曝光台 注意防骗
网曝天猫店富美金盛家居专营店坑蒙拐骗欺诈消费者
d) supporting test evidence and relevant service experience.
4.3.4.4.2 In addition to the information specified in 4.3.4.4.1 above, the following should be included for each critical part or component:
a) the basis employed for evaluating the damage tolerance or safe-life characteristics of the part or component;
b) the site or sites within the part or component where damage could affect the structural integrity of the aeroplane;
c) the recommended inspection methods for the area and the detectable size of damage;
d) for structure designed and assessed using damage tolerance principles, the maximum damage size at which the required residual strength capability can be demonstrated and the critical design loading case for the latter;
e) for structure designed and assessed using damage tolerance structures, at each damage site the inspection threshold and the damage growth interval between detectable and critical, including any likely interaction effects from other damage sites; and
f) information related to any variations found necessary to safe-lives already declared for parts and components.
Note.— Where re-evaluation of fail-safety or damage tolerance of certain parts or components indicates that these qualities cannot be achieved or can only be demonstrated using an inspection procedure whose practicability may be in doubt, then replacement or modification action may need to be defined (refer to Section 4.3.6.3 of this Part).
4.3.5 Inspection programme
4.3.5.1 The purpose of a continuing airworthiness assessment is to supplement the current inspection programme to ensure continued safety of the aeroplane type.
4.3.5.2 In accordance with 4.3.4.1 and 4.3.4.2 of this Part, an allowable final size of damage should be determined for each site so that the structure has a residual strength for the load conditions, except where probabilistic methods can be used with acceptable confidence. The size of damage that it is practical to detect by the proposed method of inspection should be determined together with the number of flights required for the crack to grow from detectable to the allowable final size of damage defined above.
4.3.5.3 The recommended inspection programme should be determined from the data described in
4.3.5.2 above, giving due consideration to the following:
a) fleet experience, including all of the scheduled maintenance checks;
b) confidence in the proposed inspection technique; and
c) the joint probability of reaching a particular load level and size of damage in those instances where the probabilistic methods can be used with acceptable confidence.
4.3.5.4 Inspection thresholds for supplemental inspections should be established. These inspections would be supplemental to the normal inspections, including the detailed internal inspections.
4.3.5.5 For structures with reported cracking, corrosion or wear, the threshold and recurrent inspection interval (i.e., initial inspection and periodicity for repeat inspections) should be determined by analysis of the service data and available test data for each individual case as appropriate.
4.3.5.6 For structures with no reported cracking or wear it may be acceptable, if sufficient fleet experience is available, to determine the inspection threshold on the basis of analysis of existing fleet data alone. The inspection threshold and intervals for modern structures are determined as part of a complex and extensive analysis and test verification programme. These should not be varied without the agreement of the type design organization and the CAA of the State of Design.
Note.— Some States do not accept the determination of the inspection threshold on the basis of analysis of existing fleet data alone, but also require reference to fatigue analyses supported by test evidence.
4.3.5.7 For corrosion inspection and control, the threshold will need to be established on the basis of world-wide fleet experience and expressed in calendar time.
中国航空网 www.aero.cn
航空翻译 www.aviation.cn
本文链接地址：
适航手册 AIRWORTHINESS MANUAL(71)
