Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Composite Structures
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/compstruct

Bird-strike simulation for certification of the Boeing 787 composite moveable

trailing edge
Steve Georgiadis a, Andrew J. Gunnion b,*, Rodney S. Thomson b, Bruce K. Cartwright c
a
Hawker de Havilland Aerospace Pty Ltd., 226 Lorimer Street, Fishermans Bend, Victoria, Australia
b
Cooperative Research Centre for Advanced Composite Structures Ltd., 506 Lorimer Street, Fishermans Bend, Victoria 3207, Australia
c
Pacific Engineering Systems International Pty Ltd., 277–279 Broadway, Broadway, NSW 2007, Australia

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Available online 16 March 2008 A validated simulation methodology has been developed to support the bird-strike certification of the
carbon fibre epoxy composite, moveable trailing edge (MTE) of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. The explicit
Keywords: finite element software PAM-CRASHTM was selected to perform the simulations utilising the advanced
Bird-strike composite material, fastener and smooth particle hydrodynamic bird models available in the code. The
Certification modelling procedures were validated firstly through comparison with existing test data and secondly
Carbon epoxy structures through the testing and analysis of representative structures. Subsequent use of the validated modelling
Explicit analysis
procedures during the analysis of the MTE facilitated the evaluation of numerous bird-strike scenarios,
Material models
leading to improved design efficiency and safety, while significantly reducing certification costs.
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction used to gain dramatic improvements to bird-strike resistance

Hawker de Havilland (HdH) is currently the sole supplier of the
MTE for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, shown in Fig. 1. HdH is respon-
sible for the design and manufacture of the flaps, ailerons and
spoilers, all of which are manufactured from carbon fibre epoxy
composite. The extensive use of composite materials throughout
the structure of the Boeing 787 Dreamliner results in significant
performance gains.
Bird-strike is a potentially serious and damaging event that
must be accounted for in the design of flight critical aircraft com-
ponents. The problem goes back to the dawn of modern aviation,
when the Wright Brothers recorded the first bird-strike on 7 Sep-
tember 1905 [1]. Although definitive figures are hard to obtain
due to variations in reporting requirements, it is estimated that
bird-strike events occur at least once every 2000 flights. In civil
aviation, more than 50 planes and over 223 lives are reported to
have been lost since 1912 due to bird-strike. The cost to the world-
wide aviation industry is estimated to be over USD 1 billion per
year [2].
The ability of critical structure to withstand bird-strike events is
regulated under the certification requirements. Traditionally, com-
ponents were designed to withstand bird-strike events through a
combination of test and semi-empirical design methods. For the
Boeing 787 Dreamliner MTE, an improved approach is described
in which modern finite element (FE) modelling methods have been
* Corresponding author. Fax: +61 3 9676 4999.
E-mail address: a.gunnion@crc-acs.com.au (A.J. Gunnion).
while at the same time removing conservatism associated with tra-
ditional semi-empirical techniques. HdH achieved this in collabo-
ration with the Cooperative Research Centre for Advanced
Composite Structures (CRC-ACS) and Pacific Engineering Systems
International (Pacific-ESI). In this paper, the certification require-
ments and compliance methodology are outlined and both the
simulation methodology and the validation and verification proce-
dures are described.
2. Certification requirements
The bird-strike airworthiness requirements relevant to the Boe-
ing 787 Dreamliner are specified under FAR Part 25, Sub-part
25.571 ‘‘Damage-tolerance and fatigue evaluation of structure”:
(e) Damage-tolerance (discrete source) evaluation. The airplane
must be capable of successfully completing a flight during which
likely structural damage occurs as a result of:
(1) Impact with a 4-pound bird when the velocity of the airplane
relative to the bird along the airplane’s flight path is equal to
Vc at sea level or 0.85 Vc at 8000 ft, whichever is more critical.
The damaged structure must be able to withstand the static
loads (considered as ultimate loads) which are reasonably expected
to occur on the flight. Dynamic effects on these static loads need
not be considered.
The MTE is exposed to the air-stream, and thus at risk of bird-
strike, only under certain conditions. For example, the flaps are

0263-8223/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2008.03.025
 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268
Fig. 1. Boeing 787 Dreamliner, showing breakdown of materials used and the MTE designed and manufactured by HdH.
only extended at air speeds equal to or less than flap deployment
speed, Vflap. In addition, any bird-strike events will be glancing
blows related to the aircraft angle of attack and the deflection of
the MTE. Based on this knowledge combined with the overall cer-
tification requirement, a set of bird-strike cases relevant to each
MTE device was created in which combinations of critical veloci-
ties and impact angles were defined. These were used to assess
the bird-strike performance of each MTE device.
3. Certification compliance methodology
3.1. Traditional certification compliance approach
The traditional bird-strike design method utilises a range of
empirical and semi-empirical methods to determine the effect of
strikes. A commonly employed method is the so-called cannonball
approach in which it is assumed that the bird continues on its path
uninterrupted and removes any structure in its direct path, as
shown in Fig. 2. Generally, this approach is conservative and sim-
plifies determination of the residual strength. A result of using
the cannonball approach on designs for control surfaces is that
the spacing of spars is such that a single strike will only damage
one spar in order to meet residual strength requirements. This
tends to dictate the lay-out of internal structure and possibly
moves away from what is optimal from strength, stiffness or
weight viewpoints.
In some circumstances, the cannonball approach may not be
conservative. It is possible for example, when impacting a control
surface at an oblique angle, for the bird to be deflected and subse-
quently damage structure further downstream. Another more ex-
treme example is if the bird penetrates one skin and is then
deflected by the upper skin, much internal structure could be dam-
aged, as shown in Fig. 3.
Fig. 2. Cannonball approach traditionally used estimate damaged zone for bird-strike design.
259
Another requirement for any assessment of the effects of bird-
strike events is to determine the loads that are induced at the con-
nection points of the control surface to the parent structure. The
actuators and fittings must be designed to be capable of sustaining
these interface loads. Using the cannonball approach, accurate
determination of the interface loads is difficult and requires
approximations and likely increased conservatism.
As a result of such uncertainties, structures designed through
these semi-empirical techniques require a more extensive testing
program to support certification. Testing would involve bird-strike
impacts at a number of critical locations to verify the validity of
cannonball approach. This increases certification time and cost,
and introduces an additional level of conservatism.
3.2. New certification compliance approach
In this work, a certification approach has been used in which
bird-strike compliance is demonstrated through explicit FE analy-
sis and validated and verified through tests at several stages, as
illustrated in Fig. 4. The need for adopting this approach was driven
by the desire to improve performance and safety of the aircraft.
This approach hinged on a validated, accepted analysis approach
to accurately simulate bird-strike events, the damage evolution
in the structure and the loads transmitted to the adjoining struc-
ture. This was accompanied by an accepted method to predict
the residual strength.
There are many benefits of simulation and this compliance
methodology. Firstly, by using an accurate and validated analysis
methodology, design conservatism can be dramatically reduced.
Secondly, the resistance of the structure to bird-strike can be
determined over a wide range of impact locations and conditions
leading to improved safety. Thirdly, interface loads can be more
accurately evaluated leading to improved design of fittings and
260 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268

Fig. 3. Example case in which the cannonball approach can be non-conservative.

Fig. 4. Certification compliance approach adopted.

actuators. Lastly, the number of tests required to demonstrate cer-
tification compliance can be dramatically reduced. This results in
better structures with reduced development and certification time
and cost.
However, the challenges associated with adopting this ap-
proach were not insignificant. While the capabilities of explicit
FE codes to simulate such highly dynamic events such as bird-
strike have steadily improved over the years, use to date has
mostly been on metallic structures [3]. The use of composite mate-
rials increases the complexity significantly due to the complex
damage initiation and propagation characteristics of the material,
including matrix and fibre failure in tension, compression or shear
and delamination. In addition, the overall structure behaviour is
strongly influenced by the behaviour and failure of fastened and
bonded joints [4]. Lastly, bird-strike involves interaction between
the structure and a fluid, the bird being mostly water. This is a
complex numerical problem to solve.
To implement this certification compliance methodology, a
building block approach was used. Validation of the modelling
techniques was employed at every stage:
 Material models for composite materials, bird, bonded and fastened
joints: Validated using elemental level tests;
 Simulation technique: Validated and verified using bird-strike
tests on representative structures of the 70 in. box and pre-pro-
duction outboard flap, respectively;
 Certification compliance: Demonstrated using the certification
bird-strike test of the outboard flap.
The methodology was used extensively in the design of the Boe-
ing 787 MTE, but can only be used for the design of like structures
impacted under similar conditions to those considered in the vali-
dation process.
4. Simulation methodology
4.1. Explicit FE analysis
Explicit FE analysis is a numerical technique commonly used for
the analysis of highly non-linear behaviour of materials with
inelastic strains, high strain rates, and large deformations such as
would occur during crash or impact situations. The technique is
particularly well suited to scenarios such as bird-strike [5] where
materials interact with other materials, or where some parts of
the structure break into smaller pieces, or where generally the
geometry changes significantly during the event.
 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268
The time step used in the solution algorithm is chosen to be
smaller than the time taken for a shock wave to propagate through
the smallest element in the model. This resulting time step, nor-
mally of the order of a microsecond or less, is necessary to ensure
that all energies associated with the propagating shock wave are
adequately captured by the analysis. A small time step means that
thousands of structural analyses are required to complete the sim-
ulation of a complex scenario. For example, the bird-strike events
presented herein spanned approximately 20 ms, requiring up to
24 h of CPU-intensive analysis. Nonetheless, the cost to explore
many impact cases through simulation is a fraction of the cost of
performing one full-scale physical impact test.
The commercial explicit FE software PAM-CRASHTM [6] was used
for all modelling aspects within this paper.
4.2. Bird-strike
On impact with a structure, the bird behaves in a fluid-like man-
ner, undergoing extreme distortion as its body breaks up into debris
particles. Capturing these behavioural aspects in a numerically sta-
ble method for the aircraft industry presents numerous challenges.
One commonly used approach models the bird using a solid
Lagrangian FE model. It then resolves the bird-structure interaction
using the contact algorithms that are a feature of modern explicit
FE codes [7–9]. While this method is able to capture the distortion
and, to a limited extent, the break up of the bird, there are several
major drawbacks [8,10]. Primarily, the material of the bird cannot
move relative to the mesh. Hence, a large scale distortion of the
bird translates directly to a large scale distortion of the mesh. With
the stable time step for an explicit FE analysis being proportional to
the shortest element dimension, the simulation time step drops as
the mesh of the bird distorts upon impact, causing a significant in-
crease in simulation time. Despite many proposed attempts to ad-
dress the deficiencies of this method, it remains an impractical way
to model bird-strike.
Alternative approaches to bird modelling have been employed
to overcome the difficulties associated with the Lagrangian FE
method. The arbitrary Lagrange Euler (ALE) method [10,11] models
the bird as a slug of fluid moving through an Eulerian mesh, the
material being free to move relative to the mesh. The bird applies
load to the Lagrangian mesh of the structure through an ALE cou-
pling interface. Results obtained from this approach have been
shown to compare well with purely Lagrangian approaches,
achieving significant reductions in simulation times because the
time step associated with the Eulerian mesh shrank less than for
the Lagrangian case. But, this approach has problems associated
with the material interface [12].
This work used a smooth particle hydrodynamics (SPH) repre-
sentation of the bird, following [13]. SPH methods, reviewed com-
prehensively in [14], were proposed some 20 years previously for
astrophysics problems [15,16]. It is a grid-less, Lagrangian tech-
nique in which a set of discrete, interacting, particles is used in-
stead of a solid element mesh. The method is well suited to
impact problems such as bird-strike analyses because the particles
are topologically independent from each other. Also, it allows for
severe distortions, eliminates many of the material interface prob-
lems, and being a Lagrangian technique, SPH can be readily linked
to standard FE formulations.
An SPH feature was incorporated into PAM-SHOCKTM in the early
1990s, exploiting it originally to model the impact of space debris
onto satellites [17,18]. It has since been added to PAM-CRASH, and
been used for a broad range of problems including complex ship
motions [19]. This SPH feature was further developed and very
extensively validated, culminating in Engineering Systems Interna-
tional’s (ESI’s) virtual, artificial bird model to address the identified
need [20] to eliminate physical tests with live birds.
261
The material characteristics of SPH are governed by an equation
of state (EOS). Suitable values for the parameters in the EOS for a
bird model are difficult to ascertain since they must be determined
indirectly. As part of the project Crashworthiness of Aircraft for
High Velocity Impact (CRAHVI) [21], the optimisation tool PAM-
OPT [22] was used to determine values for the EOS parameters. It
‘matched’ the numerical simulations done using PAM-CRASH to
the results of bird-strike tests on instrumented plates to determine
values for the EOS parameters [4]. This original, cylindrically-
shaped, ESI bird model and its characterising parameters will
henceforth in this paper be called the Cylbird.
Subsequently, a research project was initiated in Australia by
Pacific ESI with the aim of producing a virtual bird model which
would satisfy potential demands to match against the physical
bird-strike tests undertaken (mainly) during the 1970s for the US
Air Force’s Wright Laboratories [23–28]. While the primary
emphasis at that time was the effect on windshields and transpar-
encies, these extensive tests produced a wealth of information
about bird impact onto both rigid and compliant targets. While
the CRAHVI project acknowledged and built upon the huge volume
of knowledge gained during that Wright work, the Cylbird still had
a cylindrical shape. Interestingly, the shape of the artificial ‘bird’
used in the Wright tests was an oblate spheroid, somewhat like
an ellipse. The new SPH ‘bird’, given the name Ellbird, used a re-
vised geometry to match the Wright shape as shown in Fig. 5. Be-
cause of the revision, extensive and thorough validation on this
alternative artificial ‘bird’ against the Wright tests was performed.
However, it was based on the same proven technology and design
processes of the previous Cylbird, importantly using those same
EOS parameter values.
Modelling the bird with SPH particles is arguably the most com-
mon method currently used to investigate bird-strike phenomena
[29–31].
4.3. Composite materials
The PAM-CRASH bi-phase material was used to model the full
non-linear behaviour to failure of the composite materials. Rather
than using the ply material properties, the bi-phase model requires
the constituent material properties and the fibre volume fraction to
determine the stiffness of each ply. Furthermore, failure strains and
damage parameters characterise the strength behaviour of the ma-
trix and fibres independently. The values for the bi-phase material
model used in this investigation were derived from methods de-
scribed in the PAM-CRASH manual [6] and from previous experience
developed at the CRC-ACS [32] using test data generated by HdH for
the material system being used on the MTE. These methods have
been demonstrated to produce a material model that suitably repre-
sents the behaviour of a real material under in-plane and impact
loading. The initial and post-failure stiffness of each element is gov-
erned by the bi-phase model, with the material stiffness reduced to
almost zero after ultimate strain allowables have been reached.
In addition to the bi-phase material model that governs the
stiffness of the composite laminates, the element elimination crite-
rion is also important to accurately model the structural response
Fig. 5. The oblate spheroid solid bird model and its conversion to SPH elements.
262 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268
to severe damage. The most suitable element elimination criterion
and its associated control parameters were identified and validated
through the test program.
4.4. Joints
The mechanically fastened joints were represented by the PAM-
CRASH PLINK element. The use of PLINK elements to represent
mechanically fastened joints has been found to provide a satisfac-
tory representation of a mechanically fastened joint in composite
structures for crash and impact analysis [33]. This element is mesh
independent and capable of joining up to five layers per element.
The penalty stiffness of the joint is internally calculated to provide
a stable response, but can be overridden by user inputs if desired. A
PLINK can connect the shell layers as either a pinned or fixed joint,
depending on the level of rotational constraint required. The failure
model associated with the PLINK element is shown in Eq. (1).
 n  m
T S
þ 6u ð1Þ
T MAX SMAX
The maximum tensile (TMAX) and shear (SMAX) forces are input
parameters, along with the exponents used to consider interaction
effects. The exponents adopted in the failure models for the bird-
strike simulations were taken from literature [4]. The strength val-
ues used represent the lowest strengths from the different failure
modes listed in Table 1. The PLINK element has two alternative
methods to model post-failure softening relevant to this applica-
tion; time-based softening and displacement-based softening. Dis-
placement-based softening was considered to more accurately
represent the physical behaviour of mechanically fastened joints.
Bonded or co-cured joints can be modelled in PAM-CRASH using
a tied surface contact coupled with a cohesive zone fracture model
[34]. The model behaviour was investigated with extensive para-
metric studies on the element size and laminate stiffness appropri-
ate to the bird-strike simulations until satisfactory agreement
against available test data for double-cantilever beam (DCB) spec-
imens was achieved.
Table 1
Failure modes considered when evaluating fastened joint strengths
Tension Shear
Strap 1 pull-through (head) Strap 1 bearing (head)
Strap 2 pull-through (tail) Strap 2 bearing (tail)
Fastener tensile failure Fastener shear failure
Fig. 6. Rib-stiffened construction of the 7000 box shown with upper skin hidden.
5. Methodology validation: 7000 box test article
5.1. Test procedure
Preliminary validation of the bird-strike certification methodol-
ogy was achieved through a series of tests and simulations on a
simplified but representative structure, developed and manufac-
tured specifically for this purpose by HdH. The rib-stiffened nature
of the representative structure, referred to as the 7000 box is shown
in Fig. 6. Typical thicknesses for the ribs, skins, spar and D-nose
ranged between approximately 1.5 and 3 mm. The spar and D-nose
were manufactured using prepreg fabric. The skins and ribs of the
7000 box were manufactured using a resin infusion process. The
spar, D-nose and aluminium fittings were assembled using various
mechanical fasteners, representative of the type of construction for
the MTE.
The 7000 box was mounted to a steel test fixture, designed to
withstand the loads expected from the impact. The CATIATM model
of the structure and test fixture is shown alongside the FE repre-
sentation in Fig. 7. Both the test article and test rig attachment
points were instrumented with strain gauges connected to a high
speed data acquisition system. The data captured from the test
was used to validate the FE model.
The bird was represented in the test by a gelatin pack enclosed
in a nylon bag (gel-pack). The gel-pack bird was shot from a pneu-
matic gun, capable of firing at speeds up to 275 knots. A high speed
camera was setup as a speed trap to determine the projectile veloc-
ity. Two other high speed cameras were aimed at the impact loca-
tion from below and in front of the impact point to capture the
impact event.
A total of three tests with increasing bird velocities were per-
formed at Boeing’s test facility in Seattle during April and May,
2005, with the intention of inflicting increasing levels of damage
to the structure for model validation. All tests were conducted with
a nominal bird mass of 4 lb.
5.2. Validation model
The model was generated from an MSC.NastranTM FE model of
the 7000 box, developed for static analyses. Some additional mesh
refinement was performed around the impact zone. Other details
not included in the static FE model were added to fully describe
all of the structural details local to the impact zone. The MSC.Nas-
tran model was then converted into a PAM-CRASH model using a
series of in-house conversion tools alongside ESI pre-processing
 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268 263

Fig. 7. CATIA (left) and FE model (right) of the 7000 box and test fixture.

software. The resulting FE model contained nearly 20,000 shell,
beam and fastener elements.
5.3. Results
The tests were performed at increasing bird velocities, referred to
as the low, medium and high speed tests. For the low speed test, the
gel-pack bird was deflected without any detectable damage being
inflicted to the test structure. The bird deformation captured by
the side-on high speed camera is compared to the simulation in
Fig. 8 at two time intervals during the simulation. Excellent agree-
ment was achieved between the simulation and test for both the
level of damage (none) and bird deformation from the low speed
test.
The medium speed test, shown in Fig. 9, resulted in the bird
puncturing the lower skin of the validation test article. A signifi-
cant amount of damage was experienced by the composite struc-
ture, and some debonding between the ribs and upper skin
resulted from the impact. The type, size and location of damage
predicted by the simulation provided good agreement with the
test, as shown in Fig. 10.
The high speed test, shown in Fig. 11, resulted in the bird punc-
turing the D-nose of the test article and damaging the front spar.
Despite the complexity of the test (primary and secondary

Fig. 8. Images from the high speed camera (left) and simulation (right) during the low speed impact.
264 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268

Fig. 9. Images from the high speed camera (left) and simulation (right) during the medium speed impact.

Fig. 10. Pictures of composite damage (above) and delamination (below) resulting from the test (left) and corresponding simulation (right).

impacts), the simulation provided excellent agreement to the test,
predicting extensive damage to the composite D-nose, front spar
and adjacent fasteners, shown in Fig. 12.
6. Methodology verification: pre-production outboard flap
6.1. Test procedure
Verification of the bird-strike certification methodology was
achieved through a series of tests and simulations performed on
the pre-production test outboard flap (PPT-OBF). Measuring
approximately 10 m in length, this structure closely represents
the geometry, materials and manufacturing processes that will
be employed on the 787 MTE. The PPT-OBF was manufactured by
HdH specifically for the purpose of validating the bird-strike certi-
fication methodology. The composite components of the PPT-OBF
were manufactured using a resin infusion process, and were
assembled with mechanical fasteners.
Like the 7000 box, the PPT-OBF was mounted to a steel test fix-
ture, designed to withstand the loads expected from the impact.
 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268 265

Fig. 11. Images from the high speed camera (above) and simulation (below) during the high speed impact.

Fig. 12. Pictures of damage to D-nose (above) and spar (below) resulting from the test (left) and corresponding simulation (right).

Both the test article and test rig attachment points were instru-
mented with strain gauges connected to a high speed data acquisi-
tion system. The data captured from the test was used to validate
the FE model. An image of the PPT-OBF FE model and a photograph
of the test setup is shown in Fig. 13.
Bird-strike was simulated in the test using the same procedure
outlined above for the 7000 box. A total of four tests with increasing
bird velocities were performed at Boeing’s test facility in Seattle
during June and July, 2006, with the intention being to validate
the model for a range of impact velocities, locations and angles.
All tests were conducted with a nominal bird mass of 4 lb.
6.2. Validation model
The same methodology described in Section 5.2 was used to
produce the PAM-CRASH PPT-OBF model. The resulting FE model
contained approximately 90,000 shell, solid, beam and fastener
elements.
6.3. Results
For the first of four tests, the bird deformation captured by the
front and side-on high speed camera is compared to the simulation
in Figs. 14 and 15 at different time intervals. At this velocity, no
damage was evident from the impact in either the test article or
the model.
From the instrumented links connecting the PPT-OBF and the
test fixture, the reaction loads were compared with those pre-
dicted by the FE model. A typical example is presented in Fig. 16
where it can be seen that the model predicted the nature and size
of the reaction loads reasonably well. Importantly, the peak mag-
nitudes of the predicted reaction loads were equal to or greater
266 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268

Fig. 13. FE model of the PPT-OBF and test fixture (above) and photograph showing part of the actual test setup (right).

Fig. 14. Bird deformation at increasing time intervals during the test captured by a front-facing high speed video camera (above) and the simulation (below).

than those measured in the tests, ensuring the simulations remain
conservative.
For the remaining three bird-strike tests, the model continued
to provide excellent agreement with the experimental data for a
range of velocities equal to or greater than the critical impact
velocity stipulated by FAR 25. The PPT-OBF demonstrated excellent
resilience to bird-strike, with no detectable damage for any bird-
strike at the critical impact velocities.
7. Use of the bird-strike simulation methodology in design
The application of the bird-strike certification methodology
validated and verified through the test program described above
extends beyond just the outboard flap. As the current sole supplier
of the MTE for the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, HdH is responsible for
the design, manufacture and certification of all flaps, ailerons and
spoilers. Hence, other safety-critical structures, such as the inboard
flap and ailerons, must also be designed in accordance with the
FAR 25 bird-strike requirements. These structures share common
materials, manufacturing processes and assembly methods with
the outboard flap. As the impact cases (bird sizes, speeds and an-
gles) and structures are similar to those investigated for the out-
board flap, the validated bird-strike simulation methodology
presented here was used in the design and certification process
of these structures. This allowed designers to accurately consider
bird-strike cases alongside other critical design cases throughout
the design process, resulting in improved structural designs from
both an efficiency and safety perspective. Given the costs
 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268
Fig. 15. Bird deformation at increasing time intervals during the test captured by an outboard-facing high speed video camera (above) and the simulation (below).
Fig. 16. Comparison of experiment and simulation force–time history (non-dimen-
sional) of the reaction loads resulting from the first test on the PPT-OBF.
associated with manufacturing each component, particularly for
pre-production articles, bird-strike design-by-analysis also drasti-
cally reduces the development and certification costs of the pro-
gram, helping HdH compete in a globally competitive industry.
8. Conclusion
Through a test program including two different structures and a
total of seven impact tests, it has been demonstrated that current
state-of-the-art FE analysis tools are capable of simulating bird-
strike on composite structures with sufficient accuracy to validate
their use as part of a bird-strike certification compliance method-
ology. The development of this methodology led to improved
design efficiency and safety through accurate damage prediction
and the ability to perform analyses on a multitude of design
variations. Traditional semi-empirical bird-strike design methods
coupled with a more extensive test program would not allow such
design studies to be performed.
267
Given the success of this program, the bird-strike requirements
for the Boeing 787 MTE will be satisfied using the validated meth-
ods described in this work. As such, their value extends beyond
merely achieving certification of a single structure. Subsequent
use of these models during the analysis of other MTE devices facil-
itated the evaluation of numerous bird-strike scenarios, leading to
improved confidence in the ability of the components to meet the
bird-strike requirements, without the need to produce costly test
articles.
It should be noted that the modelling procedures presented
herein have only been validated for similar impacts on like struc-
tures. That is, if the materials, manufacturing processes or joining
technologies of the impacted structure were to vary from those
considered in the validation program, additional tests would be
necessary to ensure that the simulation methods are developed
and validated alongside these developments.
Acknowledgements
Mr Alexander Kor and colleagues from Boeing Structural Com-
ponent Laboratory were essential to the success of this activity,
being responsible for conducting the bird-strike tests and captur-
ing the test data required for validation.
The technical contribution of Mr David Elder (CRC-ACS) was
invaluable. Critical to the whole project was the technical support
and operational assistance from Mr Allen Chhor and Mr Paul Croa-
ker from Pacific ESI, along with the technical insight into the
underlying modelling philosophy and physics of the bird-strike
problem from Dr Paul Groenenboom and Dr Argiris Kamoulakos
of ESI Group, Professor Anthony Pickett from Cranfield University
(UK) and Dr Alastair Johnson from the German Aerospace Center
(DLR). The guidance and enthusiastic support from Mr Damian
McGuckin and Dr Tom Kisielewicz prior to, and throughout, the
project were fundamental to its overall success.
Much of the PAM-CRASH implementation of the technology
noted in this paper was done during HICAS [35] and CRAHVI
[21], projects funded partially by the European Union under vari-
ous European Commission programs.
268 S. Georgiadis et al. / Composite Structures 86 (2008) 258–268

References European conference on spacecraft structures: materials and mechanical

testing, Braunschweig, Germany; 1998.
[19] Cartwright B, Groenenboom PHL, McGuckin D. A novel technique to predict
[1] Sharing the skies manual. TP13549. Transport Canada; 2004.
non-steady loads in vessels in severe seas. In: ISOPE; 2004.
[2] Completeness and accuracy of birdstrike reporting in the UK. CAA Paper 2006/
[20] Budgey R. The development of a substitute artificial bird by the international
05. UK: Civil Aviation Authority; 2006.
birdstrike research group for use in aircraft component testing, IBSC25/WP-
[3] McCarthy MA, Xiao JR, Petrinic N, Kamoulakos A, Melito V. Modelling of bird-
IE3; April 2000.
strike on an aircraft wing leading edge made from fibre metal laminates – Part
[21] CRAHVI: Crashworthiness of aircraft for high velocity impact. CEC DG XII
1: material modelling. Appl Compos Mater 2004;11:295–315.
competitive and sustainable growth project GRD1-2000-25242; 2000–
[4] McCarthy MA, Xiao JR, McCarthy CT, Kamoulakos A, Ramos J, Gallard JP, et al.
2004.
Modelling of bird-strike on an aircraft wing leading edge made from fibre
[22] PAM-OPTTM. F-94578 Rungis Cedex, France: Engineering Systems International.
metal laminates – Part 2: modelling of impact with SPH bird model. Appl
[23] Barber JP, Taylor HR, Wilbeck JS. Characterization of bird impacts on a rigid
Compos Mater 2004;11:317–40.
plate: Part 1, Technical report AFFDL-TR-75-5. Air Force Flight Dynamics
[5] Brockman RA, Weld TW. Explicit finite element method for transparency
Laboratory; January 1975.
impact analysis. Technical report WL-TR-91-3006. Air Force Flight Dynamics
[24] Barber JP, Taylor HR, Wilbeck JS. Bird impact forces and pressures on rigid and
Laboratory; May 1991.
compliant targets. Technical report AFFDL-TR-77-60. Air Force Flight
[6] PAM-CRASHTM/PAM-CRASHTM FE Code. 94578 Rungis Cedex, France:
Dynamics Laboratory; May 1978.
Engineering Systems International.
[25] Wilbeck JS. Impact behaviour of low-strength projectiles. Technical report
[7] Bouchard MP, Davisson JC. Advanced transparency development for USAF
AFML-TR-77-134, Air Force Materials Laboratory; July 1978.
aircraft. In: 34th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/ AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics
[26] Challita A, Barber JP. The scaling of bird impact loads. Technical report AFFDL-
and materials conference; 1993. p. 800–9.
TR-79-3042. Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory; June 1979.
[8] Stoll F, Brockman RA. Finite element simulation of high speed soft-body
[27] Hamershock DW, Seamans TW, Bernhardt GE. Determination of body density
impacts. In: Proceedings of the 1997 38th AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC
for twelve bird species. Air Force Flight Dynamics Directorate, WL-TR-93-
structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, Part 1 (of 4),
3049; April 1993.
Kissimmee, FL, USA; 1997. p. 334–44.
[28] Challita A. Validation of a bird substitute for development and qualification of
[9] Iannucci L. Woven composite design for extreme events using a damage
aircraft transparencies. Technical report AFWAL-TR-80-3098. Air Force Flight
mechanics methodology. In: Proceedings of the institution mechanical
Dynamics Laboratory; October 1980.
engineers, Part L 214; 2000. p. 99–111.
[29] Ubels LC, Johnson AF, Gallard JP, Sunaric M. Design and testing of a composite
[10] Langrand B, Bayart AS, Chauveau Y, Deletombe E. Assessment of multi-physics
bird-strike resistant leading edge. National Aerospace Laboratory (NLR), NLR-
FE methods for bird strike modelling – application to a metallic riveted
TP-2003-054; 2003.
airframe. Int J Crashworth 2002;7(4):415–28.
[30] Lin I-Chien. A study of soft bird model impacting on flat plate
[11] Dobyns A. Bird strike analysis of S-92 vertical tail cover using DYTRAN. In: AHS
and aircraft pylon. Master’s Thesis. National Cheng Kung University;
affordable composite structures conference, Bridgeport, VT, USA; 1998.
2006.
[12] Johnson GR, Stryk RA, Beissel SR. SPH for high velocity impact computations.
[31] Anghileri M, Castelletti LL, Mazza V. Birdstrike: approaches to the analysis of
Comput Method Appl Mech Eng 1996;139:347–73.
impacts with penetration. In: WIT transactions on engineering sciences, vol.
[13] Johnson AF, Holzapfel M. Modelling soft body impact on composite structures.
49, Impact loading of lightweight structures; 2005.
Compos Struct 2003;61:103–13.
[32] Mikkor K. Impact of loaded composites. Undergraduate Thesis. School of
[14] Monaghan JJ. Smoothed particle hydrodynamics. Ann Rev Astron Astrophys
Aerospace, Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, RMIT University;
1992;30:543–74.
2005.
[15] Lucy LB. A numerical approach to the testing of fusion process. The Astron J
[33] Gunnion AJ, Koerber H, Elder DJ, Thomson RS. Development of fastener models
1977;88:1013–24.
for impact simulation of composite structures. In: Proceedings of the 25th
[16] Gingold RA, Monaghan JJ. Smoothed particle hydrodynamics: theory and
international congress of the aeronautical sciences (ICAS 2006), paper 586,
application to non-spherical stars. Month Notice Roy Astron Soc
Hamburg, Germany, 3–8 September; 2006.
1977;181:375–89.
[34] Greve L, Pickett AK. Delamination testing and modelling for composite crash
[17] Groenenboom PHL. Numerical simulation of hypervelocity impact using the
simulation. Compos Sci Technol 2006;66(6):816–26.
SPH option in PAM-SHOCK. Int J Impact Eng 1997;20:309–23.
[35] HICAS: High velocity impact of composite aircraft structures. CEC DG XII
[18] Kamoulakos A, Groenenboom PHL. Moving form FE to SPH for space debris
BRITE-EURAM Project BRPR-97-0543; 1998–2000.
impact simulations – experience with PAMSHOCK. In: Proceedings of