‘Arie magazines pblshos quar by ths Castomex Serica Ds tbe Eoang Conner Amare’ Greve” Ain roses Boog customer wi euppementtchncal nomaton fo promete continuous saety and etteseney in thelr daly feat operations. Information pubsishedin Ainerisconsidered accurale and auhectatve. However, namaterl shoud be considorec FAA-approved unless specticaly stated. Alfie polcies may rect fet personnel ‘tom doc! Use of published information. Customer aiines may republh, without urtne psrmision, articles from Arner. But these republished aces may be disrbuted only niin a gM ‘tganvzation, and the alfine must assume respor'sbiy for the current accuracy ofthe republished ‘material Alothers musi obtain wien permission rom Tho Boing Company Uelore repainting anor {icies is orsuresthatalimatenalconorms othe latest inormation an asourate hon published (Copyright © 1985 The Bosing CompanyAirliner/Jul-Sep 1995 ci x q r , : alier this year, «wo significant ‘events took place as part of the '77 static and fatigue airplane fest program. In January, the wi struct test successfully compl extensive year-long series of static with a pronounced “bang”. At the same time, flight cycling began on the fatigue test airplane, which will keep “flying” for nearly two years. The 777 static and fatigue test program consists of two entire airframes and a separate horizontal stabilizer, which are and operating loads ertification require- iments, verify structural analysis methods, and obtain early identification of poten= tial structural deficiencies. ‘The primary clements ofthese full-scale test programs + Aiplane configuration + Test hardwareLoad conditions and application methods. + Instrumentation used to collect test data, + Structural inspections during and af- {er test completion. ‘The 777 static and fatigue airplane tests are the culmination ofthe most intensive structural test program for any new plane model in Boeing history 777 Developmental and Cert Structural Test Program Overview Proof of structural integrity and safety is typically established by analysis and sup- ported by structural test results. Structural tests address all aspects of new airplane development. The entire structural test program applies a “building block” ap- proach. ‘These tests range from small “coupons” (see page 36 sidebar, “Glos- ary of Structural Terms”) used for new material characterization, to structural clements such as fuselage stringers, 10 subcomponents like the wing upper sur- face cover panel, to components includ- ing a 20-foot section of the 777 fuselage, to the full-scale aisplane static and tests ‘The purpose of the airplane static test program is to satisfy Federal Ay ‘Adiministration (FAA) and Joint Aviation Authorities (JAA) certification require- ‘ments: the manufacturer must demon- cation Tests Airliner/Jul-Sep 1995strate that the aigplane structure is capable of carrying the design limit load without ‘causing detrimental permanent deforma- tion of the structure. Furthermore, the strains and stresses measured at design limit foad levels during certification ests are compared with analytically deter mined values as part of the validation process of the analysis, In addition to these certification requirements, parts of the airplane static test program are of @ developmental nature, The primary ex- ample is the wing destruct tes, performed to determine wing growth potential Other developmental tests check airplane functionality and the structural response { applied discrete landing gear loads. Static Test Airplane Configuration. ‘The static test airplane was structurally complete. There were no payload or sys. {ems installations except forthe brackets that tie to the primary structure. The left ‘wing was complete with all control sur faces and high-Iif devices installed. The right wing consisted of only the wingbox Airliner/Jul-Sep 1995 and fixed leading edge. ‘The Pratt & ‘Whitney engine strut was attached tothe the General Electric strut was t wing. A simulated engine was attached to each strut. A welded steel structure simulated the horizontal stabi- lizer, which was tested separately from the rest of the airplane structure. ‘The passenger floor was complete, and the cargo floor roller trays were installed. All {airings were deleted except the Pratt & Whitney aft strut fairing. The static test airframe was the second 777 off the as- sembly line. After successful test completion, it was dismantled for use in ‘mock-ups, door trainers, and further test- Static Test Procedures, Static testing ‘was conducted in the final assembly building at the Boeing plant in Everett, Washington. The airplane was positioned fon a 40,000-square foot, 36-ineh-thick structural slab, surrounded by a system of towers and reaction fixtures (Figure 1). The airplane was tested asa free-float- 2D finsin ing body, witha series of counterbalance ballast weights compensating forthe dead ‘weight of the airplane and test hardware. Hydraulic actuators applied loads to the test airplane. The fest control system al- Towed up (0 96 of these actuators to be used for any particular test. Applied loads ‘were gradually increased from 0 percent to 100 pervent of test Ioad in 20 percent intervals, at which point the tests were in “hold” 10 allow for load corrections and reviews of strain gage data inthe test control room. ‘Typical rates of increase ‘were about five percent per minute. Fu- selage pressure was applied during tests simulating flight load conditions. Instrumentation, To monitor strains and stresses ofthe structure, more than 4,300 strain gages (Figure 2) were installed throughout the airplane. More than 500 miles of eables connected these. the data acquisition system where a proximately 1,500 channels of the d ‘were monitored in real-time by structures engineers to validate predictions and identify any unexpected highly loaded regions. Up 200 electronic deflection indicators provided deflection mea- surements and position control of the airplane. Numerous parts such as gear struts, flap support links, and strut links were cali brated to ensure proper load in. troduction to the structure, All test instrumentation output was stored electronically and can be retrieved by structures engineers as required for analysis and docu- ‘mentation, Load Application Methods. To distsib- tute actuator loads into the structure (Fig- Sure 3), engineers used a series of load and straps, bonded tension and compression pads, and simulated ait- plane components as follows: Figure 1, To state test the 777, the airplanevas positioned inside this complex system of towers and reaction fistures.Toads were distributed along the fu- selage through passenger and cargo floor fittings, body straps attached to ated cabling on the body skin| the outside ofthe fuselage, main land- ata passenger door cutout. | ing gear uplock fittings, and the More than 4,300 gages were | dummy horizontal stabilizer, installed throughout the sare 2, ‘This example of strain gage locations shows three axial gages and associ Vertical Stabilizer, Vertical stabi + Wing. Wing loads lizerloads were applied through nine were applied through fit- _formerselamped tothe front and rear tings attached to the front spars and through fittings on the aux: and rear spars at all spar iliary spar, ‘The rudder and tab were rib intersections and some loaded through tension pads bonded ‘adjacent spar/stiffener lo- (0 the skin surface. 12 Movable Surfaces. Tension + Fuselage. Fuselage or compression pads bonded to the various airplane locations: 3A. General Electric strut sand dummy engine. 3B. Trailing edge flaps. 3C. Vertical stabilizer and dummy horizontal stabi- zee. 3D. Fuselage interior, in- ‘cluding floor load system, 4 Airliner/Jul-Sep 1995skin surfaces ofthe inboard and out. board flaps, flaperon, aileron, spoil- cers 4 and 6, and slats 2, 5, and 7 applied loads to these surfaces, + Landing Gears. Vertical, fore and aft, side, and torsion loads were ap- plied through simulated inner land- ing gear cylinders inserted into production outer cylinders. + Nacelles. Vertical, forward and re- verse thrust, and side loads were ap- plied through simulated engines to the production struts, ‘Test Load Conditions. The 777 static test program consisted of more than 20 ‘major types of load applications to the airplane. Load conditions were chosen to demonstrate the critical design load- ing eapability forall structurally sign ceantitems. These were a combination of FAA/JAA-required tests and Boeing strain survey tests that included: + Simulations of posi ‘light maneuvers, ve and negati + Lateral loading due to gusts or e ‘gine-out conditions, + Fuselage pressurization, + Engine thrust loads, + Ground loads such as landing, taxi, and towing. + Airloads on the sats flaps, spoilers, and aileron. Applied test loads were calculated to pro- duce shears, moments, and torsions equivalent to design load values. After ceach limit lod test, critical areas were inspected to verify that no detrimental permanent structural deformation had occurred. LLink to Flight Testing. The major por- tion of static testing occurred at the same Airliner/Jul-Sep 1995 time as the 777 flight test program. Ini- tially, temporary operating limitations were placed on the flight test airplanes that limited the operating envelope to 80 percent of the design limit loads. These wore removed after certain static tests successfully proved the structure could withstand the design limit loads. These critical tests included positive and ne; tive maneuvers, lateral loads, proof pres- sure, and control surface, strut and stabilizer loads. The tests also satisfied “Type Inspection Authorization (TIA) re- quirements. Issuance of the TIA cleared the way for certifieation flight tests to begin. (For more on 777 Certification, see article that begins on page 6.) Wing Destruct Test. The final test was the wing destruct test, whieh took place ‘on January 14, 1995, This was a Boeing developmental test to explore the growth potential capabilities of the 777 wings by loading them beyond their design ulti ‘mate Joad requirement. Each wing was Toaded to 103 percent of ultimate load — approximately one-half million pounds (the equivalent weight of a fully loaded 777). At that point, both wings failed almost simultaneously. Data from load actuators and strain gages ‘was monitored continuously at 100 seans. per second, in order to pinpoint the exact loads and stresses at the moment of fail- ure, The failure mode was compre buckling, occurring at the analytically predicted location inthe upper wing pan- ls, at about 50 percent span length (Fig- ure), This was confirmed by high-speed video of both wings, as well as post-test inspections and metallurgical analysis of the fracture area, The largest measured ‘wing tip deflection was more than 24 feet (Figure 5). Boeing engineers are using the resulting test data to minimize struc- tural weight ineveases forthe 777 B-Mar- ket airplane and other future 777 derivatives Full-Scale Fatigue Airplane Test This test exposes a second structurally complete airframe to the typical operat- ing loads experienced by the 777 fleet A mixture of flight spectrum loads are applied (0 the airplane in a eyetie man ner until it experiences more than twiee the 777 design service objective. Flight ally began in January 1995; 000 flight cyeles have been ‘completed through early July 1995, This, Fatigue test is expected to end in late 1996, ‘The primary benefit ofthe fatigue tes is to lead the fleet in locating areas tht ‘might exhibit early fatigue problems. This fatigue testing also I] provides opportunities to develop and verify Figure 4, These pho- tosshow the777 wing after It failed during the destruct test Each wing was loaded to 103 percent ‘of ultimate load. Al- most simultaneously, both wings then failed in the upper wing panels, at about 30 percent span length. The failure mode was compres- sion buckling.Fatigue Test Procedures. Fatigue tes ing is conducted outdoors on a test slab located at the Boeing plant in Everett (Figure 6), The airplane is supported by its landing gears during testing, with ‘counterbalaneing only for some of tl heavy test bardware, One hundred hy. ddraulic actuators (Figure 7) sim neously apply loads to the airplane through a seties of load fittings, simu- lated airplane structure, formers, and bonded tension pads. Hydraulic power to the actuators is supplied by up to 13 hydraulic pumps; each is 250-horsepower and is capable of providing 100 gallons per minute at 300 psi of pressure. ‘The airplane is subjected to repeated spectrum loading that represents a mini tip detection was more than 24feet. Datafrom the rium of twice the 777 design service ob size structural weight inereasesfor future777 versions. jective. ‘The test spectrum consists of @ block of 5,000 flights, which are repeated continually during testing. Each flight 777 inspection, maintenance, and repair on te fatigue test siplane are the same represents. ground-ir-ground Fight Pro procedures — and to provide data for _as for the static test airplane file, including: analytical service objective predictions. Inaddition, full-scale testing verifies the absence of widespread damage due 10 metal fatigue. However, the test is not ‘an alternative 10 inspections required by the basie maintenance program (o ensure structural integrity over the life ofan air- plane in service. Separate testing is be jing performed on the nose and main landing gears and gear support structure to establish life Fimits for continued air ‘worthiness in aeeordance with FAAMAA, requirements, Figure 5, Thelargest measured wis destruct test will be used to Fatigue Test Airplane Configuration. ‘The fatigue test airplane is similar to the static test airplane in terms of structural ‘completeness. ‘The primary difference: the right wing includes the inboard and four outboard slats, the outboard flap, and the flaperon. The aileron and spoilers are not fatigue critical and, therefore, are not installed, ‘The inboard flap was tested separately, off the airplane. The left wing, is configured with simulated control sur faces to balance loadings for those on the right wing. Engine strut arrangements Figure 6, Here sa bird’ eye view ofthe fatigue test site, The es airplane is subjected toevetic loading, The test duration is more than twice the 777's design service objective, 6 Airliner/Jul-Sep 1995the static test. The major difference isthat wing loads are applied through 4 series of nine formers rather than Pena integral fittings. This is made pos- sible because of the lower fatigue loads applied, Each former distrib- utes applied vertical loads over Four pads, located at sparirib intersections. “The pads apply compression loading to push the wing up and down. Fu- Figure 7. One hundred hydraulic actuators, at locations allover the 777, simultaneously apply loads to the airplane. Thirteen hydraulic pumps (250 hp each) supply the power. + Ground handling. Taxi-out, Takeoff. Cabin pressurization Cruise. Depressurization. Descent, Butfeting Landing, Taxi-in, ach block of 5,000 flights is made up of five different flight types, which vary in severity and frequeney of application, This so-called “five-by-five” spectrum type loading was developed and suceess- Altliner/Jul-Sep 1995 fully utilized for the 757 and 767 major fatigue tests in the early 1980s, A typical flight cycle is applied on the average of every 4 minutes, 24 hours a day, To simulate cabin pressure at eruise altitude, the fuselage is pressurized to 8.6 psi during each flight in less than 15 sec- fonds. Two 1,500-horsepower compres- sors, operating at 6,500 cubic feet per minute, are used to pump air through 62 modified passenger windows (Figure 8) into the fuselage, which has a pressur ized volume of 46,000 cubic feet. Instrumentation. Approximately 1,000 strain gages were monitored and recorded initially. They are checked as required dluring testing. Changes in stress levels help identify potential airplane fatigue damage. ‘Test Load Application Methods. The methods of applying fatigue test loads to the aigplane are similar to those used on Figure 8. Compressors pump air through {6 modified passenger windows into the 777 fuselage. This simulates cabin pres- surization during each flight cycle. selage, fin, wing surfaces, and strut Toading are as described in the static test section. The landing gears are used 28 reaction points only. Inspection Schedules. Inspection r- ‘quirements for potential fatigue dam= ‘are based on the structural inspection plan (SIPD) developed for the 777 fleet with customer airlines tnd regulatory agencies. The test in- spection zones and methods agree with the SIPD. However, the inspection in- tervals and thresholds have been ex: tended to maximize test efficiency. A. biweekly inspection of ertical Fatigue ar cas, and areas where damage has already ‘occurred, isalso conducted. Full airplane inspeotions are planned at the completion of cach design service objective. When structural repairs are necessary, Boeing mechanics often use methods described inthe 777 Structural Repair Manual. This provides an opportunity to validate re- pairs that airline customers would use in similar situations, Horizontal Stabi izer Test ‘A complete static and fatigue test pro- gram was performed on one separate horizontal stabilizer component. Using ‘one combined test specimen reduced cost and overall test time. The composite ta- bilizer and elevators were supported at the left and right pivot fitings and jack- serew. This three-point support system allowed for a simplified and more effi cient separate stabilizer test program. After three static limit load tests (up- bending, down-bending, and asymmet- sie bending, the stabilizer was subjectedto fatigue testing in excess of twice the 777 design service objective, Fatigue testing concluded in February 1995, af- ter 120,000 equivalent flight eycles were applied during an eight-month period, ‘This test was primarily intended to verity ‘the fatigue characteristics ofthe metallic portion ofthe stabilizer structure. Fatigue ‘quality and analysis methods forthe sta- bilizer composite structural portions were already verified through an earlier com- pleted test program on a prototype stabi lizer test box. This earlier test program also included discrete damage and repair evaluations, After completion ofthe stabilizer fatigue test portion, the three limit load cases ‘were run tothe design ultimate load. The ‘program ended recently with atest to de- struction, Barely visible impact damage ‘was imparted onto the skin panels prior to the destruct testing, representative of that considered in the structural analysis. ‘The stabilizer destruct test provided an opportunity to determine tail section growth potential for 777 derivatives, to ‘obtain full-scale calibration of the meth- ods and allowables used for structural sizing, and to expand knowledge of com- posite material failures in primary struc: ture, ‘Summary ‘The full-scale static and fatigue structural tests expose two complete airframes t0 design and operating loads in order 10 meet certification requirements, validate structural analysis methods and, in the ‘axe ofthe fatigue test aigplane, to verify thatthe customer will not experience un- due repair costs as a result of structural fatigue damage. ‘Test results will also be used in the de- sign phase of 777 derivatives to maxi mize structural efficiency in developing aa preferred airplane family. These tests ‘complete the 777 comprehensive struc- tural test program. The last significant ‘remaining event is completion ofthe air- plane fatigue test, at the end of 1996. Major test completion schedules have supported the 777 flight test program, PAAand JAA certification dates, and first airplane delivery. These test programs have helped to provide a service-ready, structurally sound airplane for 777 air- line customers, rs Line cust eo Glossary of Structural Terms Airliner/Jul-Sep 1995 pee eee eee eee