BATK Training Maintenance Philosophy and Maintenance Program Development

Agus Supriyanto GATC , 17 18 November 2011

Definition
Philosophy A set of ideas or beliefs relating to a particular field or activity. Maintenance The process (includes inspection, servicing, overhaul, repair, preservation, and replacement) of ensuring that a system continually performs its intended function at its designed in level of reliability and safety. and preventive maintenance. Maintenance Program Program which define logical sequence of maintenance action to be performed as even or pieces of whole which when performed collectively result in achievement of the desired Maintenance Standard. It is compiled of individual maintenance and inspections functions utilized by an operator to fulfill its total maintenance needs. It includes corrective maintenance

Page 1

The Bathtub Curve as nature characteristic of equipments

Page 2

Maintenance shall be implemented to achieve Inherent Reliability

Page 3

Objectives of Maintenance Program

To ensure realization of the inherent safety and reliability levels of the equipment. To restore safety and reliability to their inherent levels when deterioration has occurred. To obtain the information necessary for design improvement of those items whose inherent reliability proves inadequate. To accomplish these goals at a minimum total cost, including maintenance costs and the costs of resulting failures.

Page 4

FAR 121 that related to maintenance

Page 5

Manufacturer, Authority and Operator on Maintenance Program development

Page 6

Factor Influencing Aircraft Cost

Page 7

Aircraft cost of ownership breakdown

Page 8

Maintenance Cost versus Reliability

Generally, Prevention Cost and Correction Cost are inverserly to each other. Generally, Maintenance Cost is sum of Prevention Cost and Correction Cost. Using Reliability Control Program, Maintenance Cost is adjusted to Minimum.
Page 9

Maintenance Program Development History

Page 10

MSG Program has applied on the most of latest aircraft types

Page 11

Aircraft Design Philosophy

Safe Life

Fail Save

Damage Tolerant

Page 12

MSG-2 Decision Tree Diagram

Page 13

MSG-2 Process Oriented Maintenance

1. HARD TIME This is a primary maintenance process under which an item is removed from service for discarded or recondition or heavy maintenance or bench check before a previously specified time. (Safe Life) 2. ON CONDITION MAINTENANCE This is a primary maintenance process having repetitive inspection or test to determine the condition of the item or system and to provide a reasonable assurance that the item or system will survive to the next schedule inspection or test. (Damage Tolerant) 3. CONDITION MONITORING MAINTENANCE Data on the population of Maintenance Significant Items of system in service is analyzed to determine Maintenance Requirement. Condition Monitored allows failure to occurred and relies upon analysis of operating experience to indicate the need for appropriate action. (Fail Save)
Page 14

Hard Time

Page 15

On Condition
Potential failure : Point where functional failure is imminent. Scheduled inspection or test interval Functional failure : Point where the system does not longer fulfill its minimum required performance

Point where failure start to occur

Point Where failure is detectable (potential failure)

Condition

Point where it has failed (functional failure)

Time
Page 16

Condition Monitoring
FOR EXAMPLE , THE AIRCRAFT COMPONENT HAS 10 FLIGHT CYCLES LIFE TIME

MOST OF THE AIRCRAFT COMPONENTS LIFE TIME ARE MORE THAN 10.000 FLIGHT CYCLES.

Page 17

MSG-2 Structure Inspection Redundancy

Area inspection required by CPCP C53-202-01 at interval F:12Y R:6Y Area inspection required by SI S53-03-A at interval 24,000 FH

Page 18

MSG-2 weakness
1. MSG-2 does not treat hidden functional failures adequately (this is even more critical in todays electronic aircraft where many redundant systems are hidden). 2. MSG-2 logic needs to be more rigorous. A user can determine what he/she wants to be done to a component and work the logic so that that outcome is generated. Emotion is not precluded from the decision making process. 3. MSG-2 does not address current FAA regulations, e.g. FAR 25.571 (damage tolerance and fatigue evaluation of structures), aging aircraft concerns, Corrosion Prevention and Control Program (CPCP) requirements, Enhanced Zonal Analysis Procedures (EZAP) that specifically address wiring concerns and promotes a clean as you go culture or analysis for Lightning/High Intensity Radiated Field (HIRF) tasks and intervals. 4. MSG-2 does not provides a strong and well tested analytical logic which helps eliminate and minimize emotion from the decision making process of determining if a maintenance task is needed or not.
Page 19

MSG-3 is better
Top down approach resulting in less task . Integration redundancy. Task oriented avoid confusing task to be done. Clear differentiate safety task and economical task. Promoted by FAA. Significantly impact to economical return by 30 % in reducing man-hour usage and reduce A/C ground time for routine maintenance. CPCP and Structural Inspection eliminate

MSG-3 results in over 20 % reduction in man-hours compare to MSG-2 (B737-C)

MSG-2 Maintenance Program (Total 1,657 Task Cards / 12,452 Man-hours*)
Component Maintenance 292 items System tasks 1,114 items CPCP tasks 101 items Structure tasks 150 items

MSG-3 Analysis & Optimization

System tasks 627 items

Zonal tasks 202 items

Structure tasks 166 tasks

MSG-3 Maintenance Program (Total 994 Task Cards / 9,423 Man-hours*)

Page 21

MSG-3 analysis form

Page 22

MSG-3 Analysis Flow 1

Page 23

MSG-3 Analysis Flow 2

Page 24

MSG-3 Analysis Flow 3

Page 25

MSG-3 Analysis Flow 4

Page 26

MSG-3 Analysis Flow 5

Page 27

MSG-3 Analysis Flow 5 (cont)

Page 28

MSG-3 Logic Diagram (Level 1 analysis)

5
Page 29

MSG-3 Logic Diagram (Level 2 analysis)

Page 30

MSG-3 Task selection criteria

TASK LUBRICATION or SERVICING (LU or SV) APPLICABILITY CRITERIA (based on item's failure characteristics) The replenishment of the consumables must reduce the rate of functional deterioration. EFFECTIVENESS CRITERIA (based on consequences of item's failure) SAFETY The task must reduce the risks of failure. The task must ensure adequate availability of the hidden function to reduce the risks of a multiple failures. The task must reduce the risks of failure to assure safe operation OPERATIONAL The task must reduce the risks of failure to an acceptable level. NON-SAFETY The task must be costeffective. The task must ensure adequate availability of the hidden functions in order to avoid adverse economic effects of multiple failures and must be cost effective. The task must be costeffective, i.e.; the cost of the task must be less than the cost of the failures prevented. The task must be costeffective, i.e.; the cost of the tasks must be less than the cost of the failures prevented. An economic life limit must be cost-effective, i.e.; the cost of the task must be less than the cost of the failures prevented.

OPERATIONAL or VISUAL Identification of failures must be CHECK possible. (OP or VC) Reduced resistance to failures must INSPECTION or be detectable, and there exists a FUNCTIONAL reasonably consistent interval CHECK between a deteriorated condition and (IN or FC) functional failure. The item must show functional degradation characteristics at an RESTORATION identifiable age and a large proportion of (RS) units must survive to that age. It must be possible to restore the item to a specific standard of failure resistance. DISCARD (DS)

Not applicable.

The task must reduce the risks of failure to an acceptable level.

The task must reduce the risk of failures to assure safe operation

The task must reduce the risks of failure to an acceptable level.

The item must show functional A safe-life limit must degradation characteristics at an reduce the risks of failure identifiable age and on a large proportion to assure safe operation of units are expected survive to that age.

The task must reduce the risks of failure to an acceptable level.

Page 31

Maintenance interval determination (aircraft component)

Page 32

Maintenance interval determination (aircraft system)

Page 33

Maintenance Reference

Page 34

Format of Garudas CAMP (using MSG-3)

Unique identifier of the item to be maintained

Maintenance action to be done at regular time

Maintenance interval

Page 35

Maintenance Review Board Report

1. 2. 3. 4.

Affectivity Issue date Revised Item etc

Page 36

Maintenance Planning Data (CMR)

1. 2. 3. 4.

Affectivity Issue date Revised Item etc

Page 37

Maintenance Planning Data (CPCP)

1. 2. 3. 4.

Affectivity Issue date Revised Item etc

Page 38

Service Bulletin

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Affectivity Issue date Alert / not alert Subject Content and task Economic evaluation Warranty etc

Page 39

Airworthiness Directive

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.

Affectivity Issue date Due date Subject Content and task Implementation reference etc

Page 40

Engineering Order

1. Affectivity 2. Mandatory or not 3. Issue date 4. Due date 5. Subject 6. Content and task 7. Work load / man-hour 8. Required feed back 9. Implementation reference 10. etc

Page 41

Job Card

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Affectivity Mandatory or not Issue date Subject Content and task Work load / man-hour Implementation reference etc

Page 42

Maintenance Discrepancy & Rectification

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.

Affectivity Issue date Subject Content and task Work load / man-hour Required material Implementation reference etc

Page 43

Garudas CAMP Close Loop

Presented the Draft of CAMP to DGCA for Appropal by Engineer (MQ)

Issue or Update the CAMP Doc. by Engineer (TER-2)

Distibute the CAMP Doc. by staff (TER-4)

Evaluate the source (basic of CAMP) or Analyze The Dirty Records by Engineers (TEA-TER)

MRB Document CMR Document ALI Document CPCP Document SSID Document Repair Document Existing AD Service Bulletin Service Letter Operators Experience

Make and Plan Jobcards by Planner (TLP-1)

Excecution the Jobcards by Mechanics (TL/TB)

Filter The Dirty Records by Engineer (TER-2)

Insert The Dirty Records by Data Loader (TER-2)

Store The Dirty Records by Planner (TLP-3)

Human Factor that shall be considered during maintenance implementation

Environmental Factor
Care about : lighting, noise, temperature, aroma, weather, time, ergonomic of equipment, availability of appliance, space lay out, and handling. capacity, sensation center, think center, strength, boring condition, and fatigue. muscle

Physical Factor Care about the limitation of : five human senses, brain

Psychological Social Factor Knowledge, Skill, and Attitude

Care about the worse condition of : mind function, among humans communication, human and machine communication, conflict, and stress. Understanding of theory by course, study, and training. Work experience by benchmarking, on the job training, and work practicing. Enthusiastic for new information, new knowledge, and new technology.

Page 45

Summary
1. Maintenance shall be implemented to achieve Inherent Reliability. 2. Manufacturer, Authority and Operator are close involved on Maintenance Program development. 3. Maintenance Cost shall be considered during Maintenance Program development. 4. Human Factor shall be considered during Maintenance Program implementation. 5. Garuda Indonesia has experienced to develop Maintenance Program refer to MSG-2 (DC-10, B747-200 and B737-Clasic) as well as Maintenance Program refer to MSG-3 (MD-11, B747-400, B737-NG, A330-200/300 and A320).

Page 46