How does MMPDS 03 differ from 01?

[RPstress]

See also thread thread2-188116. Like many people I'm wondering if I can make a case for buying MMPDS in it's latest version. It's hard when we don't know how it's been enhanced over the last free version.

Can anybody help?

 

[Fatstress]

Do you think it is wise to buy it now or better to wait a little bit longer in case there will be mmpds-04 coming soon...Well you know how it is, when things are not free anymore.....Well, I guess the best way then is to ask mmpds-03 publisher directly...

 

[rb1957]

from a yahoo search i think they've added some magnesium alloys (and probably some other stuff) ...

 

[prost]

What is the difference between 03 and 01? Anyone have both and has had a chance to go over them? 01 looked almost letter for letter like the MIL-HDBK-5H I had, I couldn't find a single difference, though I haven't spent that much time (couple of hours total) comparing them side by side.

What was the purpose of allowing a private corporation (Battelle in this case) the copyrights to the publicly funded MIL-HDBK-5? So that the private corp. puts a bunch of money into improving this document, sells it, then recoups its investment? Or to give a large private corp. a boondoggle?

 

[RPstress]

MMPDS 01 is identical in technical content to MIL-HDBK-5J, which is a little enhanced over MIL-HDBK-5H. For instance, J has Carpenter's Custom 465 PH stainless steel, 2000-series Al alloys 2026, 2297 Al-Lith and 2424 and 7000-series 7055. They also sneaked in a titanium or two and a couple of heat resisting alloys. J is dated Jan 2003, whereas H is Dec 1998. This means in five years they added maybe eight materials...don't know how much enhancement they made to existing materials' data.

MMPDS 01 was prepared throughout 2002 and released in 2003, almost the same time as MIL-HDBK-5J. 02 came out in about 2005, I think, and now 03 in 2007.

The history of MIL-HDBK-5 is interesting (to some of us!). I've got a version from 1962, and a copy of its predecessor ANC-5 from 1951. They make interesting reading. There's some historical data from Batelle, who seem to have been somewhat involved from the '50s.

http://projects.battelle.org/mmpds/history.pdf

There's also an Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories Technical Report, AFWAL-TR-84-4123 from 1984 about the history of MIL-HDBK-5. A copy seems to be at

http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA147788&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

There's a bit more stuff at

http://projects.battelle.org/mmpds/Aging Aircraft 2003 MMPDS Presentation.pdf

In the UK the original government sponsored stuff was issued as DEF STAN 00932, which was taken over by ESDU way back when (the '70s?). You can only reach it if you pay ESDU/IHS for access. Does anyone know of any other public archives with proper allowables (A and B basis, etc.) data?

 

[Sparweb]

The only difference I know:

MS20470AD4 rivet, 1/8" diameter, now allows 389 Pounds shear (it used to be 388).

Woohoo.



Steven Fahey, CET

 

[RPstress]

Thanks SparWeb. (I think!)

A whole extra pound...it might just fix that margin of -0.00257 I got last week.

 

[40818]

You may mock, but it all comes down to whether it is above zero or above 1, depending on you MS or RF. I bet theres plenty of people who could just "prove" that a group is good enough, thought with such small margins, i would be tempted to redesign rather then rely on such small margins.

 

[dgapilot]

RPstress or anyone else,
Anyone know where ANC-5 is on the web, or where I can get a copy? I like to collect historical documents relating to aircraft design and maintenance.

 

[RPstress]

You should find ANC-5 at:

http://stinet.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc?AD=ADA382434&Location=U2&doc=GetTRDoc.pdf

If not, try using

http://stinet.dtic.mil/

to search for it.

I've not really tried looking for earlier versions.

 

[dgapilot]

RPstress
Thanks for the link.