REPORT ON MAINTENANCE PROGRAMME RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISSEMINATION

By All WP 1.6.3 partners

Abstract:

Scheduled Maintenance Programme shall be safe, cost-efficient and contribute to improve the aircraft operational reliability. The very competitive economic environment, the airlines are confronted with, leads the industry to consider optimising their Maintenance Programmes (MP) to reduce maintenance costs while maintaining safety and reliability. Although some airlines perform this exercise on their own involving their local authorities, the A/C manufacturer is in charge when sufficient in-service experience can be collected, to organize a Maintenance Programme Evolution exercise. This exercise is directed by the relevant Industry Steering Committee, as part of the MRB process. Results of the evolution will be approved by the MRB and introduced in a revision of the MRBR/MPD. Evolution exercises are based on in-service data reported by airlines in the form of Nil findings/details of findings for each scheduled maintenance task issued from the MRB process. Up to now, the evaluation of these data by the Maintenance Working Group (manufacturer and operators as members and Regulatory Authorities as advisors) was based on the operator experience, manufacturer expertise and engineering judgment. In order to improve and homogenize this in-service data assessment, models have been developed to help the decision-making on the maintenance task interval adjustment. These models have been implemented, tested and this report describes the recommendation and dissemination of theses models.
Dissemination:

PU Deliverable/Output n:
Keywords:

D1.6.3.4

Issue n:

1.0

in-service data, scheduled maintenance, unscheduled maintenance, maintenance program, task interval, evolution exercise

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 1/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

TABLE OF CONTENTS
1 1.1 1.2 2 3 GLOSSARY, ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS GLOSSARY ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY REMINDER OF MAINTENANCE PROGRAMME EVOLUTION 5 6 6 6 7 7 8 8 8 9 11 11 11 13 14 4 4 4

3.1 CONTEXT 3.1.1 MRB PROCESS 3.1.2 MAINTENANCE PROGRAM EVOLUTION PROCESS 3.2 VIVACE MP OBJECTIVE 3.3 MODELS DEVELOPED 3.3.1 MODEL 1X 3.3.1.1 principles 3.3.1.2 Statistical model 3.3.2 MODEL 2X 3.3.2.1 principles 3.3.2.2 Statistical model 4 RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISSEMINATION

APPENDIX A: REFERENCES

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 3/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

1
1.1

GLOSSARY, ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

GLOSSARY
Definition The inability of an item to perform within previously specified limits. Why the functional failure occurs. The normal characteristic actions of an item. Failure of an item to perform its intended function within specified limits. 1. A function which is normally active and whose cessation will not be evident to the operating crew during performance of normal duties. 2. A function which is normally inactive and whose readiness to perform, prior to it being needed, will not be evident to the operating crew during performance of normal duties. Initial Interval - Interval between the start of service-life and the first task accomplishment Repeat Interval - The interval (after the initial interval) between successive accomplishments of a specific maintenance task. Any of the maintenance opportunities which are pre-packaged and are accomplished on a regular basis.

Term Failure Failure Cause Function Functional Failure Hidden Function

Interval (Initial Repeat) Scheduled Maintenance Check

1.2

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

Designation Aircraft European Aviation Safety Agency Federal Aviation Administration Failure Cause Functional Failure Industry Steering Committee Maintenance Program Maintenance Planning Document Maintenance Review Board Maintenance Review Board Report Maintenance Steering Group 3 Maintenance Working Group Policy and Procedure Handbook Serviceability of the function: the probability that the function is serviceable when needed during the period between two scheduled maintenance task.

Acronyms A/C EASA FAA FC FF ISC MP MPD MRB MRBR MSG-3 MWG PPH S or SF

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 4/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Scheduled Maintenance Programme shall be safe, cost-efficient and contribute to improve the aircraft operational reliability. The very competitive economic environment, the airlines are confronted with, leads the industry to consider optimising their Maintenance Programmes (MP) to reduce maintenance costs while maintaining safety and reliability. Although some airlines perform this exercise on their own involving their local authorities, the A/C manufacturer is in charge when sufficient in-service experience can be collected, to organize a Maintenance Programme Evolution exercise. This exercise is directed by the relevant Industry Steering Committee, as part of the MRB process. Results of the evolution will be approved by the MRB and introduced in a revision of the MRBR/MPD. Evolution exercises are based on in-service data reported by airlines in the form of Nil findings/details of findings for each scheduled maintenance task issued from the MRB process. Up to now, the evaluation of these data by the Maintenance Working Group (manufacturer and operators as members and Regulatory Authorities as advisors) was based on the operator experience, manufacturer expertise and engineering judgment. In order to improve and homogenize this in-service data assessment, models have been developed to help the decision-making on the maintenance task interval adjustment. These models have been implemented, tested and this report describes the recommendation and dissemination of theses models.

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 5/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

3 REMINDER OF MAINTENANCE PROGRAMME EVOLUTION

3.1
3.1.1

CONTEXT
MRB PROCESS

EASA and FAA require the A/C Type Certificate holder to prepare and revise the initial minimum scheduled maintenance requirements that are applicable to a dedicated aircraft (Regulatory Requirement CS/FAR 25.1529). This document is called the Maintenance Review Board Report (MRBR), and provides the scheduled maintenance tasks and their frequencies (intervals) for the aircraft systems (including powerplant), structure and zones. MRBR development is based on the MSG-3 method.

Systems MWG(s)
Maintenance Working Group

To provide PPH and direct MWG activities

To select/adjust systems tasks and intervals

Zonal MWG
Maintenance Working Group

ISC
Industry Steering Committee

Validation

MRB
Maintenance Review Board

PPH
Policy and Procedures handbook

Approval letter MRB

Structure MWG
Maintenance Working Group

Figure 1: Maintenance Review Board Process

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 6/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

3.1.2

MAINTENANCE PROGRAM EVOLUTION PROCESS

The objective of maintenance program evolution is to maintain safety, reliability, at minimum cost. The main means to achieve this is to adjust the initial/current selected intervals. Such exercise is launched when the A/C manufacturer and the ISC consider that sufficient in-service experience is collected, supported by the MRB as advisor. Airlines report in-service experience in the form of Nil findings/details of findings reports for each task. Then all tasks are reviewed individually in MWG meetings.

ISC
Industry Steering Committee

MRBR
Maintenance Review Board Report

MPD
Maintenance Planning Document

O MP

k Tas d car Job

Operator Maintenance Program

MWG
Maintenance Working Group

Interval adjustment proposal

Task report Manufacturer data compilation and analysis

Figure 2 : Maintenance Program Evolution process

3.2

VIVACE MP OBJECTIVE

Up to now the evaluation of in-service data by the MWG during MP Evolution was based on the operator experience, manufacturer expertise and engineering judgment. This evaluation could be found sometimes conservative. VIVACE MP objective was to help the decision-making by developing models and tools. This would improve in-service data assessment and bring consistency all along the process (several MWG meetings may be needed), between MWG attendees (different representative of operators and manufacturers may attend different MWG meetings) and homogenise the evolution results.

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 7/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

3.3

MODELS DEVELOPED

Different models have been developed and prototyped: Model 1x based on data from scheduled maintenance, Model 2x based on data from scheduled and unscheduled maintenance.

3.3.1
3.3.1.1

MODEL 1X
PRINCIPLES

The model 1.X is based on the following principle 1) The sample of in-service data is first classed in three categories: In service data considered statistically irrelevant; Data are considered moderately representative of the whole fleet. In this case, Engineering judgment is necessary to confirm the trend and make the final decision; Data are considered representative of the fleet and a decision can be made. 2) For data that are considered representative, interval adjustment is distributed in 3 categories increase interval decrease interval keep interval as it is) The above has lead to develop the following categories:
A B C in-service data supports target values of the new interval framework, possibly even a higher interval can be justified In-service data supports target values of the new interval framework in-service data supports target values of the new interval framework, however other inputs (e.g. engineering) should have a higher weight when making a final interval decision in-service data does not support target values of the new interval framework, however other inputs (e.g. engineering) should have a higher weight when making a final interval decision in-service data does not support target values of the new interval framework, task interval should possibly be decreased In-service data statistically irrelevant. However the MWG should not necessarily fully disregard the reported data. current data does not support an escalation. Interval should remain as it is.

E F G

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 8/ 14

VIVACE
3.3.1.2 STATISTICAL MODEL

Model Specification for interval evolution

Model 1x is a statistical model developed to estimate serviceability (S) of hidden function (e.g. probability that the hidden function is serviceable when a trigger event occurs). Model 1x principle is as follow:

Trigger event
e.g. loss of system 1 or need of back-up system

Not OK

Hidden function
OK

function unserviceable
e.g. system 2 (or back-up) is not able to take over

function serviceable
e.g. system 2 (or back-up) takes over

This model includes a statistical risk, which introduces an uncertainty in the computation of the serviceability. The defined categories (A, B, C, D, E, F, G) are linked to the model as follows: o Low uncertainty and high serviceability (low percentage of findings): category A and B o Low uncertainty and medium serviceability (medium percentage of findings): category G o Low uncertainty and low serviceability (high percentage of findings): category E o Medium uncertainty and medium serviceability (low percentage of findings): category C o Medium uncertainty and low serviceability (high percentage of findings): category D o High uncertainty: category F The result is an evolution guidance ([, NT] table) as follow:
Number of reported checks

NT
B A

% of findings

C F D

Placing the number of check and the percentage of finding on the above table, the MWG gets the category (A, B, C) defined earlier for the task under consideration. Using this table, the MWG is helped to better evaluate the right adjustment of the interval, according to the in-service experience.

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 9/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

A prototype has been implemented within MS EXCEL:

For further details on model 1x, please refer to D1.6.3.3 issue 02 report.

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 10/ 14

VIVACE 3.3.2
3.3.2.1

Model Specification for interval evolution

MODEL 2X
PRINCIPLES

Model 2x is an evolution of model 1x taking into account: The impact of unscheduled maintenance, i.e. hidden functional failure may become evident to the flight crew: upon multiple failures or to the ground personnel: during a line maintenance check,
1- Finding 0- Nil-finding

Task interval

In

In+1

In+2

In+3

time

Events reported from scheduled maintenance task Events reported from Operational Interruptions Events reported from Removals

The modelling of MSG3 functional failure which is defined as a series of Failure Cause because in MSG3 method, the failure of any cause implies the failure of the function,
Functional Failure
Failure Cause 1 Failure Cause 2 Failure Cause 3

The complex Failure Cause due to complex equipment, performing many functions and then can lead to both hidden and evident functional failure,
Functional Failure
Evident part Evident part Evident part

Hidden part

Hidden part

Hidden part

Failure Cause 1

Failure Cause 2

Failure Cause 3

3.3.2.2

STATISTICAL MODEL

Model 2x estimates serviceability (S) of the function i.e. the probability that the function is serviceable when needed. Model 2x principle is as follow:

Trigger events?

Functional Failure

Evident part

Hidden part

Evident part

Hidden part

Evident part

Hidden part

Failure Cause 1

Failure Cause 2

Failure Cause 3

Function state? OK

Not OK

Function unserviceable

Function serviceable

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 11/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

Model 2x results are computed for each failure cause 1, 2, 3 and then compiled for the functional failure to determine the function state:

S F = S FC i
i

A prototype has been implemented within MS EXCEL:

For further details on model 2x, please refer to D1.6.3.3 issue 02 report.

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 12/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

4 RECOMMENDATIONS AND DISSEMINATION

Up to now, the analysis of in-service data for the purpose of maintenance programme evolution was based on the operator experience, manufacturer expertise and engineering judgment. In order to improve and homogenize this in-service data assessment, models have been implemented to help the decision-making on the adjustment of the maintenance task intervals. Using in-service feedback experience and information from MSG-3 analysis, we were able to build different mathematical models. All models are developed within a certain environment. It means that before applying these models, the user should be aware of the hypothesis, applicability and limitations (described in deliverable D1.6.3.3 issue 02). Model 2x is innovative, very close to MSG-3 methodology. It should be taken as functional failure oriented model and both scheduled and unscheduled maintenance are considered. Use-case has been carried out on model 2x and it remains more complex than model 1x, to obtain the input data. Model 1x should be taken as a hidden function oriented model and it deals with scheduled maintenance data only. It: - proposes to use several categories (A, B, C) for interval adjustment - indicates how to choose between these categories, using a [, NT] table - is easy-to-use and homogeneous for MWG activities. - provides the shapes of categories zones on the [, NT] table. Once the Serviceability boundaries are defined according to the targeted percentage of escalation, the MWG is supported, using the [, NT] table, to better evaluate the right adjustment of the interval, according to the in-service experience.

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 13/ 14

VIVACE

Model Specification for interval evolution

APPENDIX A: REFERENCES
[1]: D1.6.3.1 Report on maintenance programme user requirements and state of the art capture [2]: D1.6.3.2 Maintenance programme in-service data analysis & model specification [3]: D1.6.3.3 issue 02 Maintenance programme: model specification for interval evolution [4]: Maintenance Programme Evolution (MPE) demonstrator presented in the VIVACE use forum2.

VIVACE 1.6/3/EADS-CRC-F/T/05018-2.0 2005 VIVACE Consortium Members. All rights reserved.

Page: 14/ 14