verification to determine whether the supplier change content meets the airworthiness requirements, and when the equivalence verification is passed, the change is directly approved;

[0019] If the equivalence verification fails, the change needs to be rejected; or further confirm whether the change content is the content of the type design data, if the change content is the content of the type design data, it is included in the type design data change for airworthiness verification.

[0020] Optionally, the supplier change includes changing the original supplier to another supplier, and / or changing a single-site supplier to a dual-site supplier.

[0021] Optionally, the changing the original supplier to another supplier, and / or changing the single-site supplier to a dual-site supplier includes:

[0022] only changing the supplier name or selecting change within the supplier list;

[0023] only changing the manufacturing site of the supplier;

[0024] only changing the equipment used in the manufacturing process of the supplier;

[0025] When one of the above changes, the non-type design data change is included for classification and airworthiness verification.

[0026] Optionally, the changing the original supplier to another supplier, and / or changing the single-site supplier to a dual-site supplier includes:

[0027] changing the manufacturing process of the composite structure;

[0028] changing the material used in the manufacturing process of the composite structure or changing the material specification;

[0029] When one of the above changes, it is necessary to determine whether it is a type design data change, if yes, the type design data change is included for classification and airworthiness verification, if not, the non-type design data is included for classification and airworthiness verification.

[0030] Advantages:

[0031] (1) The composite structure is classified into the same part family according to the same material, curing cycle, manufacturing process and structure configuration, and the data equivalence verification is adopted, which can significantly reduce the repeated verification work, thereby saving a large amount of time and economic cost.

[0032] (2) The classification of the change is confirmed through the definition of the type design data, which can confirm the depth and verification range of the verification work of the review party, avoid unnecessary complex verification process, especially for small changes that do not need to be supplemented or changes that do not need to be classified, which can directly agree to the change and simplify the entire verification process, thereby improving the efficiency.

[0033] (3) The airworthiness verification method for the supplier change of the composite structure provided by the present application is not only suitable for the OEM supplier of the composite structure, but also suitable for the composite B-angle supplier and the specialized manufacturing supplier of the composite part, and has good universality. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

[0034] Figure 1 This is a flow chart of an airworthiness verification method for a composite structural component supplier change provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0035] Figure 2 This is a flowchart of determining whether a supplier change is a model design data change, provided by an embodiment of the present invention;

[0036] Figure 3 The present invention provides a flowchart for determining whether a change in the manufacturing process of a front beam of a certain type of wing structure is a change in model design data. DETAILED DESCRIPTION

[0037] The present invention will be further described in detail below with reference to the accompanying drawings and examples. It will be understood that the specific embodiments described herein are intended only to illustrate the present invention and are not intended to limit the present invention. It should also be noted that, for ease of description, the accompanying drawings only illustrate portions relevant to the present invention, not all structures.

[0038] In the description of the present invention, unless otherwise expressly specified or limited, the terms "connected," "connected," and "fixed" should be understood in a broad sense. For example, they may refer to fixed connections, detachable connections, or integration; mechanical connections or electrical connections; direct connections or indirect connections through an intermediate medium; and internal communication between two components or interaction between two components. Those skilled in the art will understand the specific meanings of the above terms in the present invention based on specific circumstances.

[0039] In the present invention, unless otherwise expressly specified or limited, a first feature being "above" or "below" a second feature may include the first and second features being in direct contact, or may include the first and second features being in contact not directly but through another feature between them. Furthermore, a first feature being "above," "above," and "above" a second feature may include the first feature being directly above or obliquely above the second feature, or may simply mean that the first feature is higher in level than the second feature. A first feature being "below," "below," and "below" a second feature may include the first feature being directly below or obliquely below the second feature, or may simply mean that the first feature is lower in level than the second feature.

[0040] In the description of this embodiment, terms such as "upper," "lower," "left," and "right" are used to refer to positions or locations based on those shown in the accompanying drawings. These terms are intended solely to facilitate description and simplify operation, and are not intended to indicate or imply that the devices or components referred to must have, be constructed, or operate in a specific orientation. Therefore, they should not be construed as limitations on the present invention. Furthermore, the terms "first" and "second" are used solely for descriptive purposes and have no special meaning.

[0041] The embodiment provides a method for airworthiness verification of composite material structural part supplier change, which comprises the following steps of Figures 1-2 As shown in the figure, the method for airworthiness verification of composite material structural part supplier change comprises the following steps of

[0042] S100, grading the composite material structural parts, and merging the composite material structural parts with the same material, the same curing period, the same manufacturing process and the same structure configuration into the same part family in each level of the composite material structural parts;

[0043] S200, defining the tooling, the numerical model of the process scheme, the drawings and the related files for producing the composite material structural parts as type design data;

[0044] S300, determining that the content of the supplier change does not involve the change of the material of the composite material structural part, performing equivalence verification based on the data of the same part family, and judging the influence of the change on the performance of the composite material structural part;

[0045] S400, distinguishing the content involving the change of the type design data into design large change and design small change for supplementary verification, the design large change needs to be verified and airworthily approved according to the airworthiness standard, and the design small change for supplementary verification needs to carry out supplementary verification test to judge whether the changed composite material structural part meets the airworthiness requirement;

[0046] S500, distinguishing the content involving the change of the non-type design data into design small change without supplementary verification and change without classification, and directly agreeing to the change of the design small change without supplementary verification and the change without classification.

[0047] The method for airworthiness verification of composite material structural part supplier change provided in the embodiment defines the type design data of the composite material structural part, distinguishes the types of the change, and distinguishes the content involving the supplier change into type design data change and non-type design data change on the basis of the classification of the composite material structural part, so as to determine the airworthiness verification work to be carried out by the supplier, and provides a method and idea for reducing cost and increasing efficiency of the composite material structural part supplier change.

[0048] Specifically, the method for airworthiness verification of composite material structural part supplier change provided in the embodiment has the beneficial effects of:

[0049] (1) The composite material structural parts are merged into the same part family according to the same material, curing period, manufacturing process and structure configuration, and the equivalence verification of the data can significantly reduce the repeated verification work, thereby saving a large amount of time and economic cost.

[0050] (2) The classification of the change is confirmed by the definition of the type design data, which can confirm the depth and verification range of the verification work of the review party, avoid unnecessary complex verification process, especially for small changes that do not require additional verification or changes that do not require classification, which can directly agree to change and simplify the entire verification process, thereby improving efficiency.

[0051] (3) The airworthiness verification method for the supplier change of the composite material structure provided by the present application is not only suitable for the OEM supplier of the composite material structure, but also suitable for the composite material B angle supplier and the specialized manufacturer of the composite material part, and has good universality.

[0052] It should be noted that the type design data also includes the numerical model, drawings and related documents of the special tooling and special process scheme for producing the composite material structure. By including the numerical model, drawings and related documents of the special tooling and special process scheme in the category of the type design data, the manufacturing process of the composite material structure can be fully reflected, the key links that may affect airworthiness are avoided, the integrity of the type design data is ensured, and all change contents can be scientifically and comprehensively verified.

[0053] Optionally, the composite material structure includes a sandwich structure assembly, which is usually composed of a face plate and a core, and its performance is highly dependent on the manufacturing process. The airworthiness verification method for the supplier change of the composite material structure provided by the present application is not only suitable for conventional composite material structures, but also suitable for high-performance sandwich structure assemblies, and has a wide range of applications.

[0054] Optionally, in step S100, the composite material structure is classified by classifying the composite material structure into three classes of primary load-bearing parts, secondary load-bearing parts and non-load-bearing parts according to the type of load bearing.

[0055] It can be understood that the primary load-bearing parts include structural parts that directly bear large loads and are crucial to the safety and reliability of the civil aircraft structure, such as wing beams and fuselage frames; the secondary load-bearing parts include structural parts that bear certain loads but their failure has limited impact on the overall structure of the civil aircraft, such as cabin door frames; and the non-load-bearing parts include structural parts that are mainly used for structural support or decoration and do not bear loads, such as internal partitions. By this classification method, verification resources can be reasonably allocated, more effort, time and budget can be used for verification of primary load-bearing parts, and moderate or simplified strategies can be adopted for secondary load-bearing parts and non-load-bearing parts, thereby significantly reducing overall verification cost and time expenditure.

[0056] Optionally, in step S300, when performing equivalence verification based on data from a family of parts, a combination of comparative experiments, numerical simulation analysis, and historical operational data is employed to verify whether the performance of the modified composite structural component meets design requirements. Comparative experiments and numerical simulations can identify performance issues before actual operation, reducing the costs and delays associated with later repairs. Leveraging historical operational data can reduce unnecessary retesting, thereby optimizing the verification process, lowering costs, and accelerating the verification cycle.

[0057] Optionally, in step S400, the supplementary verification of minor design changes includes process verification, environmental adaptability testing, and reliability assessment to ensure that the modified composite structural component meets airworthiness requirements. By covering multiple aspects of process verification, environmental adaptability, and reliability, these supplementary verification minor design changes can ensure that the modified composite structural component meets airworthiness requirements, improve the long-term reliability and safety of the modified composite structural component, and provide safer and more reliable technical support for aviation products.

[0058] Optionally, in step S500, minor design changes in the changes to non-model design data that do not require supplementary test verification include minor design changes to supplement R&D data. The minor design changes to supplement R&D data use the R&D data under the control of the quality system as the basis for equivalence verification to determine whether the supplier's changes comply with airworthiness requirements. When the equivalence verification is passed, the change is directly approved. Using the R&D data under the control of the quality system as the basis for equivalence verification can quickly determine whether the supplier's changes comply with airworthiness requirements, thereby shortening the verification cycle.

[0059] If the equivalence verification fails, the change must be rejected; or further confirmation must be made as to whether the content of the change is the content of the type design data. If the content of the change is the content of the type design data, it must be included in the type design data change for airworthiness verification, which can ensure that changes that do not meet the airworthiness requirements will not be approved, thereby reducing safety hazards.

[0060] Alternatively, as Figure 2 As shown in the figure, supplier changes include the original supplier changing to another supplier and / or the single-point supplier changing to a dual-point supplier. Clarifying the two main scenarios of supplier changes makes the airworthiness verification process more targeted, simplifies the process, and improves airworthiness verification efficiency.

[0061] Optionally, the original supplier is changed to another supplier, and / or the single-point supplier is changed to a dual-point supplier, including:

[0062] Only the supplier name is changed or the selection is changed within the supplier list;

[0063] Only the supplier's manufacturing location changes;

[0064] Only the equipment change in the supplier manufacturing process (the same material and the same initial process are used to manufacture the composite structure);

[0065] When one of the above changes, the non-type design data change is included in the classification and airworthiness verification, which can avoid excessive verification due to low-risk changes, ensure effective allocation of resources, and improve airworthiness verification efficiency.

[0066] Optionally, as shown in Figure 2 The original supplier is changed to another supplier, and / or the single-point supplier is changed to a double-point supplier, including:

[0067] The manufacturing process of the composite structure is changed (the material of the composite structure before and after the change is the same);

[0068] The material used in the manufacturing process of the composite structure is changed or the material specification is changed;

[0069] When one of the above changes, it is necessary to determine whether it is a type design data change, and if so, it is included in the type design data change for classification and airworthiness verification, and if not, it is included in the non-type design data for classification and airworthiness verification. By determining whether the content of the supplier change is a type design data change, changes that have a greater impact on airworthiness and changes that have a smaller impact can be quickly distinguished, thereby reasonably allocating verification resources.

[0070] Optionally, whether the content of the supplier change is a type design data change can be determined from the following aspects: whether the composite structure is a main structure or a non-main structure, whether the process specification for manufacturing the composite structure is changed, whether the manufacturing plan is changed, whether the key process parameters are changed, and whether the important process steps are changed.

[0071] Exemplarily, as shown in Figure 3 Taking a certain type of wing structure front beam as an example, in the case where the material performance of the beam structure is not changed, the manufacturing process is changed from “machine laying” to “hand laying”, and the curing process is changed to a long-heat-retention platform and low-temperature-rate curing process.

[0072] According to whether the composite structure is a main structure, whether the material of the composite structure is changed, whether the process specification is changed, whether the manufacturing plan is changed, whether it affects the structural performance of the product, and whether it is a type design data change, the process is as shown in Figure 3 It is confirmed that the design is changed.

[0073] Figure 3 The order of the steps in the above method cannot be adjusted, and the determination principle is to determine according to the structural classification requirements, the definition of type design data, and the airworthiness change classification. Omitting or changing some steps will cause deviation in the compliance work category of verification.

[0074] Obviously, the above-mentioned embodiments of the present application are only examples for clearly illustrating the present application, and are not intended to limit the implementation of the present application. Various obvious changes, re-adjustments and substitutions can be made by those skilled in the art without departing from the scope of the present application. It is unnecessary and impossible to enumerate all the embodiments here. Any modification, equivalent substitution and improvement, etc. made within the spirit and principle of the present application shall be included in the protection scope of the claims of the present application.

Claims

1. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change is characterized by: include: S100, grading composite material structural parts, and merging composite material structural parts of the same material, same curing cycle, same manufacturing process, and same structural configuration into the same part family in each grade; S200, the digital models, drawings and related documents of the tooling and process scheme for producing composite structural parts are collectively defined as model design data; S300: Determine that the supplier's change does not involve a change in the material of the composite structural component, perform equivalence verification based on the data of the same family of parts, and determine the impact of the change on the performance of the composite structural component; S400. Changes to model design data are divided into major design changes and minor design changes requiring supplementary verification. Major design changes are subject to verification and airworthiness approval according to airworthiness standards, while minor design changes requiring supplementary verification are subject to supplementary verification tests to determine whether the modified composite structural components meet airworthiness requirements. S500: Divide the contents involving changes to non-model design data into minor design changes that do not require additional verification and changes that do not require classification. Directly approve the minor design changes that do not require additional verification and the changes that do not require classification.

2. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 1, characterized in that: The composite structural member includes a sandwich structure assembly.

3. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S100, grading the composite material structural component includes: According to the type of load-bearing, composite structural parts are divided into three levels: primary load-bearing parts, secondary load-bearing parts and non-load-bearing parts.

4. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S300, when performing equivalence verification based on the data of the same family of parts, a combination of comparative experiments, numerical simulation analysis and historical operation data is used to verify whether the performance of the modified composite structural component meets the design requirements.

5. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S400, the minor design changes for supplementary verification include process verification, environmental adaptability testing, and reliability assessment to ensure that the modified composite structural parts meet airworthiness requirements.

6. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 1, characterized in that: In step S500, the minor design changes that do not require supplementary verification in the changes to the non-type design data include minor design changes that supplement R&D data. The minor design changes that supplement R&D data use the R&D data under the control of the quality system as the basis for equivalence verification to determine whether the supplier's changes comply with airworthiness requirements. If the equivalence verification passes, the change is directly approved. If the equivalence verification fails, the change must be rejected; or further confirmation must be made as to whether the content of the change is the content of the said model design data. If the content of the change is the content of the said model design data, it must be included in the said model design data change for airworthiness verification.

7. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 1, characterized in that: Supplier changes include changing the original supplier to another supplier, and / or changing a single-point supplier to a dual-point supplier.

8. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 7, characterized in that: The change of the original supplier to another supplier, and / or the change of the single-point supplier to a dual-point supplier includes: Only the supplier name is changed or the selection is changed within the supplier list; Only the supplier's manufacturing location changes; Only the equipment used in the supplier's production process is changed; When one of the above changes occurs, the non-type design data changes shall be included in the classification and airworthiness verification.

9. The airworthiness verification method for composite structural parts supplier change according to claim 7, characterized in that: The change of the original supplier to another supplier, and / or the change of the single-point supplier to a dual-point supplier includes: Changes to the manufacturing process of composite structural parts; Changes in materials or material specifications used in the manufacturing process of composite structural parts; When one of the above changes occurs, it is necessary to determine whether it is a change to the model design data. If so, it will be included in the model design data change for classification and airworthiness verification. If not, it will be included in the non-model design data for classification and airworthiness verification.

Images