721004011 1 Presentation for: 10 th Israeli Symposium on Jet Engines and gas turbines Jet engines’ test cells – Considerations in selecting level of automation

7210040111

Presentation for: 10Presentation for: 10thth Israeli Symposium on Israeli Symposium on Jet Engines and gas turbines Jet Engines and gas turbines

Jet engines’ test cells –Jet engines’ test cells –Considerations in selecting Considerations in selecting

level of automationlevel of automation

Presented by: Ze’ev Ben-PorathPresented by: Ze’ev Ben-Porath

November 2011November 2011

7210040112

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsIntroductionIntroduction

The companyThe company: : Magnus Engineering inc.Magnus Engineering inc.

SSpecializes in the construction and maintenance pecializes in the construction and maintenance of computerized test cells since 1991.of computerized test cells since 1991.

- Please visit - Please visit www.magnus-eng.comwww.magnus-eng.com

The productThe product: : MCTC - Magnus Computerized Test MCTC - Magnus Computerized Test CellCell

* * Integrating all aspects of test cell Integrating all aspects of test cell operation.operation. * Installed in more than 35 test cells worldwide.* Installed in more than 35 test cells worldwide.* Currently implemented for over 60 engine * Currently implemented for over 60 engine types.types.* 95% “generic”.* 95% “generic”.* External test cell definition - User updateable* External test cell definition - User updateable..

* *Supports all levels of automationSupports all levels of automation..

7210040113

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsIntroduction (2)Introduction (2)

The test cell: The test cell: F100-PW-229 Post-Production at F100-PW-229 Post-Production at WZL4WZL4

* * Built by P&W for Polish AF.Built by P&W for Polish AF.

* International bid won by ATEC+Magnus.* International bid won by ATEC+Magnus.

* ATEC – main contractor.* ATEC – main contractor. Construction, Adapter, Fuel System (+heating), Construction, Adapter, Fuel System (+heating), etcetc..

* *Magnus – subcontractor.Magnus – subcontractor. Data acquisition, System control, Computer Data acquisition, System control, Computer systemsystem..

~ *~ *44--hour test process as defined by TIShour test process as defined by TIS..

* *95%95% automatic runautomatic run..

7210040114

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsAutomation Levels Definition (1)Automation Levels Definition (1)

Level 1: Level 1: No AutomationNo Automation

* * No central computer system.No central computer system.

* Independent displays of subsystems’ data.* Independent displays of subsystems’ data.

* Manual recording (and processing) of data* Manual recording (and processing) of data..

* *Very common for jet engine test cells in 1980-Very common for jet engine test cells in 1980-90’s90’s..

7210040115


Level 2: Level 2: Centralized Data AcquisitionCentralized Data Acquisition

* * Central computer system, aCentral computer system, acquiring data cquiring data directly directly or digitally from all other subsystems. or digitally from all other subsystems.

Benefits:Benefits:

* Automated data processing (e.g.: filtering, average, * Automated data processing (e.g.: filtering, average, maximum, minimum, tare-value computation). maximum, minimum, tare-value computation).

* Computation of derived parameters and states.* Computation of derived parameters and states. (e.g. corrected performance data, steady state) (e.g. corrected performance data, steady state)..

* *Alarms for simple and complex limits.Alarms for simple and complex limits.

* Data recording and playback/analysis capabilities* Data recording and playback/analysis capabilities..

7210040116


Level 3: Level 3: Test procedure TrackingTest procedure Tracking

* * Central computer system tracks the testing Central computer system tracks the testing process, instructs operator and performs process, instructs operator and performs the the required engine data validation required engine data validation..

Benefits:Benefits:

* Ensures adherence to specified test procedure.* Ensures adherence to specified test procedure.

* Eliminates possible human errors in evaluating results* Eliminates possible human errors in evaluating results..

* *Automated computation of process-related data.Automated computation of process-related data. (e.g. maximum vibration points, transient timing etc.). (e.g. maximum vibration points, transient timing etc.).

* Significant savings in time and fuel* Significant savings in time and fuel..

7210040117

Vibration sweep demo:

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsAutomation Levels Definition (3.1)Automation Levels Definition (3.1)

Level 3 example: Level 3 example: Vibration sweep for F110-GE-Vibration sweep for F110-GE-100100

Task Definition:Task Definition:(3) Advance throttle slowly, taking 2 minutes to reach intermediate, (3) Advance throttle slowly, taking 2 minutes to reach intermediate, and stabilize engine for 30 seconds.and stabilize engine for 30 seconds.(4) Retard throttle slowly, taking 2 minutes to decelerate to idle.(4) Retard throttle slowly, taking 2 minutes to decelerate to idle.

(5) Record peak vibration and rpm at which peak occurred…(5) Record peak vibration and rpm at which peak occurred…

In the following demo, 4 Vibration values are tracked, In the following demo, 4 Vibration values are tracked, and peak rpm values recorded separately for idle-and peak rpm values recorded separately for idle->MIL, MIL dwell and MIL->idle sections. >MIL, MIL dwell and MIL->idle sections. (display rate is 10 times faster than actual rate)(display rate is 10 times faster than actual rate)..

Actual times :

Idle->MIL: 2min, 21sec MIL dwell: 48sec

MIL->idle: 1min, 48sec Total: ~5 minutes

7210040118


Level 4: Level 4: Automated Test ExecutionAutomated Test Execution

* * Central computer system executes all (or Central computer system executes all (or most) most) of the test procedure by sending of the test procedure by sending appropriate appropriate commands to the engine and/or to external commands to the engine and/or to external subsystems (PLC, Throttle, Dynamometer subsystems (PLC, Throttle, Dynamometer etc.). etc.).

Benefits:Benefits:

* Exact execution of complex test procedures. * Exact execution of complex test procedures.

* Improved safety due to fast response to dangerous * Improved safety due to fast response to dangerous situationssituations..

* *Accurate repeatability of tests (facilitate Accurate repeatability of tests (facilitate research/development).research/development).

* Savings in time and fuel* Savings in time and fuel..

7210040119

Safety Event demo:

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsAutomation Levels Definition (4.1)Automation Levels Definition (4.1)

Level 4 example: Level 4 example: Safety event in a Volvo (bus) Safety event in a Volvo (bus) engineengine

Event Description:Event Description:

(1) Water pump breaks down.(1) Water pump breaks down.

(2) Vapors rising into cooling water tank cause increased pressure.(2) Vapors rising into cooling water tank cause increased pressure.

(3) System detects abnormal cooling water level (measured as (3) System detects abnormal cooling water level (measured as pressure). pressure).

(5) Audio and Visual Alarms activated.(5) Audio and Visual Alarms activated.

(4) Smooth return to Idle/Manual mode is automatically executed(4) Smooth return to Idle/Manual mode is automatically executed..

72100401110

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsAutomation Level Driving factors (5.1)Automation Level Driving factors (5.1)

Driving Factor A: Driving Factor A: Test Accuracy RequirementsTest Accuracy Requirements

* Requirements for very accurate execution of complex test sequences may necessitate level 4 automation.

* Jet engine testing requirements (as we * Jet engine testing requirements (as we encountered)encountered) are sometimes border line cases: are sometimes border line cases:

- Measuring transient of ~2 seconds (TIS).- Measuring transient of ~2 seconds (TIS).

- Break-In procedures (e.g. a sequence of - Break-In procedures (e.g. a sequence of 2,5,2,5… 2,5,2,5… seconds transients to intermediate PLA seconds transients to intermediate PLA positions).positions).

- Vibration sweeps requiring smooth (constant - Vibration sweeps requiring smooth (constant rate) rate)

movement of PLA movement of PLA . .

72100401111

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsAutomation Level Driving factors (5.1.1)Automation Level Driving factors (5.1.1)

Example: Example: Manual vs. Automatic Vibration sweepManual vs. Automatic Vibration sweep

The Task: (F100-PW-229, Core Run-In)“Perform slow acceleration (20-30 seconds) [from 56º] to MIL”

Manual Vibration Sweep - 56->MIL - run 1405 - 11:35:14-11:35:59

50

55

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

110192837465564738291100109118127136145154163172181190

PLAX

Relatively good coverage of the range, but in ~45 seconds.

72100401112


Example: Example: Manual vs. Automatic Vibration sweepManual vs. Automatic Vibration sweep

The Task: (F100-PW-229, Core Run-In)“Perform slow acceleration (20-30 seconds) [from 77º] to 91º”

Same operator, 45 minutes later (tired and impatient?):Up to MIL in 2 jumps. ~20 seconds to 91º.

Manual Vibration Sweep - 77->91 - run 1405 - 12:17:13-12:17:35

70

75

80

85

90

95

15913172125293337414549535761656973778185899397

PLAX

72100401113


Example: Example: Manual vs. Automatic Vibration sweepManual vs. Automatic Vibration sweep The Task: (F100-PW-229, Core Run-In)“Perform slow acceleration (20-30 seconds) [from 77º] to Min Augmentation”

Spikes due to problems in the Electric Throttle.

Automatic Vibration Sweep [TIS]-77->MinAug-run 37-12:50:28-12:50:47

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

1471013161922252831343740434649525558616467707376

PLAX

72100401114


Driving Factor B: Driving Factor B: Test ComplexityTest Complexity Complexity: Number of steps, rate of changes, number of different output commands, requirements to synchronize external subsystems (e.g. move throttle while changing load generated by a dynamometer – T700 testing).

* Very Simple tests: Level 2 sufficient (e.g. run engine 30 minutes, measure oil consumption).

* Intermediate complexity: Level 3 or 4 (depending on other factors). Most Jet engines.

* High complexity: Level 4 recommended (if not too hard to implement!). e.g. 8000->3500->7400 ->3500rpm, ~500 changes, 80 hours break-in run for UAV engine. Optimized using dynamic PLA-RPM mapping function.

72100401115


Driving Factor C: Driving Factor C: Work LoadWork Load

The work load determines the economic viability of full automation (level 4).

* low work load: Level 2 or 3.

* medium work load (typical for Jet engines): border line case for investing in level 4 automation. Exact calculation required.

* High work load: indication for level 4 automation. (Unless the complexity is very, very low!).

Sample case: Egged bus-engines test cell .

72100401116


Driving Factor D: Driving Factor D: ”Cost of Error””Cost of Error”

A very high cost of error in the test procedure

(combined with medium or high test complexity)

may dictate full automation,

even in cases of low work load.

72100401117

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsEstimating expected time savings (1)Estimating expected time savings (1)

A method to estimate expected savings in test time by A method to estimate expected savings in test time by upgrading an existing test cell to a higher automation upgrading an existing test cell to a higher automation level.level.

1. Identify a significant section of the test procedure where all steps are “well-defined” duration-wise.

Well defined: - Stabilize 5 seconds at 91º. - Perform slow (20 to 30 seconds) to MIL.

Undefined: remain at IDLE until main oil temperature reaches 100°F.

2. locate a set of executed tests (for said section) which were executed successfully, continuously and accurately (avoid cases where test steps were shorter than the minimum time specified by the test instructions).

72100401118


3 .Compute:

Tmin = theoretical minimum time to complete the test section.Aavg = Average actual time to complete the test section.Amin = Minimum actual time to complete the section.

4. Upper limit of saved run time: Aavg - Tmin

5. Minimum expected saved run time : Aavg – Amin.

6. If you have access to a test cell that runs the same tests at the target automation level – extract from that test cell data:

Eavg = average execution time at target automation level.

7. Actual expected saved run time : Aavg – Eavg.

72100401119


Sample Calculation:- Section C and D of the F100-PW-229 acceptance test (C1 to D11).- Data from 12 runs from 2 different test cells.- Test cells at automation level 3, considering upgrade to level 4.

Tmin = 23 minutes, 5 seconds (1,385 seconds).Amin = 24 minutes, 44 seconds (1,484 seconds).Aavg = 25 minutes, 51 seconds (1,551 seconds).Amax = 27 minutes, 48 seconds (1,668 seconds. 33m case discarded) lower limit on saved time: Aavg–Amin = 67 seconds ~4.3%(of Aavg)upper limit on saved time: Aavg–Tmin = 166 seconds ~ 10.7%

Note: block of 15 minutes at IDLE observed at beginning of all runs. Means the expected fuel saving will be much more than 11%.

72100401120


Another Sample Calculation:

-Steps 36-99 of the F100-PW-229 Core Run-IN. Data from 5 runs from 1 test cell.-

- Test cell at automation level 3, considering upgrade to level 4.

Tmin = 1,901 seconds.Amin = 2,051 seconds.Aavg = 2,077 seconds.Amax = 2,124 seconds.

lower limit on saved time: Aavg–Amin = 26 seconds ~1.3%(of Aavg)

-upper limit on saved time: Aavg–Tmin = 176 seconds ~ 8.5%

72100401121

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsEstimating expected fuel savings (1)Estimating expected fuel savings (1)

The expected fuel saving (%) is larger than the expected time savingssince the periods at high power settings are much shorter than the periods at IDLE. Given an existing level 3 test cell, it is possible to estimate the fuel savings by an upgrade to level 4, by precise analysis of recorded test runs:

1. Section 1 and 2 as before.2. Compute the theoretical time to stay at each PLA position (range).3. Extract scan data for the selected test sections including PLA setting and fuel Flow (MCTC-4 scans/sec).4. Compute actual time and average fuel flow at each PLA position.5. Compute total time and total fuel flow at each PLA position and compare to theoretical time.

72100401122


Sample calculation for:- Steps 36-83 of the F100-PW-229 Core Run-IN. - From a manual run at a level 3 test cell.

72100401123


Sample calculation for:- Steps 36-83 of the F100-PW-229 Core Run-IN. - From an Automatic run at the WZL4 test cell.

72100401124

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsActual / Expected resultsActual / Expected results

Based on our actual experience and the above discussions:

- Upgrade from level 2 to level 3 has resulted in 30-50% save in run time and fuel consumption (IAF, SAF).

Main sources of improved efficiency: *Automatic evaluation of complex engine checks.

* The “computer-game” effect on the operators.

- Upgrade from level 3 to level 4 will result in 5-10% save in run time and fuel consumption

Main source of improved efficiency: *Prompt and precise execution of test tasks.

72100401125

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsEconomic feasibility analysis of level 3->4 Economic feasibility analysis of level 3->4

upgradeupgradeConsider a possible upgrade of an existing test cell, currently running an F100 engine, using the MCTC at level 3 , to level 4.

Estimated (roughly) cost of upgrade: Electronic throttle – 120K$. Software upgrade – 40K$. Mechanical + PLC upgrade – 40K$.

Total Cost – 200K.$Assuming:

-savings of 10% in fuel consumption.- 9,000 liters per average engine run.- 24 runs per year.- 1$ per 1 liter fuel (??).

Investment will cover itself in: 10 years.

72100401126

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsConclusionsConclusions

*Level 2 automation is a MUST for any non-trivial test cell This is simply “good engineering practice” and facilitates quality assurance application for the testing process.

* Level 3 automation is highly recommended for any test cell with non-trivial testing procedure and a more than minimal work load.

This will result in significant time and fuel savings, as well as significant improvement in the reliability and accuracy of the testing.

* Level 4 should only be considered if the work load is very high or if other factors (test complexity, required accuracy, “cost of error”) cannot be satisfied by a manually operated test cell.

72100401127

Considering automation levelsConsidering automation levelsFinal tipFinal tip

To really optimize the testing procedure:

- Check with the engine vendor to find out how the required testing is done at their facility!

You may find that their actual procedure is different (and more

efficient) than the formal procedure.

Case at hand: T56 test cell for TUAF.

Thank you for your attention.

Any Questions?

Documents

721004011 1 Presentation for: 10 th Israeli Symposium on Jet Engines and gas turbines Jet engines’ test cells – Considerations in selecting level of automation