This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Monolithic Structure Affordability: 737 Classic Versus Next Generation
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published September 08, 2003 by SAE International in United States
Annotation ability available
One recent evolution in commercial transport structure has been the emergence of monolithic structure applications. Monolithic structure reduces the number of parts that must be managed, eliminates sub-assembly operations and contributes strongly to determinant assembly practices. The cost of three components from the Boeing 737-200 and their counterparts on the Boeing 737-600 will be compared. The mid 1960's 737-200 components were assembled from sheet metal details. The mid 1990's 737-600 components are monolithic designs and utilize superplastic forming, casting and NC machining technologies. The built-up solutions and the monolithic solutions are compared based on cost infrastructures from the 1960's and the 1990's.
|Aerospace Standard||MALE FERRULE, THREADLESS-FLEXIBLE, FIXED CAVITY, CURRENT CARRYING, SELF BONDING, SWAGED|
|Aerospace Standard||FEMALE FERRULE, THREADLESS-FLEXIBLE, FIXED CAVITY, CURRENT CARRYING, SELF BONDING, SWAGED|
|Aerospace Standard||CLAMP SUPPORT, LOOP, CLAMP|
CitationWeber, G. and Morgan, J., "Monolithic Structure Affordability: 737 Classic Versus Next Generation," SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-2909, 2003, https://doi.org/10.4271/2003-01-2909.
- U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Employee Costs for Employee Compensation, Blue Collar Occupations Aircraft Manufacturing
- U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics Producer Price Index - Commodities
- Boeing 737-100/-200 Structural Repair Manual Revision 86 Boeing Commercial Airplanes March 2003
- Boeing 737-600 Structural Repair Manual Revision 15 March 2003
- Boeing Advanced Quality System Tools The Boeing Company November 1998