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

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

3. Fighter Jet Introduction
_______
F-117
_______
F-22
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 spares and maintenance

4. Case Model – Lockheed Martin F-35

6. F-35 Production Flow

7. FOD Overview
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/Expendables
Clamps, Drill Bits, Apex Tips
Trash
Plastic Wrap, Used Tape
Manufacturing Debris
Metal Shavings, Rivet Tails
Environmental
Rocks/Pebbles, Insects

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

9. Current FOD Prevention Technique

10. F35 Production with Manual FOD Inspection

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

12. Title Example Objectives
Class
Title
Example
Objectives
Primary
Production Line Personnel
FOD Inspectors
FOD Associations
FOD Inspection Training Personnel
1a. Mechanic/Engineer involved in inspecting/detecting FOD
1b. Mechanic/Engineer involved in FOD related rework and repair
2a. Personnel Scanning for FOD
2b. Personnel documenting instance's of FOD
3a. National Aerospace FOD Prevention Inc.
4a. Personnel responsible for FOD certification/training
1a. Limit FOD inputted
1a.Detect any FOD present
1b. Remove FOD present
1b. Repair Aircraft Component
2a. Detect FOD
2b. Document FOD occurrence
3a. Standardize terms & methods for the prevention of FOD to A/C
4a. Teach FOD prevention to employees
Secondary
Aircraft Production Corporation
Aircraft Customers
Aircraft Pilots
1a. Lockheed Martin
2a. 3 US Government Branches
2b. International F35 Customers
3a. Marine Pilot
1a. Eliminate FOD present during Customer Delivery
1a. Limit rework and repair time
1a.Produce A/C as efficiently/quick as possible
2a/2b. Pilot Safety
2a/2b. Advanced AC capabilities
2a/2b. AC delivery in timely manner
3a. Complete mission safely
3a. Test A/C capabilities
Tertiary
Aircraft Production Stockholders
Insurance Companies
US Government
Foreign Governments
1a. Employees of LMCO with stock & citizens with stock in LMCO
2a. FOD related personnel insurance companies
3a. Department of Defense (DOD) – those in charge of government spending/budgets
4a. Foreign Government contract/budget officials
1a. Maximize Profit
2a. Insure/protect those who may be threatened/affected by FOD
3a. Lowest price for most capable
A/C
4a. Most safety with the least amount of FOD

13. Stakeholder Wins & Tensions

14. Problem & Need

15. Gap Analysis
Non-Linear relationship between the time to detect FOD and the costs associated
Fighter Jet Production is growing, yet FOD Inspection techniques have remained Manual
FOD damage is estimated to cost the Aerospace Industry $4 billion a year
Complexity
Years

16. Enhanced Inspection System Requirements
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.

17. 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

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

19. F35 Production with Enhanced FOD
Inspection

20. External Systems Diagram

21. Functional Architecture

22. Current Problem & Need for a Solution

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

24. X-ray Alternatives X-ray System X-ray System Source
Penetration Power (in steel)
Power Requirement
Scanning Speed
Dimensions
Start Up Time
Radiation Dose
Linear Rail
Backscatter
6.3 mm
watts
0.185(m^2/s) x
20 min
Robotic Arm
Gantry
Transmission- Optional Backscatter
400 mm
9.6(m^2/s)
Length 36.5m
Width 3.0m
Height 5.0m
15 min
5 mR
Z-Portal
300 mm
480
Width 8.9m
Height 6.3m
MobileSarch
Backscatter and Transmission
Width 2.5m
Height 4.1m
30 min
2 mR
Z-Backscatter Van
7.2(m^2/s)
Length 7.96
Width2.6m
Height 2.9m
10 mSv

25. Alternatives Per Sub-Assembly

26. Differential Imaging
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.

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

28. Aircraft Sub-Assembly
Center Fuselage

29. 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

30. Design of Experiments X Ray Alternative Complete Aircraft Instantiated
Generate accurate representation of the F35 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
Total Time Per Aircraft
Rework & Repair Hours
Station Utilization
Total Cost
(Installation + Rework & Repair Costs)
X Ray Alternative
Forward Fuselage
Time Value
and
$ Value
Center Fuselage
Wing Structure
Aft
Fuselage
X Ray
Alternative
Complete Aircraft

31. Model Interaction

32. Scan Time per Sub-Assembly:
X-ray Inspection Time Model
Scan Time per Sub-Assembly:
Scan Speed of X-Ray Alternative (V)
Surface Area of Sub-Assembly (A)
Image Analysis Time (X)
𝑇= 𝐴 𝑉 + X
Device Start Up Time
Total Inspection Time
Per Alternative
Total
Time

33. Probability of Detection

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

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

36. 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

37. 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= and β= 0.221

38. Simulation Variables Variable Random Number Generator
Using Inverse CDF Method
Distribution Graph
Station Process Times
Triangular Distribution (4,6,8)
FOD Arrival Rate
Exponential Distribution (0.183)
FOD Rework Time
Weibull Distribution (0.262, 0.221)

39. 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)

40. Simulation Flow Diagram

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

42. 2. Physical Model Decision Analysis

43. 3. Simulation Output Decision Analysis

44. 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

45. Work Breakdown Structure (WBS)

46. Project Timeline & Critical Path

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

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

52. 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

53. Questions?

54. 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 “Foreign Object Debris and Damage Prevention” [Online] Available:
6. Callerame, , "X-Ray Back scatter Imaging: Photography Through Barriers". Retrieved September, 2014 Available:
7.”CTOL SWBS Manufacturing Sequence Flow” [Online] Availablhttp://information2share.wordpress.com/2011/05/25/ctol-swbs-manufacturing-sequence-flow/
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:
10. Fessle, C J, , "Physics of Projection Radiography ". RetrievedSeptember , 2014 Available: Radiography". RetrievedSeptember , 2014 Available:
11. FOREIGN OBJECT DAMAGE PREVENTION. [Online]. Available:
12. FOD PREVENTION GUIDELINE [Online]. Available: nafpiguideline.pdf

55. Bibliography
Butler, Amy. "F-35 Deal Targets Unit Cost Below $100 Million." Aviation Week. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov
F35.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct
"BAE Systems completes 150th aircraft for F35 fighter programme".
King, Samuel Jr. "First F-35 arrives at Eglin." U.S. Air Force, 15 July Retrieved: 20 July 2011.
Pae, Peter. "Stealth fighters fly off the radar". Los Angeles Times, 23 April Retrieved 27 April 2008.
"Iraq Accepts First Lockheed Martin F-16 Aircraft · Lockheed Martin". Retrieved 13 September 2014.
Davies and Dildy 2007, p. 249
"McDonnell 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 Retrieved: 31 August 2013.

56. Fighter Jet Slide References
Butler, Amy. "F-35 Deal Targets Unit Cost Below $100 Million." Aviation Week. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Nov
F35.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 11 Oct
"BAE Systems completes 150th aircraft for F35 fighter programme".
King, Samuel Jr. "First F-35 arrives at Eglin." U.S. Air Force, 15 July Retrieved: 20 July 2011.
Pae, Peter. "Stealth fighters fly off the radar". Los Angeles Times, 23 April Retrieved 27 April 2008.
"Iraq Accepts First Lockheed Martin F-16 Aircraft · Lockheed Martin". Retrieved 13 September 2014.
Davies and Dildy 2007, p. 249
"McDonnell 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 Retrieved: 31 August 2013.

57. BACK UPS

58. Inspection Probability Of Detection
Model

60. WBS 1.1

61. WBS 1.2

62. WBS 1.3

63. WBS 1.4

64. WBS 1.5

65. WBS 1.6

66. 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 lM 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

67. 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 The Plan shall be approved by LM 90 days prior to installation.
Radiation Exposure Limits
X-Ray Exams of Pregnant or Potentially Pregnant Women
Personnel Monitoring
Exposure Records
Pregnant Authorized Users
Posting Notices
Inspections
XR Radiation workers shall not receive a dose in 1 calendar quarter over the following limits:
Deep Dose Equivalent millirem (mrem)
Lens Dose Equivalent 3,750 mrem
Shallow Dose Equivalent (skin) 12,500 mrem
Shallow Dose Equivalent (extremities) 12,500 mrem
Approach & System Alternatives