FOD…..a serial killer?

At first glance, the posters and propaganda that filled the exhibit hall at NAFPI (National Aerospace FOD prevention Conference) seem abrasive and even facetious. The posters show pictures of the Grim Reaper and skeletons, declaring FOD as a serial killer. However, after spending some time with the prevention community, the message was clear and convincing; FOD is a killer. One misplaced object in a jet engine not only causes catastrophic damage to the plane itself, but could threaten the very life of the plane’s operator.  I soon realized the propaganda was justified by the critical nature of these prevention programs.

For those of you not familiar with FOD, it stands for Foreign Object Damage. It is caused by any substance or article alien to a vehicle or system that has potential to cause damage. It is estimated that FOD costs the aerospace industry $1.1-2 billion per year in direct costs, and as much as ten times that amount in indirect costs from delays, aircraft changes, incurred fuel costs, unscheduled maintenance, and the like for a total of $12 billion per year¹. While many different types of debris exist, from garbage to wildlife, the largest contributor to damage is tools, as evident from the show’s co-host, Snap-on. Tool maintenance and control is center stage in all the prevention programs.  Therefore, there is a lot of emphasis put on creating tool maintenance solutions that are not only cost effective, but comprehensive. Various solutions exist: pen and paper systems, motion detection, and visual scans. People are using them and they work great for their check in/check out processes. However, they all have not addressed one critical limitation which is how to find the tools once they are lost. One project manager told me it still takes them 2-3 days to find a lost tool in the work area.

RFID was the talk of this year’s show, however unfamiliar it was to many of the attendees. The general consensus was that they have heard of RFID, and they are in the process of incorporating the technology as a viable prevention option. Much time at the show was spent on educating the attendees on the benefits of RFID, how it all worked and eliminating the false preconceptions of the technology:

1. RFID does not work in and around a metal environment – With Xerafy's technology is does.
2. Tags are not small or durable enough -  Our Pico^x tag is currently being used to tag tools without interfering with  functionality of use,  as evident in Cribmasters Accu Drawer demo.  
   
3. The technology is too expensive – a couple people mentioned to me that they could not afford $20 passive tags. They all became Xerafy customers.
4. The technology will get better, the tags smaller, I think we will wait and see – I am still holding out on upgrading my iPhone to the 4. Why, because as soon as I get it, the 4super will come out. That is why I am here waiting for my texts to load.

A UHF tag size is limited to the size of the silicon. Unless there is a groundbreaking breakthrough in silicon design, the tags can only get so much smaller without sacrificing your read distance.

[1] "The Economic Cost of FOD". Insight SRI Ltd. http://insightsri.com/publications. Retrieved 2008-10-28.  (via Wiki)