Search Results

The aerospace industry uses flexible complex contoured structure in aircraft. To take advantage of advancements in engineering design, assembly methods, and inspection tools, the dimensional requirements for this kind of structure can be specified using Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing (GD&T) per ASME Y14.5M-1994, “Dimensioning and Tolerancing.” The 1994 revision of this standard includes some new features which can be used to specify the dimensional requirements for flexible complex contoured structure, but there are no examples on how GD&T can or should be applied. This paper gives some examples how GD&T can be applied on flexible complex contoured structure and how this usage specifies the dimensional requirements for such parts.

In today's competitive aircraft industry environment, new design, manufacturing, and assembly methods must be developed to lower costs and provide a more consistent product. One of the methods being implemented is Dimensional Management. Dimensional Management allows the evaluation of an entire manufacturing process and distribution of tolerances within that manufacturing process. Boeing has been working with Northrop-Grumman and several other suppliers to create a digital definition of the existing 747 fuselage design. This is part of an effort to implement a new manufacturing method known as Determinant Assembly. Dimensional Management plays a key role in implementing Determinant Assembly as well as incorporating into the engineering definition acceptance criteria that is better defined.

Making TRANAIR an easier to use wing design tool is an important step toward reducing wing design cycle time. This paper shows the accuracy of TRANAIR in analysis mode for complex configurations with attached flow. This accuracy allows the design part to correctly predict improvements due to design changes. We show the current steps required for the MultiPoint (MP) design version of TRANAIR and the state of refinements toward increasing ease-of-use of this system. Finally, we discuss some of the proposed ways to further improve how the user interacts with the TRANAIR system for MP design.

The Accurate Fuselage Panel Assembly Cell (AFPAC) is a semi-automated process that was developed for accurately assembling fuselage panels on the Boeing 757 model line. This method of assembly (prior to automatic fastening) uses a new generation, accurate CNC machine tool in conjunction with reconfigurable part fixturing techniques and specialized end-of-arm tools (end effectors). These end effectors drill coordination holes in detail parts and the skin, and trim the periphery of the skin. Machine control data (MCD) for positioning the machine tool and other subsystems are developed directly from the engineering digital definition (CATIA datasets). Reconfigurable part holding and feeding mechanisms are used to allow for product changes and reduce the overall cost of the workcell. This paper describes the AFPAC assembly system and how it compares with the traditional concept of fuselage panel assembly.

A study was conducted in a B-737 full flight simulator at the Boeing Customer Training facility to evaluate pilot decision making and performance under various situations in which decisions on whether or not to reject a take off had to be made and executed. A total of eight (8) situations were defined in which Go/NoGo decisions had to be made near V1 speed. Subjects included 24 Boeing instructor pilots and 24 line pilots from five different airlines. The sequence in which pilots encountered the situations was carefully balanced across subjects to control for learning effects. The results of the study are reported as quantitative data on RTO decisions, stopping performance, and procedure accomplishment plus a summary of data derived from post-run debriefings of the airline pilots. Lessons learned, conclusions, and recommendations for RTO training are presented.

The 777 flight deck will introduce two new functions, the electronic checklist function (ECL) and the flight deck communication function (FDCF), on interactive displays. Two cursor control devices (CCD) provide each pilot control of these new functions. The appearance and operation of the displays were standardized by specifying a common user interface (CUI). Ease of training and operation dictated an integrated design approach wherein the design and operational requirements for FDCF and ECL were developed together with the CCD and CUI.

The Automated Spar Assembly Tool (ASAT II) at the Everett, Washington, 777 Boeing manufacturing facility could be the largest automated fastening cell in the commercial aircraft industry. Based on the success of the ASAT I, Boeing's 767 spar assembly tool, the 285-foot long ASAT II cell was needed to accurately position and fasten the major spar components (chords and web), then locate and fasten over 100 components (ribposts and stiffeners) to assemble the 777 forward and rear wing spars. From its inception in 1990 to the first drilled hole in January 1993 and through two years of spar production, the more advanced ASAT II has proven to be a greater success than even its 767 ASAT I predecessor. This massive automated fastening system consistently provides accurate hole preparation, inspection, and installation of three fastener types ranging from 3/16 inches to 7/16 inches in diameter.

Boeing is currently fundamentally rethinking and radically simplifying the processes related to airplane configuration definition and production. The presentation will describe reasons for embarking on this effort and a description of the fundamental production control processes Boeing will deploy. Process Engineering will be described using Boeing's program as an example.

With the increasing shift toward automation with respect to fastener installation, the need has evolved for clearer definition of the process capability of new fastener installation automation systems. In light of Engineering design requirements, and to address the process capability issue, Boeing has developed and implemented D6- 56617, a machine certification process for automated fastening of fuselage structure. This philosophy was a new approach in the following ways: 1. Previously, engineering oversight of automated fastening systems was limited to wing structure applications. 2. The process requires that process capabilities and performance of the automated machinery itself be established by test. 3. The process requires that detailed Process Control Documents be developed and followed. 4. The process links the statistical test data to the day to-day operating parameters of the machine.

This paper addresses the steps and processes to create a full life circle of Tool Routines utilizing 3D data analysis as the driver. The paper covers the development of 3D Tool Routines for automation, the execution of the routines and the analysis of the collected historical 3D data. The process goal is to reduce the tool routine frequency by establishing and proving tool stability utilizing historical data. The historical data will also give us information in regards to design and tolerance capabilities. Graphical software programs are evolving in a way that enables us to link the different operations and software programs that encompass tool routines. Through the use of software and hardware such as laser tracker, we can achieve automation of tool routines and analysis. Customers in the aerospace, automotive and construction industries are among the beneficiaries in the application of this inspection process.