MIL-HDBK-1530B(USAF)
c. Task III (full-scale testing). Task III is flight and laboratory tests of the airframe to assist in determination of the structural adequacy of the analysis and design.
d. Task IV (force management data package). Task IV is the generation of data required to manage force operations in terms of inspections, maintenance, modifications, and damage assessments when an air vehicle is flown in a manner that differs from that for which is was designed.
e. Task V (force management). Task V are those operations which must be conducted by the
U.S. Air Force during force operations to ensure damage tolerance and durability throughout the useful life of individual air vehicles.
5. DETAIL GUIDELINES
5.1 Design information (Task I). The design information task encompasses those efforts required to apply the existing theoretical, experimental, applied research, and operational experience to specific criteria for materials selection and structural design for the air vehicle. The objective is to ensure the appropriate criteria and planned usage are applied to an air vehicle design so that the specific operational requirements will be met. This task begins as early as possible in the conceptual phase and is finalized in subsequent phases of the air vehicle life cycle.
5.1.1 ASIP Master Plan. The ASIP manager will translate the requirements of AFI 63-1001 into a program for each air vehicle and document these in the ASIP master plan. This plan will be integrated into the Integrated Master Plan and Integrated Master Schedule. The purpose of the ASIP master plan is to define and document the specific approach to accomplish the various ASIP tasks throughout the life-cycle of each, individual flight vehicle. The plan should depict the time-phased scheduling and integration of all required ASIP tasks for design, development, qualification, and tracking of the airframe. The plan should include discussion of unique features, exceptions to the guidance of this handbook and the associated rationale, and any problems anticipated in the execution of the plan. The development of the schedule should consider all interfaces, the impact of schedule delays (e.g., delays due to test failure), mechanisms for recovery programming, and other problem areas. The plan and schedules should be updated annually and when significant changes occur.
5.1.2 Structural design criteria. Detailed structural design criteria for the specific air vehicle should be established in accordance with the requirements of the applicable contracts. These should include design criteria for strength, damage tolerance, durability, flutter, vibration, sonic fatigue, mass properties, and weapons effects. Detailed structural design criteria guidance is provided in JSSG-2006.
5.1.2.1 Damage tolerance and durability design criteria. The airframe structure should incorporate materials, stress levels, and structural configurations which:
a. allow routine in-service inspection;
b. minimize the probability of loss of the air vehicle due to propagation of undetected cracks, flaws, or other damage; and
c. minimize cracking (including stress corrosion and hydrogen-induced cracking), corrosion, delamination, wear, and the effects of foreign object damage.
Damage tolerance design approaches should be used to ensure structural safety since undetected flaws or damage can exist in critical structural components despite design, fabrication, and inspection efforts to eliminate their occurrence. Durability structural design approaches should be used to achieve USAF weapon and support systems with low in-service maintenance costs and meet operational readiness throughout the design service goal.
5
For Parts Inquires submit RFQ to Parts Hangar, Inc.
© Copyright 2015 Integrated Publishing, Inc.
A Service Disabled Veteran Owned Small Business