Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is 747-8 Digitally Designed?  
User currently offlineCleanskies From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 6 posts, RR: 0
Posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 19 hours ago) and read 4948 times:

Hi,

we all heard and read about digital tools used to design aircraft such as A380, Boeing taking it one step further on the 787, for which production is actually also digitally simulated and conceived (remember 787 "Virtual Roll-out", Dec 2006).

Such tools allow engineers from different sites to work on the same aircraft digital platform, providing tremendous time savings in case of a design change, and allowing the aircraft design itself to be highly optimized.

What about 747-8? Did Boeing re-create a whole 747-400 digital model before derivating the 747-8 digital entity? If not, to what extent can 747-8 systems design be optimized?

Thanks

52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBoeingBus From United States of America, joined May 2004, 1597 posts, RR: 17
Reply 1, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 4848 times:

Absolutely it is.... its probably not to the extent of the 787 but there is nothing like it either.

Boeing could not manage the outsourcing working to China, Russia, and India if the design work was not in a electronic form. Even most vendorssuppliers that produce the hardware would not accept anything by CAD.



Airbus or Boeing - it's all good to me!
User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31259 posts, RR: 85
Reply 2, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 4719 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Yes, the 747-8 program used extensive digital modeling. It's standard practice in the industry, now.

User currently offlineIkramerica From United States of America, joined May 2005, 21562 posts, RR: 59
Reply 3, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 4704 times:

I'm sure the 744 was digitally modeled long ago just so that when it came time to update/NG the product, it wouldn't be a monumental task.

What's interesting is despite all the digital modeling, computer testing, etc., once they put the model in the windtunnel they found it to have 200nm more range than they projected...  Smile



Of all the things to worry about... the Wookie has no pants.
User currently offlineBR715-A1-30 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4490 times:

Wasn't CATIA designed by Boeing? I thought I read somewhere that it was, but it may have been that they were the first to use it to design an airplane.. (A La 777)

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31259 posts, RR: 85
Reply 5, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4466 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting BR715-A1-30 (Reply 4):
Wasn't CATIA designed by Boeing?

It was created by Dassault Systèmes.


User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 7028 posts, RR: 46
Reply 6, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4448 times:



Quoting BR715-A1-30 (Reply 4):
Wasn't CATIA designed by Boeing? I thought I read somewhere that it was, but it may have been that they were the first to use it to design an airplane.. (A La 777)

The first CAD program was originally developed by Lockheed in the late 60's and early 70's; I believe that this program eventually became CADAM. That was owned by IBM during its heyday in the late 70's and early 80's, and then was spun off. I believe that CATIA is an offshoot of CADAM, but I could be wrong. Yes, Boeing did use it to develop the 777, but they did not develop the program to the best of my knowledge. They did own it at one time, perhaps around the time of the 777, but it is now owned by Dassault.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineDk1967 From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 49 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 4366 times:

Catia was developed in-house by Dassault who at the time were using CADAM (made by Lockheed). They sold the distribution rights to IBM in the early 80's, but held ownership of the software itself. Boeing standardized on it in the mid 80's, but never owned it.

User currently offlinePianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4314 times:

The -400 was made on v4 (catia) if i'm not mistaken, and we use a program called "FlyThru" to digitally mock-up the aircraft and view all parts of it. The 87 and 47-8 are completely v5 (all 47-8 parts are new, though some are "copies" of -400 parts) and we use a Boeing proprietary program to view mock-ups of the aircraft. CATIA itself is used to view and design small batches of parts, but the internal Boeing program can display the entire aircraft at one time and is really pretty damn amazing...

User currently offlineSEPilot From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 7028 posts, RR: 46
Reply 9, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 4236 times:



Quoting Dk1967 (Reply 7):
Catia was developed in-house by Dassault who at the time were using CADAM (made by Lockheed). They sold the distribution rights to IBM in the early 80's, but held ownership of the software itself. Boeing standardized on it in the mid 80's, but never owned it.

Thanks for the more precise information. I knew the tie-ins existed, but was hazy on the details. But I do know that Cadam was owned by IBM in the early 80's, as I was using it.



The problem with making things foolproof is that fools are so doggone ingenious...Dan Keebler
User currently offlineCleanskies From Switzerland, joined Jan 2008, 6 posts, RR: 0
Reply 10, posted (6 years 9 months 5 days 1 hour ago) and read 3997 times:



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
The -400 was made on v4 (catia) if i'm not mistaken, and we use a program called "FlyThru" to digitally mock-up the aircraft and view all parts of it. The 87 and 47-8 are completely v5 (all 47-8 parts are new, though some are "copies" of -400 parts) and we use a Boeing proprietary program to view mock-ups of the aircraft. CATIA itself is used to view and design small batches of parts, but the internal Boeing program can display the entire aircraft at one time and is really pretty damn amazing...

I heard of FlyThru and I could see images from it, of a 767-400 I think.

But I thought that 777 was actually the first aircraft to be entirely digitally designed. Hence I never saw a single 3D image of 747-400 (nor 747-8). I would be pretty impressed if Boeing had used a complete 3D model to design 747-400 in the late 80's...


User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10183 posts, RR: 97
Reply 11, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 3877 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):

You should post more IMO  Smile
Anything of your's I've read so far, I've found to be most informative..  thumbsup 

Liked what I saw of Catia V5 when it was peddled to us, but as an organisation we're welded to CADDS5 at the moment.

Regards


User currently offlineManfredj From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 1132 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3242 times:



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
The -400 was made on v4 (catia) if i'm not mistaken, and we use a program called "FlyThru" to digitally mock-up the aircraft and view all parts of it.

So, I'm kinda confused. If the original 747-100 was not desinged by computer (which I would think it's not) and the overall shape of the airplane is un-changed from the 400, in reality isn't the whole aircraft hand designed?

Also, maybe you could answer this question Piano...why does the 747 enjoy a higher cruise speed than most other commercial aircraft?



757: The last of the best
User currently offlineEA772LR From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2836 posts, RR: 10
Reply 13, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3132 times:



Quoting Manfredj (Reply 12):
Also, maybe you could answer this question Piano...why does the 747 enjoy a higher cruise speed than most other commercial aircraft?

Perhaps a very simple answer could be from the relatively high angle of degree that the wings are swept back. Look at a schematics picture or drawing of the 747, then look at many other airlines wings. This also holds true with the 727 and the A380. The 380 is now the fastest plane currently in commercial service (excluding bizjets).



We often judge others by their actions, but ourselves by our intentions.
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9701 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 3029 times:

This thread is highlighting some of the difficulties of working with a product designed in a different era of engineering technology. It can be quite difficult working with old parts that are outdated by current standards.

Quoting Ikramerica (Reply 3):
I'm sure the 744 was digitally modeled long ago just so that when it came time to update/NG the product, it wouldn't be a monumental task.

The switch from the older V4 version of CATIA to V5 is quite a monumental change. Boeing still uses V4 on some models. The 737 for example is a mix of V4 and V5 with most stuff being V4 that I am aware of.

Quoting Manfredj (Reply 12):
So, I'm kinda confused. If the original 747-100 was not desinged by computer (which I would think it's not) and the overall shape of the airplane is un-changed from the 400, in reality isn't the whole aircraft hand designed?

It gets a bit confusing, but most of the drawings are digitized. I don't know the 747 that well, but believe it is mostly V4 Catia. Even though the basic design hasn't changed, there are always updates to the drawings being made for various reasons. Airplane designs aren't stagnant. There are many changes at the detail through module level made between models.

However there are parts on the 747 that are hand drawn. Certain components haven't been changed since the 1960s and thus still probably don't have any CAD drawings at the detail level. Many of these would be outsourced parts where the system is modeled in CAD, but the detailed drawings for the specifications assigned by Boeing are hand drawn and the supplier's drawings may be hand drawn.

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
The -400 was made on v4 (catia) if i'm not mistaken, and we use a program called "FlyThru" to digitally mock-up the aircraft and view all parts of it.

FlyThru is a very useful tool which essentially does let you look at the entire airplane, although no one ever would. It helps you start at the smallest component and add parts around it so an engineer can find what he/she needs to. If you try to look at too much though, the program is so slow that it is pretty worthless.

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
The 87 and 47-8 are completely v5 (all 47-8 parts are new, though some are "copies" of -400 parts)

I had not heard that. I am surprised to hear that they changed the part numbers on everything including all the supplier parts.

[Edited 2008-02-27 07:36:39]


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineTod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1729 posts, RR: 3
Reply 15, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2781 times:



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
. The 87 and 47-8 are completely v5

Nope

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
(all 47-8 parts are new, .

Nope

Tod


User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9701 posts, RR: 52
Reply 16, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2737 times:



Quoting Tod (Reply 15):
Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
. The 87 and 47-8 are completely v5

Nope

Are parts of the 787 in V4?



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineTdscanuck From Canada, joined Jan 2006, 12709 posts, RR: 80
Reply 17, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2699 times:



Quoting Cleanskies (Reply 10):
But I thought that 777 was actually the first aircraft to be entirely digitally designed.

First commercial airplane...I suspect there were some military or bizjets that were done full CAD first.

Quoting Cleanskies (Reply 10):
Hence I never saw a single 3D image of 747-400 (nor 747-8).

3D images of the 747-400 and 747-8 are pretty easy to come by, but a lot of what gets out to the public is rendered for marketing purposes. It doesn't mean that there's actually a digital dataset for the design.

Quoting Manfredj (Reply 12):
If the original 747-100 was not desinged by computer (which I would think it's not) and the overall shape of the airplane is un-changed from the 400, in reality isn't the whole aircraft hand designed?

The original 747-100 was not CAD. And yes, the overall shape didn't change (much) for the -400. However, that's using "designed" out of context. You don't actually design on paper or on computer...you design in your head. You document and analyze on paper or computer. "Digital design" really means the product definition (i.e. the drawings, model, and whatnots) is digital, not hand-drawn.

Tom.


User currently offlineNA From Germany, joined Dec 1999, 10805 posts, RR: 9
Reply 18, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 2669 times:

I´m pretty sure that a few years ago I read an article about the 747-400 design being "completely" digitalized from a certain serial-no. onwards. Must have been around the time the ER came out, can´t remember details.

Btw, is there a recommendable, affordable MAC-compatible 3D-software where factory CAD-data can be imported? I´m currently thinking about it as clients increasingly ask me about it.


User currently offlinePianos101 From United States of America, joined Jan 2008, 365 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2642 times:



Quoting Tod (Reply 15):
Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
. The 87 and 47-8 are completely v5

Nope

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 8):
(all 47-8 parts are new, .

Nope

And your proof is... what, exactly? From Boeing's work statement point of view everything is v5. I have not heard of anything that is not v5. Even part releases are done through Enovia, instead of the old PDM system that we're using on the 47-8.

All the 47-8 parts are "new" though many are copies of -400 parts, and even have the exact same part numbers. -400 parts are not in v5 and we are designing the -8 all in v5. Although most of the parts are "copies," you should see how many issues have been coming up...

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 14):
It gets a bit confusing, but most of the drawings are digitized. I don't know the 747 that well, but believe it is mostly V4 Catia. Even though the basic design hasn't changed, there are always updates to the drawings being made for various reasons. Airplane designs aren't stagnant. There are many changes at the detail through module level made between models.

yeah, the -400 is pretty much all in v4. Things need to be changed all the time, and it's done all in v4.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 16):
Are parts of the 787 in V4?

No

Quoting NA (Reply 18):
I´m pretty sure that a few years ago I read an article about the 747-400 design being "completely" digitalized from a certain serial-no. onwards. Must have been around the time the ER came out, can´t remember details.

Yeah nothing is hand drawn anymore. Unfortunately, we still need to make 2D instl dwg's for the mechanics, but that's the extent of 2d that is done for the -400, 777, -8, 87, and i'm pretty sure the 67 too.

The other problem, as someone mentioned, is with suppliers. 47-8 suppliers are somewhat different from -400 suppliers and this is causing some forms of small issues at the detail part level. Most of this is alleviated, though, because we're doing the 47-8 all in v5 as all new parts. This is allowing us to work out build issues with suppliers at the time that we release detail parts, and not when they come to evt and won't fit on the aircraft...

Quoting NA (Reply 18):

Btw, is there a recommendable, affordable MAC-compatible 3D-software where factory CAD-data can be imported? I´m currently thinking about it as clients increasingly ask me about it.

I don't know of any good Mac 3d cad programs... My best idea would be to use boot camp or something like parallels to run software through windows, unfortunately!!


User currently offlineTod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1729 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2523 times:



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 19):
And your proof is... what, exactly?

Info from a Catia driver on the 47-8 program.

Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 19):
Although most of the parts are "copies," you should see how many issues have been coming up...

Hear about it on nearly a daily basis.


User currently offlineApollo13 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 21, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 2488 times:

Okay im sorry for asking this because im sure it has been answered numerous times BUT...... will the 747-8 be built. And if so, when, and what features can be expected from this aircraft? WIll there be a longer upper deck, better range (well thats a given im sure!!!).

User currently offlineStitch From United States of America, joined Jul 2005, 31259 posts, RR: 85
Reply 22, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2449 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Apollo13 (Reply 21):
Okay im sorry for asking this because im sure it has been answered numerous times BUT...... will the 747-8 be built.

Components for the first frames are already in production so, yes, it will be built.

Read all about it at:

http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/747-8_background.html
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/747-8_facts.html
http://www.boeing.com/commercial/747family/747-8_fact_sheet.html


User currently offlineA380US From United States of America, joined Mar 2007, 2358 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 11 hours ago) and read 2438 times:

In this day and age almost everything s digitally created.


www.JandACosmetics.com
User currently offlineAstuteman From United Kingdom, joined Jan 2005, 10183 posts, RR: 97
Reply 24, posted (6 years 9 months 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 2360 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Pianos101 (Reply 19):
Unfortunately, we still need to make 2D instl dwg's for the mechanics, but that's the extent of 2d that is done for the -400, 777, -8, 87, and i'm pretty sure the 67 too.

There's nothing unfortunate about that.......  no   Smile

Regards


25 Ikramerica : Yes. People are confusing Modeling with Designing and using the terms as synonyms. They aren't. You can design on paper, then model in the computer t
26 Pianos101 : a catia driver? what's that? i'm a structural designer for boeing and am working on 47-8 wing, and everything we do is in v5... right... sorry if i w
27 ScrubbsYWG : this is interesting. Is this not a kind of fearful way of doing things? Wouldn't it be better to give mechanics exactly what they are supposed to do
28 ScrubbsYWG : just to clarify my above post. I realize that getting every idea down unambiguously isn't always achieved, and toolmakers, mechanics, etc. often have
29 Post contains links and images Revelation : To throw in some personal recollections, I was an IBM employee in the late 80's and early 90's. For a while I worked on, of all things, FORTRAN compi
30 Post contains images Astuteman : And carried to its logical conclusion, a set of designers who know absolutely f**k all about the constraints and issues that the production guys have
31 Pianos101 : Exactly... And the mechanics wouldn't "misinterpret" the engineering drawings, because there wouldn't be a full design to "interpret." They would lit
32 RoseFlyer : Yes that is the goal of engineering. Engineering wants to have unambiguous instructions for manufacturing, assembling and testing. No interpretation
33 Tod : Just slang that some folks use to describe Catia operators such as TD's at Boeing. Sorry about the confusion. Hasn't that always been the case?
34 ScrubbsYWG : i totally agree rose flyer. I work in plastic injection molding product development(product design, mold design, etc.) so i get to be involved with al
35 Post contains images Astuteman : That was very much the historical culture in the business in which I work (and is still exhibited by "freshers") Thankfully, that has changed enormou
36 Tod : I will rarely hire an engineer that can't spin a wrench. Without the hands-on ability to understand how your designs are to implemented an engineer's
37 Pianos101 : How is what i said speaking ill?? I said that mechanics have a skill that engineers don't have (and vice versa, i guess); they have the ability to lo
38 ScrubbsYWG : It was not directed to you at all. The general theme of that paragraph was about young engineers graduating from university and having an opinion tha
39 Tdscanuck : In the days before full 3D modelling, there are some things that it's almost impossible to do in 2D manual drafting. Aircraft aren't nice shapes with
40 Tod : This is why alot of Boeing tubes were mock-up defined in the olden days. The engineers drew up their best guess and the mock up shop turned it into r
41 ScrubbsYWG : That makes a lot of sense. In cases such as that, would a drawing be updated to follow the proven bends, or would that kind of note always be attache
42 Post contains images Astuteman : Brother! How true is that! Mind you, we still get in-build tolerance build-up issues coming out of our ears. There still seems to be some designers t
43 ScrubbsYWG : interestingly, i was just reading an article about tolerence analysis that i got in an email from PTC(makers of pro/engineer)
44 Pianos101 : Ahh my bad. Being a young engineer just starting in the industry I figured it was directed at me. I hope that I'm not like that, but hey....
45 ScrubbsYWG : heh, you and me both! I personally think i am not like that. I may not be the MOST hands on engineer out there, but i can turn a wrench i understand
46 SEPilot : I certainly can say "Amen" to both of you. I actually worked as both a machinist and a mechanic before I stumbled into my engineering career; I have
47 Tod : The drawings are normally updated. In the case of Boeing water system tubing a master tube was created by the mock-up shop, approved by the responsib
48 Tdscanuck : A little of both. As Tod correctly notes, they end up with a master tube that is used as a reference. If you go to the Boeing spares facility in LA,
49 ScrubbsYWG : I remember that part!
50 Pygmalion : Not anymore... after going full digital tubing and no mockup, no master tubes on the 777... Boeing digitized all those old master tubes for all the m
51 ScrubbsYWG : what is hardpoint tooling? and soft tools?
52 Tdscanuck : Hardpoint tooling is tools that give you the desired geometry of the part by virtue of the way they hold the parts for assembly. So, for an extreme e
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Today Is 747 Day! posted Sat Apr 7 2007 09:49:38 by RootsAir
Is The 7E7 Designed For A Wrong Market? posted Wed Jan 26 2005 21:29:15 by Aither
Why Is 747 Fastest Commercial Jet? posted Thu Jan 8 2004 12:42:26 by Pkone
Is A 747 Classic As Good As A L1011 Tristar. posted Tue Aug 26 2003 06:41:58 by 747400sp
Anyone Know Why NW760 Is A 747-400 Today? posted Sat Mar 31 2001 19:48:50 by Nwa747-400
Is 747-400 Fly-by-wire Airplane? posted Thu Nov 23 2000 16:19:09 by Sonic
What Is A 747-2B3B SCD/SUD? posted Wed Aug 25 1999 12:31:24 by Hisham
Is This The James Bond 747 In A Westlife Vid? posted Tue Jan 1 2008 15:13:13 by SINGAPORE_AIR
What Is This 747? posted Wed Nov 28 2007 10:38:10 by FCKC
How Well Is KL Maintaining Its 747-400? posted Sun Nov 18 2007 15:48:00 by BOAC911