Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube

航空发表于 2011-4-13 08:44:28

**** Hidden Message *****

航空发表于 2011-4-13 08:44:49

February 2002 WTT face to face CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, or Export are Prohibited 1 Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited Fan Disk Pressure Faces Wear Versus Relube Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube Overview  Fan disk wear rate status CFM56-3 and CFM56-7B engine qty versus engine flight leg CFM56-7B relube interval analysis versus CFM56-3 (1,500-3,000 cycles) New relube interval proposal CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited  180 disks inspected with 856A4633G02 tooling – 159 disks within serviceable limit – 15 disks within service extension limit – 6 disks beyond serviceable limit Wear Rate Seems to Be Conducted Per Flight Hours Fan Disk Pressure Faces Wear Versus Relube Data concerning fan disk without relube, and fan blade without undercut Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited Engine Flight Leg Influence Wear Rate Fan Disk Pressure Faces Wear Versus Flight Leg Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited CFM56-7B Main engine population with flightleg within 1.8 to 3.4 Significant sub-population identified with flightleg within 2.6 to 3.4 CFM56-3 Main engine population with flightleg within 1.4 to 2 CFM56-7B Population Distribution Versus CFM56-3 Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited Cycles: 3200 Max Hours: 5000 Max CFM56-7B Engine Yearly Utilization Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited  CFM56-3 Interval: 2500-4500 Hrs  CFM56-7B Interval: 1700-9500 Hrs Factor 5 in Time, Can Be Reached With Current CESM Spec CFM56-7B Fan Disk Relube Interval Analysis Vs -3 Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited  Relube every 1,500 cycles and at letter check seem very similar  Relube every 3,000 cycles seems very large for the Fleet 737 NG (2 years and more)  Introduction of relube threshold in operating hours for high flight leg customers to provide better disk protection (does not affect most of CFM56-7B operators) Cycles Hours 1500 cycles (in Months) 3000 Cycles (in Months) 12 Months (hours/cycles) 15 Months (hours/cycles) Letter Check inspection 3200 hours (in Month) Fleet NG 1557 3063 12 23 3063 / 1557 3829 / 1946 13 COA Fleet 1233 3693 15 29 3693 / 1233 4616 / 1541 10 Fleet 737 2000 2780 9 18 2780 / 2000 3475 / 2500 14 Yearly Relub interval CFM56-7B Engine Relube Analysis Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube CFMI / Boeing Proprietary Information - Unauthorized Disclosure, Use, February 2002 WTT face to face or Export are Prohibited Conclusion: – Fan disk wear rate driven by accumulated flight hours – CFM56-3 engine population much more homogeneous in term of flight leg / fleet distribution – Some CFM56-7B operators with high flight leg – Relube interval proposal Within 3,000 Cycles, or 5,000 Flight Hours, Whichever Comes First CFM56-7B Fan Disk Relube Proposal Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube

kinran 发表于 2011-6-4 23:32:41

:victory: :victory:

bocome 发表于 2011-7-31 04:29:56

Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube

页: [1]

航空论坛_航空翻译_民航英语翻译_飞行翻译's Archiver

Fan Disk Wear Versus Relube