498  Approved for public release. OTR 2020- 00294  Testing Section   During  the previous update to the standard in 2005, AIAA deadlines limited the MMA Committee on  Standards focus on the testing section. As a result, much of the previously existing material was still held  over from the boiler plate language found in the (even then) decades -old processes and philosophies . With  the current  standard update, the testing area was the first area of emphasis  to modernize, making it more  usable and valuable to the engineers who employ it.  

A realization was made by the authors that many of the same programs that have this MMA standard levied  as a set of requirements also have other testing standards levied at the same time, such as those listed in  References 1- 4. Since the authors (and a compendium of MMA standard users  on government programs )  were most familiar with References 1 and 2, many of the same outline, structure, and philosophical  elements found in those testing standards were duplicated  in the new MMA standard where it made logical  sense.  

For example, the previous version of the MMA standard did not give any guidance or direction regarding  which tests were intended to be performed at each  level of as sembly . To remedy this, the new MMA testing  section mimic s that of Reference 2, with separate Unit Level, Subsystem Level, and Vehicle Level test  subsections . It was noted that one of the more referenced features in the testing standards is a table or  matrix that indicates what  testing should be done at which level . In order to assist the user even further in  this area, a similar table was constructed for the MMA standard, and is shown in Figure 2.  

With this table, one can see at a glance the required test s (and those requiring a formal evaluation to be  conducted to determine if they are required) for each level of assembly, as well as for the test type   (qualification, proto- qualification, or acceptance) . Users of the standard will also notice that the slate of  typical MMA tests have been broken down into broad categories such as P erforma nce tests, E nvironmental  Exposure tests, and “Special” tests.  

Another omission in previous versions of MMA standards is any guidance regarding the flow of a testing  program,  and in what order these required tests should be performed. Many programmatic, personnel, or  resource limitations can dictate the order of some testing flows, but there was no default or recommended   order. As such, recommended test flows were added to the standard, with an example shown in Figure 3   that illustrat es a typical test flow sequence one might employ for an  MMA  at the Unit Level . Additional,  similar test sequences are provided in the standard for Subsystem and Vehicle L evels of assembly as well.  

These sequences provide not only a default recommended order by which to conduct a test program, but  also provide respective reference paragraphs in the document for  more detail on each particular test. Th e  reference paragraphs atte mpt to provide test -specific requireme nts as well as bac kground information,  such  as the purpose o f the test or other nuances that may help perform or set up a particular test . A simple color - coding scheme also identifies which tests may only be applicable for qualification or acceptance programs  specifically.