 
Hold
the mouse
over any of the thumbnails for
the caption!

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

10
|

Examination of a fractured drive from a Bendix
Magneto.
-
- 1. Introduction
- 1.1
- A request was received for an examination to be carried
out on the subject drive and its magneto after the magneto
had malfunctioned in service.
- 1.2
- It is understood that the magneto was operating in Lycoming
Engine Type 10-540-E1B5, which was fitted in the starboard
position on a Rockwell 500S aircraft. It is also understood
that the malfunction was identified by a mag-drop prior to
an acceptance flight after the aircraft and engines had been
subject to routine checks.
- 1.3
- The magneto to which the subject drive was fitted was to
Part.10-349300; the second 3 having been altered to an 8 at
some time.
- 1.4
- The examination requested was to identify the mechanism
which had resulted in drive separation.
- 2. Examination Results
- 2.1
- The magneto submitted for examination is shown in Plate
01.
- 2.2
- The fractured parts of the drive were subjected to visual
and macro examination and magnetic tests. It was found that
the component had been machined from a wrought (rolled?) ferromagnetic
steel bar and had been carburised and case hardened during
manufacture. Detailed macro examination of the fracture surfaces
on the drive showed that all had resulted from overload conditions
except those arrowed on Plates 05 and 06. These fracture surfaces
were typical of those which result from a low stress, high
endurance tension fatigue mechanism and are shown in part
on Plates 07, 08 and 09.
- 2.3
- The only damage to the drive dogs was as shown on Plates
02 and 03.
- 3. Conclusions
- 3.1
- It is considered that fracture of the subject drive resulted
from the initiation and progression of tension fatigue cracks
in the regions shown on Plates 05 and 06, complete separation
occurring when the remaining material was incapable of supporting
in service loads.
- 4. Comment
- 4.1
- Since the preparation of the above report it has been learned
that:
a) the bearing was found to be worn on stripping the engine.
b) a foreign object could have been introduced into the magneto
at the time it was last overhauled which became trapped between
the armature and stator, momentarily restricting armature
rotation.
The worn bearing could have been responsible for the fatigue
damage present and the foreign object for the drive separation
occurring immediately after magneto overhaul.
|
|