Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2brh9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T03:24:53.617Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Crack free and cracked life of the pressurised cabin of the A300B—calculation, tests and design measurements to improve damage tolerance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

O. Gökgöl
O. Gökgöl*
Affiliation:
Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The A300B aircraft is a co-operative effort by France, Germany, Great Britain, USA, Spain and the Netherlands. The work sharing regarding manufacture of the structure is as follows:

  • MBB: Fuselage sections from the tail cone to section 16, upper shell of section 15, and the vertical tail.

  • VFW-Fokker: Fuselage sections 13 and 14.

  • AS: Flight compartment, fuselage sections 12, 15 (lower shell), wing centre box and pylons.

  • CASA: Horizontal tail and passenger compartment door No 1.

  • Fokker-VFW: Movable components on the wing, flap track fairings.

  • British Aerospace (HSA): Cantilever wing, slats.

  • General Electric: Engines.

  • Messier: Landing gears.

The design of the A300B was based on many years’ experience gained on aircraft like the Trident (HSA) and the Caravelle (AS). Furthermore, by means of extensive studies and tests, bases were created to ensure reliability of the structure and to achieve an optimum design regarding weight and cost.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 83 , Issue 817 , January 1979 , pp. 1 - 15
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1979 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Winkler, . A300B Detaihersuche CV, ES 113/69, Ausgabe 12.73. Deutsche Airbus GmbH München.Google Scholar
2. Königsmann, H. Programm zur Berechnung von Versteifungsfaktoren bei versteiften Schalen, Unveröffentlichter MBB UH-Bericht.Google Scholar
3. Swift, T. and Wang, D. Damage tolerant design analysis methods and test verification of fuselage structure, AFFDL-TR-70, 1970.Google Scholar
4. Gökgöl, O. A300B-EF3/SM3—Vorschlag zur Verstärkung der Radialversteifungen, MBB UH-A300B Bericht Nr. 19//A002.74937/2.Google Scholar
5. Soreadhiningrat, B. Programm zur Berechnung des Rißwachstums und der Restfestigkeit, MBB UH, Bericht Nr. 00//-A007.74731.Google Scholar
6. Pusponegoro, H. and Hannak, R. Programm zur Berechnung des Rißfortschrittes in glatten und versteiften Feldern unter Berücksichtigung von Retardation, EDV-Programm (RISSFO-HABIBIE).Google Scholar
7. Gökgöl, O. Lebensdauervorhersage für Kampfflugzeuge-Rßlwachstum und Restfestigkeit, ZTL 1976, MBB UH Bericht Nr. UH-28-76.Google Scholar
8. Koshorst, . Airbus A300—full scale fatigue test, AI/TE 3-769/77, April 1978.Google Scholar
9. Willert, U. Ermüdungsversuch am Hautfeld mit Fenstern, A300B—Versuchsbericht Ev-050 (1.08.2), Deutsche Airbus GmbH München.Google Scholar
10. Schütz, D. and Gökgöl, O. Optimierung einer verschraubten Fiigung zwischen Flügelunterdecke und Anschlußbeschlag eines Militärflugzeuges, LBF Bericht Nr. TR-95, 1971.Google Scholar