roberto_vargas_6.2_Case Study Analysis_Accident Research
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
335
Subject
Mechanical Engineering
Date
Feb 20, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
11
Uploaded by ConstableInternetParrot
1
Case Study Analysis 6.2: China Airlines Flight CI611
Roberto L. Vargas
Embry Riddle University BSAS 335: Mechanical and Structural Factors in Aviation Safety
Dr. Thomas L. Holmes Jr
November 26, 2023
2
Introduction
On May 25, 2002, China Airlines Flight CI611 a Boeing model 747-200 series aircraft had an inflight breakup due to structural failure of the aft lower lobe section (
Boeing 747-200,
2022). This area of the aircraft was repaired permanently on May 25, 1980, after blending the affected area that was damaged due to a tail strike on February 7, 1980 (
Boeing 747-200,
2022). In this case study I will attempt to explain my findings regarding the accident and the events that lead up to it. I will go over the repair procedures and the execution of these procedures by the technicians and how they differ from what should have been done. Primary Causal Factors of the Accident In my research, I believe that the primary cause of the in-flight breakup of Flight CI611 was the separation of the tail section of the aircraft. It seems to have had a structural weakness at the aft lower lobe of the aircraft where it was believed to have been repaired 22 years before. The
area around the previous repair to the tail strike in 1980 (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003).
Figure 1
Evidence of Failed Doubler
Note: Failed doubler from the Crash of Flight CI611 from the Aviation Occurrence Report Volume 1
3
Due to the incident in 1980, the damaged area failed with fatigue cracking around the STA 2100 area of the aircraft. These cracks were evident around the doubler in that area and seemed to propagate alongside it (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003).
Contributing Factors to the Accident
Some of the contributing factors to this accident come in the form of the incident that happened in 1980, Improper maintenance practices, and a break in the inspection process for that
repair. It seems in the documentation that some of the criteria to repair the damage done to the aircraft were not accomplished to the specifications of Boeing and therefore weakened the affected area of the aircraft. This action, if taken correctly, could have prevented the event on May 25, 2002, from happening, leading to the in-flight breakup.
First, the incident that weakened the aft lower lobe of the 747 aircraft on February 7, 1980, caused significant scratches when landing at Kai Tec Airport Hong Kong (
Boeing 747-
200,
2022). This is where it was decided to temporarily repair the scratches with two doublers made of aluminum 7075-T6 alloy. It was to be replaced in four months with a permanent repair that was accomplished according to the Boeing 747 structural repair manual (SRM)
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4
Leading up to the permanent repair on May 25, 1980, which had the permanent doubler where the previous doubler had been for the temporary repair as they blended the scratches but did not Figure 2
Temp repair instructions
Note: The documentation to instructions for a temporary repair of structural damage.
5
fully remove the damaged area with minimal documentation of the repair since it was considered
a minor repair (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003).
The mechanics working the repair did not fully blend the damaged area to get rid of the scratches. Nor did they extend the doubler past the damaged area as the SRM instructed it to do so that the load on the skin could be transferred around the damaged area (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003). Since the repair was applied directly to the affected area and not around it then the damaged area bares the load. Especially on a pressurized vessel the doubler should have extended around the area that was damaged and sealed to reinforce it which would have been a common practice at the time Figure 3
Skin scratches on aft lower lobe
Note: This is the damaged area of the lower lobe that show the scratches not fully blended away
6
(
Typical repairs for aircraft structures (part 1), 2023). Also, the inspection of this area throughout the aircraft history was undermined. The inspection requirements for the Corrosion Prevention and Control Program (CPCP) had 29 items inspection items that were not accomplished in the maintenance records (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003).
Structural and Mechanical Factors Related to the Accident
For structural and mechanical-related factors of this accident seem to be on structural failure of this repair area. The flight recorder retrieved from the accident site showed all systems were performing nominally up to the point when they were cut off from their power supply (
In-
Flight Breakup, 2003). This was another factor that led to the understanding that the aft tail section separated first in flight. The flight recorders were attached to the main power supply that was separated from the tail section. No other information after this point would lead investigators
to believe that any system or mechanical issue contributed to the accident.
The sections of aircraft retrieved from the crash site included the doubler repair that led investigators to believe that this section had failed. Since this was not correctly repaired the doublers that were to repair the area were not big enough to cover the affected area according to Boeing standards of repair in their SRM. This causes the affected area to fatigue and crack over time extending from the original scratches that were not fully blended or removed (
Boeing 747-
200,
2022). The continued cycling of the aircraft being pressurized and the stress loading in this area caused these cracks to propagate out alongside the rivet hole of the doublers.
Relevant Human Factors and Organizational Factors Related to the Accident
The human factor of this accident stems from the actions of the repair team back in 1980 that accomplished the repair. China Airlines also did not seem to have reached out to a Boeing
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
7
Representative in Hong Kong (BFSHKG) for advice on the repair process (
In-Flight Breakup Volume 2,
2003). They could not validate the work being performed which would have raised red flags for the Boeing representatives. It’s hard to determine if CAL did this on purpose or if they weren’t familiar with the procedures for informing Boeing of their repair SRM, but it looks like it was overlooked.
The inspections that need to be performed were missed during the CPCP inspection. Some of the findings state that 29 items from the PCP inspection in November 1997 and onward were not checked. These inspection points, especially for aging aircraft like this Boeing 747 are essential to the continued health of the aircraft (
In-Flight Breakup Volume 2,
2003). These types of inspection are designed to seek out different levels of corrosion including fatigue and cracks that are starting to propagate. Although the doublers that were installed hid a lot of the cracks that were growing underneath it there was evidence of cracking around the doublers to suggest that there was damage underneath. Dark traces of stains in the areas of the doublers were evidence of a small preach in the pressure seal of the aircraft (
Boeing 747-200,
2022).
Figure 4
Dark strains around Note: The staining outside the doubler indicating a preach in the pressure seal.
8
Outcomes of the Accident
After the investigation of this accident, the Aviation Safety Council (ASC) issued an Interim Flight Safety Bulletin to ICAO for an aircraft pressurization structure repair alert supply (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003). This included added wording to the engineering orders stating that “Hidden structural damage can cause aircraft structure failure” (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003). Also needed to include step-by-step instructions, detailed drawings, Required Item Inspection (RII), and categorize the repair as a major. China’s Civil Aviation Administration (CAA) grounded all 747-200 in the China Airlines fleet to ensure no other repairs like this one had cracks or were improperly repaired (Wong, 2022).
CAL had reviewed its self-audit inspection procedures to better catch the deficiency of oversight to missing inspection points. Establishing an Engineering Planning Department (EPD) on May 10
th
, 2004, to integrate planning, control, work order issues, and other functions to aid in this process (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003). Boeing NDI staff now use new technologies and procedures to aid in the detection of repairs like tail strikes (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003). The FAA considered the implementation of an independent power source for the flight recorders to function if the main power supply is severed (
In-Flight Breakup, 2003). This is a common practice today with flight recorders or “Black boxes” to have an independent power supply that is inspected in several calendar days (
Flight data recorder,
2014). Risk Mitigation or Reduction Strategies
After reviewing all the evidence of this accident and what was overseen when conducting the repairs I would suggest adequate training in handling repairs like the one for flight CI611. As an Aircraft mechanic and Structures mechanic, I can say from my work
9
experience that once you start working in this occupation uncommon repair or unique repairs do not have training associated with them for best practices or lessons learned. Even as an experienced mechanic, I can say I get complacent and so do many of my colleagues. I have rarely seen companies take the initiative to train their employees how to handle repairs like this knowing what best practices are to aid in familiarizing with procedures. These can be complex repairs and their level of importance is understated sometimes when mentioned. The assumption that most technicians will always remember or know how to approach a repair even though it may not be routine is a flaw in logic. Not having some kind of inspection process after the repair was done to ensure all the scratches were completely removed or blended out was something else that could have been avoidable. Today I don’t see how an inspection point was not created to ensure that the repair was done even if it was considered a minor repair. To consider a repair that needs doublers and is
supposed to divert the load away from the affected area seems to be a miscommunication. Pressure vessels need to be treated as fatigue-critical areas due to the purpose of pressure vessels in the atmosphere. After accidents like the Comet 1 that happened decades before this accident, I would have imagined that any alteration or modification of a pressure vessel would be considered more serious.
Conclusion
After reviewing this case study of the Boeing 747-200 it has brought me perspective on why some of the repairs that I've witnessed are meant with harsh scrutiny when inspected. It is hard to understand the gravity of what I work on every day if I have nothing to compare it to. The reason why we take our procedures seriously is due to accidents like the China Airlines Flight CI611. It is important to share cases like this with the technicians, and mechanics whose
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
10
people’s lives are in their hands. I believe that there should be weekly reviews of case studies like this for these technicians and professionals to remind them of the importance of their jobs. I have not seen any employer I've worked for making this kind of effort to the importance of their workmanship.
References
Aviation Safety Council. (2003, June 3). In-Flight Breakup over the Taiwan Strait Northeast of Makung, Penghu Islands China Airlines Flight CI611 Boeing 747-200, B-18255
. Volume 2.
Federal Aviation Administration. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/2022-11/CI611_English_VOL_1.pdf
Aviation Safety Council. (2003a, June 3). ). In-Flight Breakup over the Taiwan Strait Northeast of Makung, Penghu Islands China Airlines Flight CI611 Boeing 747-200, B-18255. Volume 2
. Federal Aviation Administration. https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/CI611_English_VOL_2.pdf
Blogger. (2023, May 22). Typical repairs for aircraft structures (part 1)
. Aeronautics Guide. https://www.aircraftsystemstech.com/2017/06/typical-repairs-for-aircraft-structures.html
Boeing 747-200
. Federal Aviation Administration. (2022a, December 19). https://www.faa.gov/lessons_learned/transport_airplane/accidents/B-18255
University of Missouri. (2014, May 21). Flight data recorder batteries are long overdue for an upgrade, MU researcher suggests
. Aviation Pros. https://www.aviationpros.com/engines-
components/aircraft-airframe-accessories/batteries/news/11474884/flight-data-recorder-
batteries-are-long-overdue-for-an-upgrade-mu-researcher-suggests
Wong, D. (2022, May 22). Deadly Metal Fatigue: The story of china airlines flight 611
. Simple Flying. https://simpleflying.com/china-airlines-flight-611-metal-fatigue-story/
11
Related Documents
Related Questions
Which of these statements are correct?
arrow_forward
i need the answer quickly
arrow_forward
Test Specimen
4140 CF steel
6061 T6 Al
Gray Cast iron 40
FC Brass 360
Impact Energy (J or ft-lb)
48.5 ft-lb
25 ft-lb
12 ft-lb
27 ft-lb
Impact Strength (J/m
or ft-lb/in)
123.096 ft-lb/in
63.452 ft-lb/in
What is the final analysis/ overall observation from the data?
30.457 ft-lb/in
68.528 ft-lb/in
arrow_forward
Problem 1: (50 points)
In Avengers 2, Captain America's improved
shield is made from unobtainium, a new
material that will soon be available in a store
near you. Unobtainium has the normal stress-
strain diagram shown. The proportional limit,
the elastic limit and the yield point are
identical in this material.
o [MPa]
2001
175
150
125
100
Fig.1 Normal stress-strain
75
50
25
0
0. 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25
Unobtainium has a Poisson's ratio of 0.3.
a. [6pts] Identify the yield point oy, the ultimate stress ou and the fracture
stress of. Include units.
c. [25pts] A bar of unobtainium has a length of
1.5 m, a width of 100mm and a height of 50
mm, as shown. The cross-sectional area is
50mm 100mm = 5 x 10-³m². The bar is
subjected to an axial force of 375 kN.
Find the normal stress in a cross-section of the bar.
b. [5pts] How do you find Young's modulus from this graph? Find its value with units.
whesta fins dus al hoss
P = 375 KN
1.5 m
0.3
50 mm
100 mm
& [mm/mm]
Is the material within its…
arrow_forward
C
Dynamic Analysis and Aeroelasticity
SECTION B
Answer TWO questions from this section
ENG2012-N
The moment of inertia of a helicopter's rotor is 320kg. m². The rotor starts from rest
and at t = 0, the pilot begins by advancing the throttle so that the torque exerted on
the rotor by the engine (in N.m) is modelled by as a function of time (in seconds) by
T = 250t.
a) How long does it take the rotor to turn ten revolutions?
b) What is the rotor's angular velocity (in RPM) when it has turned ten
revolutions?
arrow_forward
When design for a cyclic load, if in one case, the designed reliability is 0.99, what is the approximate reliability factor which should be used according to the textbook?
1.0
0.9
0.81
0.75
arrow_forward
Drop-load (I)This exercise is part of a series of problems aimed at modelling a situation by progressively refining our model to consider more and more parameters. This progressive approach is very close to what professional scientists do!
Context
We want to lower a suspended load in a controlled way so that it hits the ground with a speed whose modulus is not too great. To do this, the suspended load (B) is connected by a rope passing through a pulley to another mass (A), which can move on a horizontal surface.
Information
The masses of the charges A and B are known.The pulley is a ring of mass mp and radius R that can rotate without friction.The surface on which mass A is placed is horizontal.There is no friction between mass A and the surface on which it is placed.The string attached to mass A is perfectly parallel to the surface on which the mass rests.
SchematizationDraw a diagram of each object that interests us. Draw x- and y-axes for each object. Draw and name each force…
arrow_forward
CHAPTER 5 : DIESEL ENGINE POWER PLANT
A six cylinder, four-stroke CI engine is tested against a water brake dynamometer for which
B.P = WN/17x10' in kW, where W is the brake load in newton and N is the speed of the
engine in the r.p.m. The air consumption was measured by means of a sharp edged orifice.
During the test following observersations were taken :
• Bore
• Stroke
• Speed
• Brake load
Barometer reading
= 10 cm
= 14 cm
= 2500 rpm
= 480 N
= 76 cm Hg
• Orifice diameter
• Co-efficient of discharge of orifice
• Pressure drop across orifice
• Room temperature
Fuel Consumption
= 3.3 cm
= 0.62
= 14 cm of Hg
= 25°C
= 0.32 kg/min
Calculate following :
i.
The volumetric efficiency
The brake mean effective pressure ( b.m.e.p)
The engine torque
The brake specific fuel consumption ( b.s.f.c )
ii.
iv.
arrow_forward
A study of the response of a human body subjected to vibration/shock is
important in many applications. In a standing posture, the masses of head, upper
torso, hips, and legs and the elasticity/ damping of neck, spinal column,
abdomen, and legs influence the response characteristics. Develop a sequence
of three improved approximations for modeling the human body.
Restraint
-Windshield
Seat
belts
Instrument
panel
-Slant
footboard
Impact
force
Floor
arrow_forward
Can you help with both please.
arrow_forward
The engineering constants for an orthotropic material are found to be
E1= 27.579 GPa V12 = 0.2 G12=41.368 GPa
E2=20.684 GPa V23 = 0.4 G23=48.263 GPa
E3=21.374 GPaV13 = 0.6G31=13.790 GPa
Find the stiffness matrix [C] and the compliance matrix [S] for the preceding orthotropicmaterial.
arrow_forward
Please show work for practice problem 12
arrow_forward
CASIO
fx-991ES PLUS
ALPHA
CALC
EGO
the car move ?
[Ans. NA 16.5 kN, Ng =42.3
kN, the car does not move]
%3D
5. A box weighs 150 kg. The coefficient of static friction
between the box and the ground is 0.3. Determine if the
80 kg man can pull the box without slipping when the
coefficient of static friction between the man's shoes and
the ground is 0.4.
Hint: analyse block and man separately i.e. draw separate FBDS
arrow_forward
answer fast
arrow_forward
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
Recommended textbooks for you

Elements Of Electromagnetics
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9780190698614
Author:Sadiku, Matthew N. O.
Publisher:Oxford University Press

Mechanics of Materials (10th Edition)
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9780134319650
Author:Russell C. Hibbeler
Publisher:PEARSON

Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781259822674
Author:Yunus A. Cengel Dr., Michael A. Boles
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education

Control Systems Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781118170519
Author:Norman S. Nise
Publisher:WILEY

Mechanics of Materials (MindTap Course List)
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781337093347
Author:Barry J. Goodno, James M. Gere
Publisher:Cengage Learning

Engineering Mechanics: Statics
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781118807330
Author:James L. Meriam, L. G. Kraige, J. N. Bolton
Publisher:WILEY
Related Questions
- Which of these statements are correct?arrow_forwardi need the answer quicklyarrow_forwardTest Specimen 4140 CF steel 6061 T6 Al Gray Cast iron 40 FC Brass 360 Impact Energy (J or ft-lb) 48.5 ft-lb 25 ft-lb 12 ft-lb 27 ft-lb Impact Strength (J/m or ft-lb/in) 123.096 ft-lb/in 63.452 ft-lb/in What is the final analysis/ overall observation from the data? 30.457 ft-lb/in 68.528 ft-lb/inarrow_forward
- Problem 1: (50 points) In Avengers 2, Captain America's improved shield is made from unobtainium, a new material that will soon be available in a store near you. Unobtainium has the normal stress- strain diagram shown. The proportional limit, the elastic limit and the yield point are identical in this material. o [MPa] 2001 175 150 125 100 Fig.1 Normal stress-strain 75 50 25 0 0. 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 Unobtainium has a Poisson's ratio of 0.3. a. [6pts] Identify the yield point oy, the ultimate stress ou and the fracture stress of. Include units. c. [25pts] A bar of unobtainium has a length of 1.5 m, a width of 100mm and a height of 50 mm, as shown. The cross-sectional area is 50mm 100mm = 5 x 10-³m². The bar is subjected to an axial force of 375 kN. Find the normal stress in a cross-section of the bar. b. [5pts] How do you find Young's modulus from this graph? Find its value with units. whesta fins dus al hoss P = 375 KN 1.5 m 0.3 50 mm 100 mm & [mm/mm] Is the material within its…arrow_forwardC Dynamic Analysis and Aeroelasticity SECTION B Answer TWO questions from this section ENG2012-N The moment of inertia of a helicopter's rotor is 320kg. m². The rotor starts from rest and at t = 0, the pilot begins by advancing the throttle so that the torque exerted on the rotor by the engine (in N.m) is modelled by as a function of time (in seconds) by T = 250t. a) How long does it take the rotor to turn ten revolutions? b) What is the rotor's angular velocity (in RPM) when it has turned ten revolutions?arrow_forwardWhen design for a cyclic load, if in one case, the designed reliability is 0.99, what is the approximate reliability factor which should be used according to the textbook? 1.0 0.9 0.81 0.75arrow_forward
- Drop-load (I)This exercise is part of a series of problems aimed at modelling a situation by progressively refining our model to consider more and more parameters. This progressive approach is very close to what professional scientists do! Context We want to lower a suspended load in a controlled way so that it hits the ground with a speed whose modulus is not too great. To do this, the suspended load (B) is connected by a rope passing through a pulley to another mass (A), which can move on a horizontal surface. Information The masses of the charges A and B are known.The pulley is a ring of mass mp and radius R that can rotate without friction.The surface on which mass A is placed is horizontal.There is no friction between mass A and the surface on which it is placed.The string attached to mass A is perfectly parallel to the surface on which the mass rests. SchematizationDraw a diagram of each object that interests us. Draw x- and y-axes for each object. Draw and name each force…arrow_forwardCHAPTER 5 : DIESEL ENGINE POWER PLANT A six cylinder, four-stroke CI engine is tested against a water brake dynamometer for which B.P = WN/17x10' in kW, where W is the brake load in newton and N is the speed of the engine in the r.p.m. The air consumption was measured by means of a sharp edged orifice. During the test following observersations were taken : • Bore • Stroke • Speed • Brake load Barometer reading = 10 cm = 14 cm = 2500 rpm = 480 N = 76 cm Hg • Orifice diameter • Co-efficient of discharge of orifice • Pressure drop across orifice • Room temperature Fuel Consumption = 3.3 cm = 0.62 = 14 cm of Hg = 25°C = 0.32 kg/min Calculate following : i. The volumetric efficiency The brake mean effective pressure ( b.m.e.p) The engine torque The brake specific fuel consumption ( b.s.f.c ) ii. iv.arrow_forwardA study of the response of a human body subjected to vibration/shock is important in many applications. In a standing posture, the masses of head, upper torso, hips, and legs and the elasticity/ damping of neck, spinal column, abdomen, and legs influence the response characteristics. Develop a sequence of three improved approximations for modeling the human body. Restraint -Windshield Seat belts Instrument panel -Slant footboard Impact force Floorarrow_forward
- Can you help with both please.arrow_forwardThe engineering constants for an orthotropic material are found to be E1= 27.579 GPa V12 = 0.2 G12=41.368 GPa E2=20.684 GPa V23 = 0.4 G23=48.263 GPa E3=21.374 GPaV13 = 0.6G31=13.790 GPa Find the stiffness matrix [C] and the compliance matrix [S] for the preceding orthotropicmaterial.arrow_forwardPlease show work for practice problem 12arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
- Elements Of ElectromagneticsMechanical EngineeringISBN:9780190698614Author:Sadiku, Matthew N. O.Publisher:Oxford University PressMechanics of Materials (10th Edition)Mechanical EngineeringISBN:9780134319650Author:Russell C. HibbelerPublisher:PEARSONThermodynamics: An Engineering ApproachMechanical EngineeringISBN:9781259822674Author:Yunus A. Cengel Dr., Michael A. BolesPublisher:McGraw-Hill Education
- Control Systems EngineeringMechanical EngineeringISBN:9781118170519Author:Norman S. NisePublisher:WILEYMechanics of Materials (MindTap Course List)Mechanical EngineeringISBN:9781337093347Author:Barry J. Goodno, James M. GerePublisher:Cengage LearningEngineering Mechanics: StaticsMechanical EngineeringISBN:9781118807330Author:James L. Meriam, L. G. Kraige, J. N. BoltonPublisher:WILEY

Elements Of Electromagnetics
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9780190698614
Author:Sadiku, Matthew N. O.
Publisher:Oxford University Press

Mechanics of Materials (10th Edition)
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9780134319650
Author:Russell C. Hibbeler
Publisher:PEARSON

Thermodynamics: An Engineering Approach
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781259822674
Author:Yunus A. Cengel Dr., Michael A. Boles
Publisher:McGraw-Hill Education

Control Systems Engineering
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781118170519
Author:Norman S. Nise
Publisher:WILEY

Mechanics of Materials (MindTap Course List)
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781337093347
Author:Barry J. Goodno, James M. Gere
Publisher:Cengage Learning

Engineering Mechanics: Statics
Mechanical Engineering
ISBN:9781118807330
Author:James L. Meriam, L. G. Kraige, J. N. Bolton
Publisher:WILEY