DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Validation on Usability of Time Domain Reflectometer for Identifying Defected Aircraft Wiring

항공기 배선 결함 식별을 위한 TDR(시간영역 반사계) 활용 적합성

  • Kim, Su-Woong (Maintenance & Engineering Division, Korean Air) ;
  • Lee, Jang-Ryong (Department of Aeronautical Science and Flight Operations, Korea Aerospace University)
  • 김수웅 (대한항공 정비본부) ;
  • 이장룡 (한국항공대학교 항공운항학과)
  • Received : 2020.06.03
  • Accepted : 2020.06.29
  • Published : 2020.06.30

Abstract

Wiring defect is a major concern for safe aircraft operations. However, troubleshooting process of a wiring defect is very difficult due to extensive and complex wiring system and installed location. Recently, time domain reflectometer (TDR) equipment that enables effective defected wiring troubleshooting has been introduced. Unfortunately, TDRs have not practically adopted by most of airlines' maintenance departments because the effectiveness and usefulness of TDRs have not been verified. This study was conducted to verify if TDRs can identify the location and type of defected aircraft wiring, and whether they can be applied for troubleshooting purposes. Experimental plan was established by using various wires and connections applied to actual aircraft and the observed results were compared with the TDR operation guide. The usability of the TDR in actual aircraft wiring defect detection may be acceptable as the experimental results showed similar results to the TDR operation guide.

배선 결함은 안전한 항공기 운항에 커다란 영향을 미친다. 그러나 배선 결함의 고장탐구 과정은 광범위하고 복잡한 배선 시스템과 설치 위치 때문에 매우 어렵다. 최근 국내 항공사에 배선 결함 고장탐구를 효과적으로 할 수 있게 해주는 시간영역 반사계(TDR; time domain refelectometer) 장비가 소개되었다. 하지만 TDR의 효과와 유용성이 검증되지 않아 대부분의 항공사 정비 부서에서 TDR은 실질적으로 거의 사용되고 있지 않다. 본 연구는 TDR이 항공기 배선에서 결함의 위치 및 유형을 식별하여 문제 해결에 적용될 수 있는지 여부를 결정하기 위해 수행되었다. 실제 항공기에 적용되는 다양한 전선 및 연결부품을 이용한 여러 실험 계획을 수립하여 관찰된 실험 결과를 장비 운용 가이드에서 제공된 데이터와 비교하였다. 실험 결과, 양쪽의 데이터가 유사함을 볼 수 있었으며 TDR은 실제 항공기 배선 결함 고장탐구시 활용 적합성이 있음을 확인하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. NTSB, Aircraft accident report : In-flight breakup over the atlantic ocean Trans World Airlines flight 800, NTSB, Washington: DC, NTSB/AAR-00/03, pp. 271-294, 2000.
  2. TSB(transport safety board of canada), In-Flight Fire Leading to Collision with Water, TSB, Gatineau: Quebec, A98H0003, 2003.
  3. R. Pope, Aging systems task force aging transport systems task 1 and task 2 final report, ATSRAC, Washington: DC, ATSARC-12501, 2000.
  4. S. Slotte, Enhanced airwothiness program for airplane systems, FAA, Washington: DC, DAH Familiarization briefing, 2007.
  5. C. Furse, R. Haupt(2001, February), Down to the wire. IEEE spectrum [Online]. 38(2), pp. 34-39. Available: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/898797 https://doi.org/10.1109/6.898797
  6. H. Y. Lee, "EWIS reliability analysis of aging fighter aircraft through teardown inspection", Journal of the Korean Society for Aviation and Aeronautics, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 2-5. Dec. 2018.
  7. ATSRAC. Intrusive inspection final report - chapter7 [Internet]. Available: https://www.mitrecaasd.org/atsrac/intrusive_inspection.html
  8. K Airline, ERP maintenance management system [Internet]. Available: http://erp.koreanair.com
  9. IIAC(incheon international airport corporation), Air statics of incheon international airport [Internet]. Available: https://www.airport.kr/co/ko/cpr/statisticCategoryOfDay.do
  10. W. G. Linzey, Development of an electrical wire interconnect system risk assesment tool, FAA, Sterling: VA, DOT/FAA/AR-TN06/17, pp. 25-26, 2006.
  11. FAA, Aircraft electrical wiring interconnection system training program, FAA, Washington: DC, AC 120-94, pp. 13-14, 1997.
  12. Nanotronix, Study on the developement of telecommunication measurement equipment using TDR, Ministry of trade, industry and energy, Sejong: Korea, A00-993-3306-06-1-3, 2001.
  13. CASA(civil aviation safety authority) of the australian goverment, Aircraft wiring and bonding, CASA, Australia, AC 21-99(1), Section 2 - Chapter 1, 2013.
  14. AEA Technology, E20/20 TDR & Avionics TDR operating manual [Internet]. Available: http://www.aeatechnology.com/manuals