787/A350 - did they test the wings to destruction ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Greater Aldergrove
Age: 52
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
787/A350 - did they test the wings to destruction ?
Of course, I meant 'destruction'!
We've all seen the video of the 777 wing being tested to it's limit...but did Boeing ever break the 787 wing? Or Airbus the A350 wing?
Just curious as to what the final limits were in either case...
(Title fixed for you - JT)
We've all seen the video of the 777 wing being tested to it's limit...but did Boeing ever break the 787 wing? Or Airbus the A350 wing?
Just curious as to what the final limits were in either case...
(Title fixed for you - JT)
Last edited by NWSRG; 31st Oct 2016 at 21:02. Reason: Construction / destruction!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Greater Aldergrove
Age: 52
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DIBO, I had never seen that before. I knew they tested a scaled down test piece at some stage, but had never seen it...thanks! But, NOT a full scale test...
As for 'construction'...well, the fingers just did their own things despite what the brain was thinking!
As for 'construction'...well, the fingers just did their own things despite what the brain was thinking!
Last edited by NWSRG; 31st Oct 2016 at 22:28.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Uhhh- that video was of the wing box and about 1/2 of a full scale 787 wing. AFIK a full scale wing test to destruction was not done- but was loaded to a few percent above ultimate load. test to destruction is NOT required. However you can find full scale load tests to destruction of the boeing 747 and 777 on the boeing site. 767 was not loaded to destruction because of a aft frame partial failure which twisted the vertical stabiliser section about 15 degrees. FWIW the 777 wing test to destruction actually broke- failed within a few inches of predictedf location by buckling near an inboard rib.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Greater Aldergrove
Age: 52
Posts: 851
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Conso...the video speaks of a "full scale, half span" test. So not the full test (as per 777). This was what I remembered...thanks for clarifying!
So, not on the 787, but what about the A350?
So, not on the 787, but what about the A350?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check the airbus site- if they did- I'm sure it would be available along with data
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A350, full scale aircraft test, not just a wing..
even with pressurising the tube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B74_w3Ar9nI
Typically, Boeing tests the wings and components separately, while Airbus tests entire assemblies. This also is the case with the the aerodynamic design, which is why the wingbox between the two looks so different.
even with pressurising the tube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B74_w3Ar9nI
Typically, Boeing tests the wings and components separately, while Airbus tests entire assemblies. This also is the case with the the aerodynamic design, which is why the wingbox between the two looks so different.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" Typically, Boeing tests the wings and components separately, while Airbus tests entire assemblies.'
Partly right- mostly wrong. While BA does test some items separately, they always test two complete structures.
One airframe is used for a static test of a complete but non flyable structure to ultimate- wings, body- usually but not always to destruction when the wings are bent up to failure. . The other is a fatigue test - wings, body pressurized, etc to simulate a typiical takeoff and cruise and landing cycle. Go to the Boeing site for some facts and data.
for example
Static test complete
Boeing Moves 787 Dreamliner Fatigue Test Airframe to Testing Rig - Feb 02, 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai2HmvAXcU0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFSh04Zl4Yw
"
LiveLeak com Boeing 787 Dreamliner Wing Loading Test-- its the 777 !
note the video labeled 787 is actually the 777 wing test in 1995 - I wuz there !!
Partly right- mostly wrong. While BA does test some items separately, they always test two complete structures.
One airframe is used for a static test of a complete but non flyable structure to ultimate- wings, body- usually but not always to destruction when the wings are bent up to failure. . The other is a fatigue test - wings, body pressurized, etc to simulate a typiical takeoff and cruise and landing cycle. Go to the Boeing site for some facts and data.
for example
Static test complete
Boeing Moves 787 Dreamliner Fatigue Test Airframe to Testing Rig - Feb 02, 2010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ai2HmvAXcU0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFSh04Zl4Yw
"
LiveLeak com Boeing 787 Dreamliner Wing Loading Test-- its the 777 !
note the video labeled 787 is actually the 777 wing test in 1995 - I wuz there !!
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The purpose of structural load testing is to validate the analysis results for the structure at a given load case. In some cases, a smaller analysis factor of safety (FOS) is permitted if the analysis is validated by structural testing.
Testing a structure to failure, beyond its design limits, is not typically required. But it sure is exciting to watch.
Testing a structure to failure, beyond its design limits, is not typically required. But it sure is exciting to watch.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a pretty good summary- photo of 787 structural test to 150 percent go here-
no video but great photo of wings bent to ' max '
https://www.wired.com/2010/03/boeing...ing-flex-test/
and
here
http://www.seattletimes.com/business...ing-bend-test/
no video but great photo of wings bent to ' max '
https://www.wired.com/2010/03/boeing...ing-flex-test/
and
here
http://www.seattletimes.com/business...ing-bend-test/
Testing a structure to failure, beyond its design limits, is not typically required. But it sure is exciting to watch.
We immediately accused the structures guys of building the wing too heavy
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went on the Boeing visitor tour in 1983 IIRC, rode the elevator up to the 747 assy observation platform, etc. - Still an amazing sight!
But outside the building was the 767 test article in the fatigue test rig. Over and over, the wing was flexed to the cert limit, then relaxed back to unload it. It didn't break while we were there, and I'm sure they interrupted the test every couple hundred cycles for routine inspection.
But outside the building was the 767 test article in the fatigue test rig. Over and over, the wing was flexed to the cert limit, then relaxed back to unload it. It didn't break while we were there, and I'm sure they interrupted the test every couple hundred cycles for routine inspection.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the update-confirmation of my earlier post # 4 which I said
From memory- a frame near the aft door had either been omitted or improperly fastened and failed. I was working on 767 at the time in tooling. Later after it had been hauled out to the ' boneyard ' I had to go out and check what special tool ( hilock cutter ) might be needed to unfasten the last two fasteners on the aft portion of the upper plus chord ( wing to body join ) to allow trimming about 2 inches off the upper horizontal / vertical portion due to a possible fatigue issue noted in early analyis of the ongoing fatigue testing. Other than the partially buckled aft section, the rest of the plane appeared to be in good condition with few if any obvious deformations.
. . . 767 was not loaded to destruction because of a aft frame partial failure which twisted the vertical stabiliser section about 15 degrees.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The fatigue test article is cycled to duplicate near max loadings of takeoff- cruise- landing- pressurization /depressurization cycles as in commerical service. Not expected to fail wings or any other parts but to find and if needed to correct structural issues resulting from many service cycles . And yes- includes routine inspection cycles.
It is NOT the same test structure used in static test
" But outside the building was the 767 test article in the fatigue test rig. Over and over, the wing was flexed to the cert limit, then relaxed back to unload it. It didn't break while we were there, and I'm sure they interrupted the test every couple hundred cycles for routine inspection."
It is NOT the same test structure used in static test
" But outside the building was the 767 test article in the fatigue test rig. Over and over, the wing was flexed to the cert limit, then relaxed back to unload it. It didn't break while we were there, and I'm sure they interrupted the test every couple hundred cycles for routine inspection."
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: PA
Age: 59
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" Typically, Boeing tests the wings and components separately, while Airbus tests entire assemblies.'
Partly right- mostly wrong. While BA does test some items separately, they always test two complete structures.
Partly right- mostly wrong. While BA does test some items separately, they always test two complete structures.
I did say typically. I was actually referring to the design and research. It is well known that Boeing designs the wings and models them individually, as they do not consider the fuselage/wingbox in any lift capacity, while Airbus does, hence the much different wingbox design.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: WA STATE
Age: 78
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
" BTW, the image you provided was for the drop test, not a fatigue test as noted by the thread subject."
??????? That POST both a static test and a fatigue test airframes - what do you mean by ' drop test' ?
Once again- Boeing uses two ' non flyable' - early production ( line number less than 4 or 5 ) for full up static and full up fatigue tests. The static test bird has full wings ( no feathers ) and fuselage stressed- loaded to 150 percent for certification- and depending to a few percent above until failure
On the fatigue test bird ( non flyable ) the complete body and wing unit are flexed and pressurized simulating typical flight profiles for tens of thousands of cycles.
As to design philosophy- you may be correct- but what does that have to do with subject of thread. ???
Please provide link to image you calim was a ' drop test '
The first image Of the first lInk was labeled as loading the fatigue test bird- one can clearly see the multiplehoses used for rapid pressurization and depressurization.
" "Unlike static tests, where loads are applied to the airplane structure to simulate both normal operation and extreme flight conditions, fatigue testing is a much longer process that simulates up to three times the number of flight cycles an airplane is likely to experience during a lifetime of service," said Scott Fancher, 787 vice president and general manager, Commercial Airplanes. "This testing is instrumental in confirming the longevity of the airplane."
Thank you
??????? That POST both a static test and a fatigue test airframes - what do you mean by ' drop test' ?
Once again- Boeing uses two ' non flyable' - early production ( line number less than 4 or 5 ) for full up static and full up fatigue tests. The static test bird has full wings ( no feathers ) and fuselage stressed- loaded to 150 percent for certification- and depending to a few percent above until failure
On the fatigue test bird ( non flyable ) the complete body and wing unit are flexed and pressurized simulating typical flight profiles for tens of thousands of cycles.
As to design philosophy- you may be correct- but what does that have to do with subject of thread. ???
Please provide link to image you calim was a ' drop test '
The first image Of the first lInk was labeled as loading the fatigue test bird- one can clearly see the multiplehoses used for rapid pressurization and depressurization.
" "Unlike static tests, where loads are applied to the airplane structure to simulate both normal operation and extreme flight conditions, fatigue testing is a much longer process that simulates up to three times the number of flight cycles an airplane is likely to experience during a lifetime of service," said Scott Fancher, 787 vice president and general manager, Commercial Airplanes. "This testing is instrumental in confirming the longevity of the airplane."
Thank you
Last edited by CONSO; 3rd Nov 2016 at 01:49. Reason: correcting image lables
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tdracer
Sinilarly attributed to Gerhard Neumann of GE. "If the test article works correctly the first time, it's too heavy!"
We immediately accused the structures guys of building the wing too heavy
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The primary structures of a commercial aircraft are analyzed for something like 50 or more load cases. But the structural/fatigue tests are only performed to validate 2 or 3 of those analysis cases.
The 787 wing box had some issues during its initial structural qual testing.
DailyTech - Boeing Dreamliner Wing Box Problems May Delay Program Further
The 787 wing box had some issues during its initial structural qual testing.
DailyTech - Boeing Dreamliner Wing Box Problems May Delay Program Further
