Substitution for obsolescence of material specification in military

aircrafts.
D.S.Srinath, DGM (QA), Foundry & Forge Division, HAL, Bangalore

Introduction
Designers choose materials that offer the most attractive combination of service performance
and reliability, ease in processing and manufacturing, cost, and availability. However, these
factors constantly change as material specification become obsolete with better properties
developed and better information about existing materials becomes available. Substitution,
the process of revising the match between materials and applications, is the material users’
technical response to this shifting environment. In some cases, substitution involves finding
or developing the best material for the application and in many others involves designing or
redesigning the application to make the best use of available materials.

Substitutions can be very costly and therefore are undertaken only when there is a high
degree of certainty that the benefits will be substantial. To be adopted, a substitute material or
design must demonstrate both technical and economic feasibility and must overcome a
variety of institutional hurdles. More important, it must gain the acceptance of the designers,
regulatory authorities and the end users who will ultimately use it.

Substitution as an Emergency Response to a Supply Problem

To a certain extent, already developed, on the-shelf substitute materials and technologies can
be relied upon in an emergency to conserve materials that are in short supply. Substitutes for
strategic materials in many applications are often available, though not necessarily readily
recognizable as such. The existence of technically and economically viable substitutes is not
the only requirement for a timely response to a supply emergency. For many critical
applications, a new material must be tested and its use in a particular component must be
qualified and certified.

Substitution as a Continuing Strategy for Reducing Import Vulnerability

Besides being an emergency response, substitution can also play a key role in long-term
strategies to reduce dependency on imported materials. Although many technically promising
substitutes are under development, the extent to which they will be adopted in aircraft is
difficult to foresee, In the absence of an immediate availability problem, industry’s adoption
of new materials, designs, and manufacturing technologies is usually not motivated by
concerns about strategic materials availability. A successful long-term strategy for reducing
vulnerability to imported materials through substitution depends not only on the technical
feasibility of alternative materials but on acceptance of them as practical alternatives by the
aircraft industry. Acceptance comes only when the technical benefits have been clearly
demonstrated and a high degree of designer and end-user confidence has been established.

Technical Factors
Technological barriers to strategic materials substitution can be time-consuming and
formidable, especially for applications in which little or no compromise in performance is
acceptable, Even when a promising substitute is developed in the laboratory, new and
significant technical problems may be encountered when large-scale tests are undertaken to
verify laboratory findings, Often, a return to basic research is required to overcome these
scale up problems.
Economic Factors
The cost effectiveness of using the current material is not greatly affected by price increases
in strategic raw materials. In fact, the prices of raw materials can be such a small part of the
cost picture that they are relatively unimportant in a substitution decision. For example, raw
materials account for only about 1 percent of the cost of a jet engine or transmission systems.
Therefore, all else being equal, a change in the cost of raw materials often has to be dramatic
to warrant the expense of shifting to a substitute material.

Institutional Factors
Even after the technical feasibility of the substitute has been demonstrated airworthiness
regulatory authorities may not accept the substitution. Standard-setting and professional
organizations play key institutional roles in the development process by testing new materials
and developing standards for their use.

Designer and End-User Acceptance

Acceptance by designers and end users can be the highest hurdle in the adoption of a
substitute. Substitutes are adopted only when component designers and end users have
acquired a high degree of confidence in the technical capabilities and economic potential of
the new technologies. These materials users will not use any substitute technology with
which they are uncomfortable; they are reluctant to make changes, especially if the new
designs or replacement materials are relatively untried. Substitution in critical applications
often requires a degree of confidence or comfort with the new material or design that can
only come from a proven track record. Consequently, promising substitutes are often
introduced first into noncritical applications where confidence can be gained without fear of
catastrophic failures.

Qualification and Certification of Alloy Substitutes

Currently, many promising alloy substitutes are under development that has potential to
reduce strategic materials requirements. Many of these substitute materials will not be tested
and developed to the point where they can be considered on-the-shelf technologies that will
be immediately available in a supply disruption. A major reason for this is that industry is not
likely to commit resources to qualify and certify new materials that it does not have
immediate plans to use. Qualification and certification is needed in many critical applications
those in which substitution could be most important to reduced import vulnerability. In
addition, owing to their critical applications, the certification process for strategic materials
substitutes is more demanding of time and data.

Experience of Foundry & Forge Division, HAL in material substitution

HAL has been supporting the Indian Armed forces in repair and overhaul of legacy
platforms. Divisions of HAL has been assigned with the task of manufacturing parts
complying to the OEM drawing requirement and military engine programs generally very
specific to OEM are the live examples. The material specification for these Engines is
originally MSRR and virtually there is no quote for the specifications from mills located in
Europe or USA. The regulatory authorities are not confident to accept the material
specification away from the original and this could cause delays in the overhaul of the
platforms leading to fleet maintenance issues.

As defined in the DDPMAS 2002 the main contractor shall apply for production permit to
replace the material specification based on the experience with other origin platforms. The
property requirement of the original specification is complied with by using a suitable
material and the right heat treatment process. There are no changes in the quality acceptance
of the part or the right drawing requirement. In most cases, we have selected substitute
specification complying with industry standards rather than company standards and
successfully implemented the same.

Conclusion:
The substitution of material specification is logical and rational based on the past experience
with both Western and Russian platforms. The production permit approval by the regulatory
is also valid as the mechanical properties and metallurgical properties are evaluated for
compliance to the original material specification. The only limitation in this process is the
production permit for a pre-defined batch and the performance feedback is obtained from the
user or customer. The form, fit and surface protection is not given concession and component
is complied with the part drawing/assembly drawing requirement.

Recommendation:
The life of the platforms with Indian Armed Forces is much beyond the expectation of the
original equipment manufacturer and there is a need to substitute with newer improved
materials. As we do not have control on the substitution, our request to accept the material
change necessitates a long drawn approval process. Therefore it is recommended in the long
term interest of life cycle support that the original equipment manufacturer defines alternate
material specifications on the drawing based on the availability from both Western and
Russian Sources. This will support the Indian Armed Forces in maintaining the fleet
operations and prevent AOG situation.

##########################################################################