Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
Filter
- Title
- Authors
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keywords
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- Issue
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Authors
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keywords
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- Issue
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Authors
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keywords
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- Issue
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Authors
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keywords
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- Issue
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Authors
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keywords
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- Issue
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Volume
- References
Filter
- Title
- Authors
- Author Affiliations
- Full Text
- Abstract
- Keywords
- DOI
- ISBN
- EISBN
- Issue
- ISSN
- EISSN
- Volume
- References
NARROW
Format
Topics
Book Series
Date
Availability
1-3 of 3
Aircraft wheel halves
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.aero.c0047125
EISBN: 978-1-62708-217-4
Abstract
A commercial aircraft wheel half, machined from an aluminum alloy 2014 forging that had been heat treated to the T6 temper, was removed from service because a crack was discovered in the area of the grease-dam radius during a routine inspection. Neither the total number of landings nor the roll mileage was reported, but about 300 days had elapsed between the date of manufacture and the date the wheel was removed from service. The analysis (visual inspection, macrographs, micrographs, electron microprobe) supported the conclusions that the wheel half failed by fatigue. The fatigue crack originated at a material imperfection and progressed in more than one plane because changes in the direction of wheel rotation altered the direction of the applied stresses. Recommendations included rewriting the inspection specifications to require sound forgings.
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.aero.c0047165
EISBN: 978-1-62708-217-4
Abstract
Two outboard main-wheel halves (aluminum alloy 2014-T6 forged) from a commercial aircraft were removed from service because of failure. One wheel half was in service for 54 days and had made 130 landings (about 1046 roll km, or 650 roll mi) when crack indications were discovered during eddy-current testing. The flange on the second wheel half failed after only 31 landings, when about 46 cm (18 in.) of the flange broke off as the aircraft was taxiing. Stains on the fracture surfaces were used to determine when cracking was initiated. The analysis (visual inspection, liquid penetrant inspection, and micrographs with deep etching in aqueous 20% sodium hydroxide) supported the conclusion that failure on both wheel halves was by fatigue caused by a forging defect resulting from abnormal transverse grain flow. The crack in the first wheel half occurred during service, and the surfaces became oxidized. Because the fracture surface of the second wheel half had chromic acid stains, it was obvious that the forging defect was open to the surface during anodizing. No recommendations were made except to notify the manufacturer.
Series: ASM Failure Analysis Case Histories
Publisher: ASM International
Published: 01 June 2019
DOI: 10.31399/asm.fach.aero.c0047169
EISBN: 978-1-62708-217-4
Abstract
The flange on an outboard main-wheel half (aluminum alloy 2014-T6 forging) on a commercial aircraft fractured during takeoff. The failure was discovered later during a routine enroute check. The flange section that broke away was recovered at the airfield from which the plane took off and was thus available for examination. Failure occurred after 37 landings (about 298 roll km, or 185 roll miles). Examination of the fracture surfaces revealed that a forging defect was present in the wall of the wheel half. The anodized coating showed distinct twin-parallel and end-grain patterns between which the fracture occurred. The periphery of the defect was the site of several small fatigue cracks that eventually progressed through the remaining wall. Rapid fatigue then progressed circumferentially. Metallographic examination using Keller's reagent showed that the microstructure was normal for aluminum alloy 2014-T6 and the hardness surpassed the minimum hardness required for aluminum alloy 2014-T6. An abrupt change in the direction of grain flow across the fracture plane indicated that the wall had buckled during forging. This evidence supported the conclusion that the wheel half failed in the flange by fatigue as the result of a rather large subsurface forging defect. No recommendations were made.