Manual Inspection Design of an Enhanced FOD Enhanced

Manual Inspection Design of an Enhanced FOD Enhanced Inspection System for the Inspection Aircraft Production Process Foreign Object Debris (FOD) By: Justin Amoyal, Roman Garber, Marwan Karama, Meba Kassahun & Anoosha Koohi 1

Agenda • Context • Fighter Jet Production Overview • FOD Overview • Current FOD Prevention Process • • • Stakeholder Analysis & CONOPS Approach & System Alternatives Methods & Models Project Management Future Steps 2

Fighter Jet Introduction F-22 _______ F-117 F-35 Flyaway cost is one measure of the cost of an aircraft. It values the aircraft at its marginal cost, including only the cost of production and production tools essential for building a single unit. It excludes prior costs such as research and development (treating these as sunk costs), supplementary costs such as support equipment, or future costs such as 3 spares and maintenance

Case Model – Lockheed Martin F-35 4

5

F-35 Production Flow 6

FOD Overview Ø Foreign Object Debris (FOD): A substance, debris or article alien to a vehicle or system which would potentially cause damage. • According to Boeing, FOD costs the aerospace industry $4 Billion/year Classification Examples Panstock Washer, Bolt, Screw, Pin Consumables Rag, Cap, Bag, Bottle Personal Items Pens, Key, Change, Paper Tools/Shop Aids Wrench, Socket, Hammer Perishables/Expendabl Clamps, Drill Bits, Apex es Tips Trash Plastic Wrap, Used Tape Manufacturing Debris Metal Shavings, Rivet Tails Environmental Rocks/Pebbles, Insects 7

FOD Affect on Current Fighter Jet Production Process FOD Arrival Rate Exponential[. 183] 8

Current FOD Prevention Technique 9

F 35 Production with Manual FOD Inspection 10

Agenda • Context • Stakeholder Analysis & CONOPS • Stakeholder Analysis • Gap & Problem • Mission Requirements • • Approach & System Alternatives Methods & Models Project Management Future Steps 11

Title Example Tertiary Objectives 1. 2. 3. 4. Production Line Personnel FOD Inspectors FOD Associations FOD Inspection Training Personnel 1 a. Mechanic/Engineer involved in inspecting/detecting FOD 1 b. Mechanic/Engineer involved in FOD related rework and repair 2 a. Personnel Scanning for FOD 2 b. Personnel documenting instance's of FOD 3 a. National Aerospace FOD Prevention Inc. 4 a. Personnel responsible for FOD certification/training 1 a. Limit FOD inputted 1 a. Detect any FOD present 1 b. Remove FOD present 1 b. Repair Aircraft Component 2 a. Detect FOD 2 b. Document FOD occurrence 3 a. Standardize terms & methods for the prevention of FOD to A/C 4 a. Teach FOD prevention to employees 1. 2. 3. Aircraft Production Corporation Aircraft Customers Aircraft Pilots 1 a. Lockheed Martin 2 a. 3 US Government Branches 2 b. International F 35 Customers 3 a. Marine Pilot 1 a. Eliminate FOD present during Customer Delivery 1 a. Limit rework and repair time 1 a. Produce A/C as efficiently/quick as possible 2 a/2 b. Pilot Safety 2 a/2 b. Advanced AC capabilities 2 a/2 b. AC delivery in timely manner 3 a. Complete mission safely 3 a. Test A/C capabilities 1. 2. 3. 4. Aircraft Production Stockholders Insurance Companies US Government Foreign Governments 1 a. Employees of LMCO with stock & citizens with stock in LMCO 2 a. FOD related personnel insurance companies 3 a. Department of Defense (DOD) – those in charge of government spending/budgets 4 a. Foreign Government contract/budget officials 1 a. Maximize Profit 2 a. Insure/protect those who may be threatened/affected by FOD 3 a. Lowest price for most capable A/C 4 a. Most safety with the least 12 amount of FOD Secondary Primary Class

Stakeholder Wins & Tensions 13

Problem & Need 14

Gap Analysis Complexity Cumulative Cost Related to FOD Ø Non-Linear relationship between the time to detect FOD and the costs associated Ø Fighter Jet Production is growing, yet FOD Inspection techniques have remained Manual Ø FOD damage is estimated to cost the Aerospace Industry $4 billion a year Years Manual Inspection GAP Improved System Number of Aircraft Produced 15

Enhanced Inspection System Requirements MR # Requirement Description MR. 1. 0 System shall have a 98% FOD detection rate in all portions of the Aircraft MR. 2. 0 System shall support a production rate of 1 plane/day MR. 3. 0 On-site support shall be provided for 2 weeks per installation location during initial operational phase of equipment. MR. 4. 0 Supplier shall provide 1 week of operator training for 10 operators MR. 5. 0 System shall have an ROI of 25% based on LM data sample acquired before the integration of the system and data sample acquired approximately 12 months after system integration MR. 6. 0 System shall reduce FOD inspection times by 50% based on LM data sample acquired before the integration of the system and data sample acquired approximately 12 months after system integration. MR. 7. 0 Supplier shall develop an integration plan for incorporation of the equipment into the F-35 production plan. Plan shall be approved by LM 30 days prior to installation. 16

Agenda • Context • Stakeholder Analysis & CONOPS • Approach & System Alternatives • Implementation & Design Alternatives • Functional Breakdown • Allocated Architecture – Imaging Component – Analysis Component • X-Ray System Alternatives • Methods & Models • Project Management • Future Steps 17

Design Alternatives & Implementation 1. Manual/Visual Inspection 2. X-Ray imaging & Differential imaging software • Automated system with multi-layer view • Automated FOD Identification Software 18

F 35 Production with Enhanced FOD Inspection 19

External Systems Diagram 20

Functional Architecture 21

Current Problem & Need for a Solution 22

Backscatter & Transmission X-rays Backscatter X-Rays Ø Both x-ray source and x-ray detectors apparatus are located on one side of the object Transmission X-Rays Ø Passes an X-Ray beam through an object to a detector on the far side 23

X-ray Alternatives X-ray System Source Penetration Power (in steel) Power Requirement Scanning Speed Dimensions Start Up Time Radiation Dose Linear Rail Backscatter 6. 3 mm 250 -600 watts 0. 185(m^2/s) x 20 min x Robotic Arm Backscatter 6. 3 mm 250 -600 watts 0. 185(m^2/s) x 20 min x Gantry Transmission- Optional Backscatter 400 mm 380 -480 9. 6(m^2/s) Length 36. 5 m Width 3. 0 m Height 5. 0 m 15 min 5 m. R Z-Portal Backscatter 300 mm 480 x Width 8. 9 m Height 6. 3 m 15 min 5 m. R Mobile. Sarch Backscatter and Transmission 300 mm x 9. 6(m^2/s) Width 2. 5 m Height 4. 1 m 30 min 2 m. R Z-Backscatter Van Backscatter x x 7. 2(m^2/s) Length 7. 96 Width 2. 6 m Height 2. 9 m x 10 m. Sv 24

Alternatives Per Sub-Assembly 25

Differential Imaging provides the operator with a means of assistance in identifying the FOD items after the Aircraft Components have been scanned and the images are being compared. 26

Aircraft Sub-Assembly Center Fuselage Try to identify these two object? 27

Aircraft Sub-Assembly Center Fuselage 28

Agenda • • Context Stakeholder Analysis & CONOPS Approach & System Alternatives Methods & Models • Design Of Experiments • System Models – Inspection Time Model – Inspection Reliability Model • The Simulation – – Simulation Inputs & Outputs Variables Assumptions Flow Diagram • Business Model • Project Management • Future Steps 29

Design of Experiments • Generate accurate representation of the F 35 production process by gathering data • Create Instantiated architectures for the system by deciding which X-Ray alternatives are viable for each Aircraft Sub-Assembly • Instantiated architectures will be compared based on cost, rework hours, production time per Aircraft Instantiated Architecture Aircraft Sub. Assembly X Ray Alternative Forward Fuselage X Ray Alternative Center Fuselage X Ray Alternative Wing Structure X Ray Alternative Aft Fuselage X Ray Alternative Complete Aircraft Total Time Per Aircraft Time Value Rework & Repair Hours Station Utilization Time Value and $ Value Total Cost (Installation + Rework & Repair Costs) $ Value 30

Model Interaction 31

X-ray Inspection Time Model Device Start Up Time Total Inspection Time Per Alternative Total Time 32

Probability of Detection 33

Probability of Detection Variables Absorption coefficient (μ) Half Value Layer (HVL) • • Quantity that characterizes how easily a material can be penetrated by a beam of x -ray. 50% of x-ray radiation is absorbed • Density ( ρ ) Steel>Titanium> Aluminum • X-ray energy • Material P = Density μ Energy μ μ HVL P Inspected component thickness • • Forward Fuselage AFT fuselage Center fuselage Wing modulus Thickness HVL Thickness Penetration 34

Probability of Detection Example Aircraft Sub. Assembly Material (Highest Density) Thickness (inch) Center Fuselage Steel 4’’ X-Ray Machine Power (Watt) Gantry 300 35

The Simulation Tool • Discrete Event Simulation • Configurable Design – User can add/remove stations, change mean process time per station or even change FOD rate per station – User inputs # of shifts to run the simulation for – User may input # of workers as well as hourly rate per worker 36

Simulation Variables • Probability of Detection & Inspection Time per Alternative derived from physical models • Inverse CDF method for Random Number generation • Station Process Times – Under the assumption of Flow-To-Tact manufacturing all stations take an equal amount of time to process each part – Triangular Distribution with min = 4 hours, max = 8 hours, & mode = 6 hours • FOD Arrival Rate – Exponential Distribution with λ = 0. 183/hour • FOD Rework Time – Weibull Distribution with α= 0. 262 and β= 0. 221 37

Simulation Variables Variable Station Process Times Random Number Generator Using Inverse CDF Method Distribution Graph Triangular Distribution (4, 6, 8) Exponential Distribution (0. 183) FOD Arrival Rate Weibull Distribution (0. 262, 0. 221) FOD Rework Time 38

Model Assumptions • There are 18 total Assembly stations – Process Time, determined by Random number generator – Chance to leave FOD (Exp) • FOD Inspection modeled as Bernoulli Distribution based on Probability of Detection Model – With p = Probability of detection – Each Station has a chance to detect FOD (By Eye) • If FOD is detected, rework time is determined by Random number generator (WEIB) 39

Simulation Flow Diagram 40

Analysis of Results (Decision Analysis) 1. Research Decision Analysis 41

2. Physical Model Decision Analysis 42

3. Simulation Output Decision Analysis 43

Agenda • • • Context Stakeholder Analysis & CONOPS Approach & System Alternatives Methods & Models Project Management • • Work Breakdown Structure Timeline & Critical Path Risk Management Project Budget & Performance Indices • Future Steps 44

Work Breakdown Structure (WBS) 45

Project Timeline & Critical Path 46

Critical Tasks Foreseeable Risks 1. Define Requirements 1 a. Receiving definitive feedback from Lockheed Martin 1 b. Verification of specific requirements from lack of quantitative data. 2. Times for Production Stages 2 a. Data not received from LMCO in sufficient time 3. Times for FOD Inspection Mitigation Routes 1 a: Define requirements based on the capabilities of the system with correlation to the goals and objectives of Lockheed Martin 1 b. Use “dummy variables” in simulation and verify requirements based on output 2 a. Ask for average times per stage from Lockheed Martin and apply a random number generator as a multiplier to obtain multiple data points 3 a. Data not received from LMCO in sufficient time 3 a. Ask for average FOD inspection times per stages or position 3 aa. Establish a percentage of time per shift spent 4. Failure to receive data searching and apply this to the simulation 4. Retrieve Costs of from X-RAY vendors. Different X-RAY System 4 a. Estimate costs from available research Alternatives 5 a. Dependent upon receiving data in a timely 5. Establishing fashion 5 a: Establishing “dummy variables” will enable our Distributions of team to run multiple simulations, graph the output discrete events and establish these distributions 47 5 aa. Obtaining these averages from Lockheed Martin

48

49

50

Agenda • • • Context Stakeholder Analysis & CONOPS Approach & System Alternatives Methods & Models Project Management Future Steps 51

Plans for the near future • • Results Modeling False Alarms Analysis of Results ROI Analysis Sensitivity Analysis Tying together GUI with Java code Conclusions and Recommendations 52

Questions? 53

Bibliography • • • • 1. American Science and Technology, “Z BACKSCATTER VAN, ” AS&E, Massachusetts, USA, Tech. Report. ZBVDATA_080307, 2007. 2. American Science and Technology, “MOBILESEARCH HE, ” AS&E, Massachusetts, USA, Tech. Report. MSHEDATA_012711, 2011. 3. American Science and Technology, “Omniview Gantry High-Performance Inspection System, ” AS&E, Massachusetts, USA, Tech. Report. OVDATA_101711, 2011. 4. American Science and Technology, “Z PORTAL, ” AS&E, Massachusetts, USA, Tech. Report. ZPORTALDATA_052510, 2010. 5. Batchel, B. 2014. “Foreign Object Debris and Damage Prevention” [Online] Available: http: //www. boeing. com/commercial/aeromagazine/aero_01/textonly/s 01 txt. html 6. Callerame, , "X-Ray Back scatter Imaging: Photography Through Barriers". Retrieved September, 2014 Available: http: //www. icdd. com 7. ”CTOL SWBS Manufacturing Sequence Flow” 2011. [Online] Availablhttp: //information 2 share. wordpress. com/2011/05/25/ctol-swbs-manufacturing-sequenceflow/ 8. Garber, M , Diagnostic imaging and differential diagnosis in 2 case reports , J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. , vol 35 , no , p. 745 – 754 9. Gemini® 7555". Retrieved September , 2014 Available: http: //as-e. com/productssolutions/parcel-inspection/gemini-6040 10. Fessle, C J, , "Physics of Projection Radiography ". Retrieved. September , 2014 Available: http: //web. eecs. umich. edu. "Backscatter Radiography". Retrieved. September , 2014 Available: http: //www. nucsafe. com 11. FOREIGN OBJECT DAMAGE PREVENTION. [Online]. Available: http: //www. lockheedmartin. com/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/documents/scm/terms/fod/f 54 od. pdf 12. FOD PREVENTION GUIDELINE [Online]. Available: http: //www. nafpi. com/ nafpiguideline. pdf

Bibliography • • • Butler, Amy. "F-35 Deal Targets Unit Cost Below $100 Million. " Aviation Week. N. p. , n. d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. F 35. com. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2014. "BAE Systems completes 150 th aircraft for F 35 fighter programme". King, Samuel Jr. "First F-35 arrives at Eglin. " U. S. Air Force, 15 July 2011. Retrieved: 20 July 2011. Pae, Peter. "Stealth fighters fly off the radar". Los Angeles Times, 23 April 2008. Retrieved 27 April 2008. "Iraq Accepts First Lockheed Martin F-16 Aircraft · Lockheed Martin". Retrieved 13 September 2014. Davies and Dildy 2007, p. 249 "Iraq Accepts First Lockheed Martin F-16 Aircraft · Lockheed Martin". Retrieved 13 September 2014. "Mc. Donnell Douglas F-15 Streak Eagle fact sheet". National Museum of the United States Air Force. Retrieved 24 September 2010. "Analysis of the Fiscal Year 2012 Pentagon Spending Request. " Cost of war, 15 February 2011. Retrieved: 31 August 2013. 55

Fighter Jet Slide References • • • Butler, Amy. "F-35 Deal Targets Unit Cost Below $100 Million. " Aviation Week. N. p. , n. d. Web. 10 Nov. 2014. F 35. com. N. p. , n. d. Web. 11 Oct. 2014. "BAE Systems completes 150 th aircraft for F 35 fighter programme". King, Samuel Jr. "First F-35 arrives at Eglin. " U. S. Air Force, 15 July 2011. Retrieved: 20 July 2011. Pae, Peter. "Stealth fighters fly off the radar". Los Angeles Times, 23 April 2008. Retrieved 27 April 2008. "Iraq Accepts First Lockheed Martin F-16 Aircraft · Lockheed Martin". Retrieved 13 September 2014. Davies and Dildy 2007, p. 249 "Iraq Accepts First Lockheed Martin F-16 Aircraft · Lockheed Martin". Retrieved 13 September 2014. "Mc. Donnell Douglas F-15 Streak Eagle fact sheet". National Museum of the United States Air Force. Retrieved 24 September 2010. "Analysis of the Fiscal Year 2012 Pentagon Spending Request. " Cost of war, 15 February 2011. Retrieved: 31 August 2013. 56

BACK UPS 57

Inspection Probability Of Detection Model 58

59

WBS 1. 1 60

WBS 1. 2 61

WBS 1. 3 62

WBS 1. 4 63

WBS 1. 5 64

WBS 1. 6 65

Differential Imaging Requirements DIR # Requirement Definition DIR. 1. O Supplier shall provide LM the capability to customize the Differential Imaging Software. DIR. 2. 0 A site license for all software required for LM to customize the system Differential Imaging Software shall be submitted for approval 6 months prior to installation on LM intranet assets. DIR. 3. 0 Installation on LM intranet assets will occur 90 days prior to installation. DIR. 4. 0 Two training courses to educate LM employees in the customization of the Differential Imaging Software. DIR. 5. 0 Each class shall be for 10 or less l. M employees and conducted immediately after the training at the LM Fort Worth Facility. DIR. 6. 0 Differential Imaging software shall support the use of multiple algorithms to detect images 66

X-Ray Safety Requirements • XR. 1. 0 – System occupational exposure shall be in accordance with OSHA requirements. Supplier shall provide an X-Ray Exposure Protection Plan that addresses the following areas. • XR. 1. 1 - The Plan shall be approved by LM 90 days prior to installation. o o Radiation Exposure Limits Personnel Monitoring Exposure Records Posting Notices o Inspections o X-Ray Exams of Pregnant or Potentially Pregnant Women o Pregnant Authorized Users • XR. 2. 0 - Radiation workers shall not receive a dose in 1 calendar quarter over the following limits: o o Deep Dose Equivalent Lens Dose Equivalent Shallow Dose Equivalent (skin) Shallow Dose Equivalent (extremities) 1250 millirem (mrem) 3, 750 mrem 12, 500 mrem Approach & System Alternatives 67