Current design rules are analyzed and challenged by considering better damage-detection capabilities offered by structure health monitoring systems. The weight-saving potential associated to the integration of such sensing systems is discussed with regards to structural and structure health monitoring system design. Three prospective scenarios are analyzed and considered in a specific use case. According to the most promising scenario (i.e. robust detectability of damages larger than 300 mm2), structural weight reductions of approximately 9% can be achieved. Considering the weight added by the structure health monitoring system, effective weight savings in the order of 5% are achievable. Although this potential is rather modest, applying structure health monitoring systems on structures mainly driven by the damage tolerance criterion is expected to provide reductions far beyond 5%.
RaziHWardS.Principles for achieving damage tolerant primary composite aircraft structures. In: 11th DoD/FAA/NASA conference on fibrous composites in structural design, Fort Worth, TX, 26–28 August 1996.
6.
BollerCChangFKFijinoY.Encyclopedia of Structural Health Monitoring. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.
7.
WillbergCDuczekSVivar-PerezJM, et al. Simulation methods for guided wave-based structural health monitoring: a review. Appl Mech Rev2015; 67(1): 10803–10820.
8.
SuZYeL.Identification of damage using LambWaves: from fundamentals to applications. London: Springer, 2009.
9.
YuanSRenYQiuL, et al. A multi-response-based wireless impact monitoring network for aircraft composite structures. IEEE Trans Ind Electr2016; 63(12): 7712–7722.
10.
SmithardJRajicNvan der VeldenS, et al. An advanced multi-sensor acousto-ultrasonic structural health monitoring system: development and aerospace demonstration. Materials2017; 10(7): 832.
11.
EcksteinBMoix-BonetM.Lamb wave interaction at delamination and debondings due to impact damage in complex stiffened CFRP structures. ASME J Nondestruct Evaluat2018; 1: 031003.
12.
WillbergCKochSMookG, et al. Continuous mode conversion of lamb waves in CFRP plates. Smart Mater Struct2012; 21(7):075022.
13.
KesslerSSSpearingSMSoutisC.Damage detection in composite materials using lamb wave methods. Smart Mater Struct2002; 11(2): 269–278.
14.
OdinetsT.Sizing of essential SHM components of IVHM architecture and computing the relevant costs via scalable simulation, 2017, https://elib.dlr.de/121790/1/Paper_DLRK.pdf
15.
MeyerH.Reduction of uncertainties in SHM data transmission and failure analysis within limitations to economic and safety aspects. In: AST international workshop on aircraft system technologies, Hamburg, 21–22 February 2017.
16.
BreguetL.Calcul du poids de combustible consumm par un avion en vol ascendant. Comptes Rendus Hebdomadaires Sances l’Acadmie Sci1923; 177: 870–872.
17.
HwangILeeJS.Buckling of orthotropic plates under various inplane loads. KSCE J Civil Eng2006; 10(5): 349–356.
PCB Piezotronics. MTS System Corporation. Sensors for machinery health monitoring, 2017, https://www.pcb.com.
23.
ZhaoXGaoHZhangG, et al. Active health monitoring of an aircraft wing with embedded piezoelectric sensor/actuator network: I. Defect detection, localization and growth monitoring. Smart Mater Struct2007; 16(4): 1208–1217.
24.
FlynnEBToddMD.Bayesian probabilistic structural modeling for optimal sensor placement in ultrasonic guided wave-based structural health monitoring. In: Smart sensor phenomena, technology, networks, and systems 2010, San Diego, CA, 8–10 March 2010. New York: SPIE.
AnnighoeferBIhleHThieleckeF.An easy-to-use real-time AFDX simulation framework. In: 2016 IEEE/AIAA 35th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (DASC), Sacramento, CA, 25–30 September 2016, pp. 1–9. New York: IEEE.
SchmittDGollnickV.Air transport system. London: Springer-Verlag, 2016.
35.
DollmayerJCarlUB.Einfluss des leistungsbedarfs von flugzeugsystemen auf den kraftstoffverbrauch. In: DGLRJT 2004, Dresden, 20–24 September 2004. doi: 10.15480/882.212.
