Topic: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project  (Read 5345 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« on: October 17, 2005, 04:48:17 pm »
CAPE CANAVERAL, Fla. (AP) - Inadequate methods of applying and repairing foam on the space shuttle's fuel tank probably contributed to the dangerous loss of a chunk of the insulation during Discovery's launch 2 1/2 months ago, a NASA investigation team concluded Friday.

So much work is needed to understand the problem and correct the deficiencies that shuttle flights are on hold until at least May, and possibly even next summer.

NASA's Richard Gilbrech, head of the investigation team, said no one may ever know exactly what caused a 1-pound, 3-foot section of foam to break off Discovery's external fuel tank in late July. It was a scary repeat of what happened during Columbia's doomed flight in 2003.

Gilbrech's team suspects workers inadvertently crushed the foam while conducting repairs in that area, or handled it in such a way that resulted in damage. The tank was worked on considerably more than previous ones because of all the post-Columbia modifications.

 
(AP) NASA released this photo of external fuel tank #120 leaving the vehicle assembly building, right,...
Full Image
 
 
In addition, thin lines may have been introduced into the foam when it was sprayed onto the tank, weakening the material.

"We don't think in and of itself crushed foam alone could have been the cause of the foam coming off," Gilbrech said. "We believe it was potentially a combination" of things.

The investigation team found no evidence of negligence, said Gilbrech, who is deputy director of NASA's Langley Research Center in Virginia. Workers followed procedures, "it's just we didn't really have an appreciation for the significance that this handling damage could have."

Numerous tests are planned in coming months to establish just how sensitive the foam is and whether it can be easily crushed by workers. Foam is about as well understood right now as steel was during the Industrial Revolution, Gilbrech said.

Another possibility is that the one-inch layer of underlying foam may have cracked because of thermal stresses, causing the layer on top to pop off, Gilbrech said.

 
(AP) In this image made from video released by NASA, what appears to be a sizable piece of material is...
Full Image
 
 
"We're attacking all fronts and trying to learn as much as we can, but I don't know that we'll ever pinpoint one of those potentials as the root cause," he said.

NASA already has introduced new techniques for applying foam and is limiting workers' access to vulnerable areas.

Some redesign work will be required in the spot where foam came off Columbia and resulted in a fatal blow to the wing. During Discovery's liftoff, an 8-inch piece of foam broke off that same area. In all, worrisomely large foam chunks flew off in five spots.

Shuttle program manager Wayne Hale said it is too soon to set a launch date for the next shuttle mission but cited May as a possibility. It depends on progress made at the fuel tank assembly plant in New Orleans, which was in the path of Hurricane Katrina.

It will be December before the factory's entire 2,000-person staff is back on the job, Hale said. Only 500 are now working.

Space operations chief Bill Gerstenmaier said 18 more shuttle flights are planned to the international space station and possibly one to the Hubble Space Telescope before the fleet is retired in September 2010.

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20051015/D8D8ED480.html
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Ravok

  • Guest
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2005, 07:28:49 pm »
I wonder how much it would affect the payload, flight characteristics,and weight and balance. If they just wrapped a thin coat, of some type of netting to keep it in place?

Offline Dracho

  • Global Moderator
  • Rear Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 18289
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2005, 07:32:01 pm »
Duct Tape.
The worst enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan.  - Karl von Clausewitz

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #3 on: October 19, 2005, 05:18:27 pm »
I wonder how much it would affect the payload, flight characteristics,and weight and balance. If they just wrapped a thin coat, of some type of netting to keep it in place?

I've always wondered why they don't try something along those lines...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Ravok

  • Guest
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #4 on: October 19, 2005, 08:54:23 pm »
I wonder how much it would affect the payload, flight characteristics,and weight and balance. If they just wrapped a thin coat, of some type of netting to keep it in place?

I've always wondered why they don't try something along those lines...

 Its probally to simple of an idea, for the Egg heads at NASA to think of. ;)

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #5 on: October 20, 2005, 09:41:27 pm »
the only thing i can think of that would prevent them is weight.  You would need to make it mighty thin to conserve weight.  w/ that you now risk it being sheered off by the acceleration at launch
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #6 on: October 21, 2005, 02:10:32 am »
Or How about some kind of attachment to cover the heat shield on the orbiter?  This is where the Saturn V design was very clever.  during Flight, none of the Engine Bells, the LEM, or the Heat Shield were exposed right until they were going to be used...

On Apollo 13 they had an explosion in one of the cryotanks of the Service Module Propulsion System, which ripped out a panel right from the SPS engine bell to a few feet from the heat shield and it was still undamaged, and yet on the shuttle a piece of foam can destroy the heatshield.  The shuttle has been plagued by these kind of failures right from the first Columbia Flight, when two "Non Essential" tiles fell off...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #7 on: October 21, 2005, 03:06:22 pm »
i really think they would have done that if it weren't for weight concerns.  even thought shuttle was designed to take a good sized payload, i would think installing such a protective skin, which would have to be thick enough to provide enough protection, would be pushing it, and even if it wasn't it would basically mean the shuttle would have the payload capcity to do very much.
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #8 on: October 24, 2005, 06:17:52 am »
i really think they would have done that if it weren't for weight concerns.  even thought shuttle was designed to take a good sized payload, i would think installing such a protective skin, which would have to be thick enough to provide enough protection, would be pushing it, and even if it wasn't it would basically mean the shuttle would have the payload capcity to do very much.

One of the things that has always puzzled me about the Shuttle Launch is the fact that they pitch and roll the orbiter into a head down wings up position so the shuttle is underneath the Boosters and the external tank...  Out of curiosity, does anyone know why they don't pitch into an azimuth that would achieve the same delta V but position the orbiter on top of the boosters?


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Sirgod

  • Whooot Master Cattle Baron
  • Global Moderator
  • Vice Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 27844
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #9 on: October 24, 2005, 08:23:01 am »
You know, Maybe a net made out of Storm's Carbon Nanotubes might be a good idea after all. Good thinking Ravok.

Stephen
"You cannot exaggerate about the Marines. They are convinced to the point of arrogance, that they are the most ferocious fighters on earth - and the amusing thing about it is that they are."- Father Kevin Keaney, Chaplain, Korean War

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #10 on: October 24, 2005, 01:12:22 pm »
it pitches over in order to gain velocity downrange (horizontal velocity).  This is essential as vertical velocity will not keep it in orbit, all it does is get it up there, it is the horizontal/tangental velocity that keeps it in orbit.  also note that the if the shuttle engines were to pitch downward so the shuttle was on top it would burn up the external fuel tank. 

FYI my major is astronautical engineering ;)
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #11 on: October 24, 2005, 06:32:46 pm »
it pitches over in order to gain velocity downrange (horizontal velocity).  This is essential as vertical velocity will not keep it in orbit, all it does is get it up there, it is the horizontal/tangental velocity that keeps it in orbit.  also note that the if the shuttle engines were to pitch downward so the shuttle was on top it would burn up the external fuel tank. 

FYI my major is astronautical engineering ;)

I understand the velocity issue since to send it straight upwards would require it to be sent 22,000 miles into the air, but why would it burn the up the external fuel tank?  Is it an ullage issue?


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #12 on: October 24, 2005, 07:27:23 pm »
well you realize that while the shuttle is burning its engines in that portion of its accent its sucking fuel from the external tank.  you really don't want to put a hole in that thing.  BTW, even if u sent it 22,000 miles vertically it would have an orbit so elliptical that it would indefinitely be reenter and be incinerated. it would probably have a very high eccentricity (eccentricity of 0 is a circular orbit) as its only horizontal velocity was the rotation of the earth and that would probably lost in its accent anyway.  currently we have no method of actually doing that, so we require a hohmman(sp) transfer in order to achieve said orbit.
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #13 on: October 24, 2005, 07:56:12 pm »
well you realize that while the shuttle is burning its engines in that portion of its accent its sucking fuel from the external tank.  you really don't want to put a hole in that thing.  BTW, even if u sent it 22,000 miles vertically it would have an orbit so elliptical that it would indefinitely be reenter and be incinerated. it would probably have a very high eccentricity (eccentricity of 0 is a circular orbit) as its only horizontal velocity was the rotation of the earth and that would probably lost in its accent anyway.  currently we have no method of actually doing that, so we require a hohmman(sp) transfer in order to achieve said orbit.

22,000 miles should be the right spot for a geosynchronus to my knowledge, which admittedly is not great on these matters.  A satellite at 22,000 miles above the Earth travelling in a synchronus orbit should always cover the same spot, no?  Or am I looking at this completely the wrong way? 

I know how to handle the power descent on a lunar module, but that is more just by knowing what to do and when to do it checklist fashion rather than knowing the maths needed to calculate the Descent Orbit...

I still don't get why having the orbiter on top should burn a hole in the tank...  I've found lots of websites telling you how the shuttle is put into orbit, but not why it has to be done that way...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #14 on: October 24, 2005, 08:04:41 pm »
well the easiest way to see it is to look at the engines when they are doing the pitch over, you will see the angle at which they are pointed.  however i will say that i'm unsure if the engines themselve are capable of being pitched downard, but if they were, they would definatly produce enough heat to burn a hole in that insulation.  that insulation won't protect the tank from the heat.   

the horizontal veloicty it would have a geosync coming (assuming you could get out that far) probably wouldn't be enough to hold it in said orbit (at least in a circular one, it would be highly elliptical, still in orbit, but w/ a ballistic tragectory).  now the only way it wouldn't fall back down to earth is if you were at the edge of earth SOI (sphere of influence)  then as long as it positioned right (lagrange points) it'll stay right there.  if i get time i'll try to do the math and scan it in so u'll see. 
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #15 on: October 24, 2005, 08:06:14 pm »
also note that if it were to acend vertically it wouldn't keep all of it horizontal velocity, it would loose some in it accent, as well as trade its kinetic energy (its velocity) into potential energy (the height of its orbit).
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline prometheus

  • Hot and Spicy
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 3610
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #16 on: October 24, 2005, 08:33:33 pm »
well the easiest way to see it is to look at the engines when they are doing the pitch over, you will see the angle at which they are pointed.  however i will say that i'm unsure if the engines themselve are capable of being pitched downard, but if they were, they would definatly produce enough heat to burn a hole in that insulation.  that insulation won't protect the tank from the heat.   

the horizontal veloicty it would have a geosync coming (assuming you could get out that far) probably wouldn't be enough to hold it in said orbit (at least in a circular one, it would be highly elliptical, still in orbit, but w/ a ballistic tragectory).  now the only way it wouldn't fall back down to earth is if you were at the edge of earth SOI (sphere of influence)  then as long as it positioned right (lagrange points) it'll stay right there.  if i get time i'll try to do the math and scan it in so u'll see. 

I'd appreciate a look at the maths if you get time...  On the other point, the engines can gimbal 10.5 degrees off axis right round through 360 degrees...  I can see where you're coming from now, I hadn't thought of the engine bells having to point towards the external tank on a head up wings down pitchover...


To make an apple pie from scratch, you must first create the Universe!

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #17 on: October 24, 2005, 09:38:35 pm »
well i just did the math ;).  (should have warned ya... its a bit long ;))

Ok here is the intial tangental velocity an vehicle would have at the equator

Vlaunch site = R * angular velocityof earth

Where R is the radius from the spin axis (radius to the center of the earth)

Vlaunch site = 6378.137 (km)* .0000729212 (rad/s)

Vlaunch site = .4651 (km/s)

ok now for the tangental velocity at the geo sync orbit

Vcircular orbit = Sqrt(mu/R)

Where mu is earths gravitational constant, 3.986*10^5 and R is the radius of the orbit to the center of the earth (altitude (km) + 6378.137(km)

Vcircular orbit = Sqrt(3.986*105(km3/sec2)/42158(km))

Vcircular orbit = Sqrt(9.4549(km2/sec2)

Vcircular orbit = 3.074 km/sec


so as you can see you would not be able to maintain a circular orbit. 


ok now to prove that it will burn up ;)

first we must find the specfic mechanical energy which is always negative for elliptacl orbits, 0 for parabolic, and positive for hyperbolic (which makes sense as it takes more energy than what it take sto just take a parabolic orbit)

SME=V2/2 - mu/R

where R is the radius of the orbit, and v is the velocity at that orbit

SME=.4651(km/s)2/2-3.986*105(km3/sec2/42158(km)

SME = -9.23855 (km2/s2)

from here we can calculate the semi major axis

a = - mu/(2*SME)
a = - 3.986*105(km3/(2*-9.23855)
a = 21572.76 km

and now to determine the radius at perogee (closet to earth)

a=(Ra + Rp)/2

we know the Ra (radius at apogee) is 42158 as this is the furthest distance from earth

21572.76(km)=(42158 (km)+ Rp)/2

Rp = 987 (km)  <  6378.137(km)  and thus will make contact w/ earth. 

to prove it has a highly elliptical orbit we must check it eccentricity (e).  when e=0 the orbit is circular, 0<e<1, the orbit is elliptical with values closer to one becoming more elliptical, e=1 the orbit is prabolic (leaving earth), e>1 the orbit is hyperbolic (leaving earth, used for interplanatary travel)

e = (Ra - Rp) / (Ra + Rp)
e = (42158(km) - 987(km)) / (42158(km) + 987(km))
e = .95 (unitless)

i would tell you the time it would take but that takes shyt load of time ;)

hope that helps (that took alot of time to type arg lol)



Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #18 on: October 24, 2005, 09:43:34 pm »
btw, this assumes no outside forces acting on the rocket other than gravity. and here is the orbit it would have to be at inorder for it not to need any horizontal velocity other than what was imparted to it by the earth

1836279.347 (km) above the earths surface (altitude, not radius)).  i used the formula i used to find the tangental velocity at a specific orbit,  except i solved for the orbit
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"

Offline Tus-XC

  • Capt
  • XenoCorp® Member
  • Commander
  • *
  • Posts: 2789
  • Gender: Male
Re: Report Blames Shoddy Work on Shuttle Foam Replacement Project
« Reply #19 on: October 24, 2005, 09:55:44 pm »
a rough estimate on the time till impact once in orbit,

4 hours till impact (half of the period) (rough because at perigee is already under ground and finding the actual time is alot of derivatives and stuff i dont' want to do lol)
Rob

"Elige Sortem Tuam"