故障简介
近期有三架737NG飞机因刹车钢索张力低导致储压器下降快,排故走了不少弯路。刹车钢索张力低,还会呈现不同的故障现象,比如打泵无压力,轮舱有异响和飞机滑跑有轻微偏转等。排故时更换多个部件未果,最后调节钢索排除了故障。
原理简介
刹车钢索是刹车脚蹬和刹车计量活门之间的柔性连接部件,刹车脚蹬通过刹车钢索将刹车指令传到刹计量活门,计量活门控制人工刹车压力(的大小)。
脚蹬不动时,计量活门堵住液路,刹车无液压。
人工刹车时,通过控制脚蹬的行程(力量)大小,给计量活门指令,刹车计量活门根据指令给刹车提供对应的压力。刹车压力调节过程,有部分压力被释放回油箱。
故障分析
刹车钢索张力低的影响。
刹车钢索张力下降有两种情况。第一,两侧刹车钢索张力小,脚蹬通过钢索给计量活门传输的指令不准确。尤其是在停留刹车状态下,计量活门收到的指令比实际给的指令小。此时计量活门调节压力比实际需要的偏小,有一部分液压释放回系统油箱。如果使用储压器停留刹车,储压器油液回油,压力将会快速下降直到储压器压力与计量活门收到的指令压力相等。这种情况类似于我们踩刹车释压。第二,两侧刹车钢索张力不一致,脚蹬无指令状态下,计量活门可能错误的收到刹车指令,储压器同样有部分液压油被释放回到系统油箱,导致储压器压力下降。第二种情况概率很小,因为刹车脚蹬是靠计量活门的弹力回位的,一般只有计量活门反过来影响脚蹬的初始位置。
虽然钢索张力低不都会导致储压器压力下降快,但存在潜在故障源,一旦达到一定条件将变成显性故障。手册对刹车储压器维护标准和放行标准比较严格,如果出现储压器下降快故障,很可能导致航班延误或飞机停场。具体标准如下:
另外,如果左右两边刹车钢索不一致还有可能出现人工踩刹车时,两边刹车压力不一致,导致飞机滑行时出现左偏或者右偏的现象,这对飞机高速滑行或者落地滑跑时人工踩刹车极为不利。我们也遇到过有架飞机因为右边刹车钢索张力比左边高,而且两侧钢索张力不对称导致飞机高速滑行刹车时飞机右偏的故障。
排故注意事项。
我们在排除刹车储压器压力下降快故障时,也遇到了些问题,走了不少弯路。针对储压器下降快故障,隔离手册有相应的排故步骤。从原理上分析,导致储压器快速下降的原因有三个,一是储压器漏气,预充的气压不足;二是刹车系统部件和管路漏油,一般内漏可能性比较大。三是钢索校装问题导致计量活门释压(非部件内漏)。储压器漏气排除方法比较简单,涉及部件也少。而针对液压内漏涉及的部件比较多,判断内漏也没有很好的方法,需要专用设备。值得注意的是,我们遇到一起故障,检查刹车内漏时,发现在设置停留刹车状态下,计量活门回油管有油液回油,怀疑是计量活门内漏。更换计量活门之后计量活门依然有回油,当时还认为新件有问题。隔离手册并没有要求先检查钢索校装系统,所以没有第一时间发现钢索张力低的问题,最后调节钢索故障排除了。
改进措施
关于刹车钢索张力,目前的维修方案有功能检查 - 停留刹车系统,检查间隔每4000 CYC,工卡结合C检(1C间隔)完成,适用所有飞机。
2012年初,由于厂家缺件,无法提供原材料的钢索,波音公司选择了具有更高水平的镀锌的材料的钢索,使用这种材料容易在钢索使用几个月后出现钢索张力下降的情况。波音发出SL 737-SL-32-192,建议客户对于新交付飞机,在运行3个月后完成一次钢索的检查和调节。波音在SL描述也说到钢索下降确实会导致刹车储压器压力保持不住,下降快的情况。工程部根据SL编写EO,检查刹车控制钢索张力,对于新交付飞机,在运行3个月后执行相关EO,无需重复执行,受影响飞机均就完成EO.
波音对使用镀锌的材料钢索的飞机进行调查,并不能排除其他原因导致的钢索张力下降的问题。受EO影响的飞机虽然均已完成EO,但部分飞机还是出现刹车钢索张力低的问题,储压器压力下降快的飞机均受EO影响,即完成了EO也还出出现钢索张力低的问题。我们普查整个机队的刹车钢索张力,发现没受SL影响的飞机也出现刹车钢索张力低的现象。
针对刹车钢索张力低问题,波音也收到其他客户的报告。但是波音并不打算修改维修方案。波音认为目前已按4000FC检查储压器压力下降情况。而且刹车储压器日常运行是需要检查的,如发现储压器压力低故障需要检查钢索张力。考虑到客户担心航班延误或者取消,波音建议按2000FC检查刹车钢索或者根据客户机队经验来自己定。
维护建议
当遇到类似刹车储压器下降快的故障时,建议先检查刹车钢索张力,再检查刹车计量活门内漏情况,避免误换件。
根据经验定期检查刹车钢索张力。
SR原文
China Southern experienced the parking brake accumulator to bleed down faster than normal in Dec 2018 for the three datum airplanes. China Southern checked the brake control cable tension which is much lower AMM limit.
China Southern did the fleet survey on airplanes based on one branch and found the brake control cable tension is lower than AMM limit, some of these airplanes are listed in SL REF/A/ while some airplanes are NOT, please review the survey result REF/B/ attached.
For these airplanes listed in SL REF/A/, China Southern followed Boeing recommendation and re-checked the brake control cable tension in 2013-2014.
RESPONSE AND/OR REQUIRED ACTION:
1, Does Boeing receive similar report from other operators?
2, Does Boeing recommend operator to re-inspect the brake control cable tension?
3, If yes, please advise the interval and revise SL accordingly.
RESPONSE:
Boeing has reviewed the Ref/C/ message provided by China Southern. We offer the following:
1, We have received similar reports of low parking brake cable tension from other operators.
2, Please be advised that there is no scheduled maintenance task for the brake systems cable tension adjustment. MPD Item Number 32-340-00 for the parking brake bleed rate is the closest thing to a scheduled maintenance task for brake cable tension. This functional check is performed every 4000FC. However, in-between these MPD checks, flight crews have a qualitative check of the parking brake bleed down rate every flight. If the flight crew squawks the parking brake, checking the cable tension is one of the FIM troubleshooting steps. However, Boeing realizes that China Southern is concerned about spanventing these events which could result in a flight delay or cancellation. To spanclude these events from occurring, China Southern may want to perform AMM Task 32-41-00-820-801 Hydraulic Brake System Adjustment between MPD checks. Boeing's recommendation is to perform this adjustment task every 2000FC or as appropriate based on China Southern's fleet experience.
3, We apspanciate China Southern for providing the Ref /B/ survey results. The Ref /A/ service letter discusses the non-conformance of the brake cable material (from early 2012 to late 2013) used in the brake control system on the airplanes line numbers 3978 through 4710, and 4712. According Ref /A/, for 1/8 inch cables, such as that used in the brake system, the conforming cable was installed on line number 4711, 4713, 4714 and all airplanes after line 4714. The first airplane to be equipped with the conforming cable delivered in December, 2013. The airplanes listed in the survey results were delivered outside of that non-conformance timeframe. Therefore, we do not believe a revision to the SL is necessary.
For the Ref /B/ airplanes not covered under the SL, we recommend that China Southern verify the brake system is correctly rigged by adjusting the cable tensions and ensuring that the rig pins fit per AMM 32-41-00/501.