Quote from: Clueless Idiot on 07/31/2016 08:20 pm I dont have the patience or intelligence to do the research myself I don't either
I dont have the patience or intelligence to do the research myself
Quote from: Jim on 07/31/2016 08:00 pmyes, yes and no, they are nothing similar (rotating machinery, pressures and temperatures) to lighters.Will you please thoroughly explain the two yes's pretty please? I dont have the patience or intelligence to do the research myself so please just bestow upon thee your great wisdom. So again referring to the SA-T stage, how much refurbishment happened in between those 31 firings? Now heres the thing, I have been thinking about this lots lately, what is the refurbishment rate of rocket engines in general? Of course those rocket scientists know this answer already. Imagine yur a rocket scientist and you fire up rocket engine on a test stand, then you inspect the engine and you find that A. It doesn't need any refurbishment at all or B. It needs parts replaced or soot needs to be cleaned out or something. Lets pretend option A happened, ok now you fire it again and you inspect it and once again you find that it needs refurbishment or not. Ok now you repeat these steps again and again.Now I am sure this has happened already in the real world. But what Im not sure about is whether the rocket scientist discovered option A or B?I mean spacex has of course done this experiment with the merlin and they know the answer. Oh help me out here?
yes, yes and no, they are nothing similar (rotating machinery, pressures and temperatures) to lighters.
A somewhat tricker aspect is the longevity of the tank assembly, and these recent tests are highly encouraging.
Quote from: meekGee on 07/31/2016 10:20 pmA somewhat tricker aspect is the longevity of the tank assembly, and these recent tests are highly encouraging. Not sure we really know that. We have no idea what was done to the stage between recovery and the current cycle of tests. We know the basic overall structure was intact at recovery and is - at this moment - capable of handling several consecutive cryo loading cycles and static firings. We don't yet know if any maintenance or repairs were done in between, and we don't yet know if any stage can be successfully reflown. I think most engineers would say things look positive, though I doubt a great number - especially anyone who's got experience in structural fatigue testing analysis - would YET go so far as to say "highly encouraging." Some may see this as picking nits. Others may see it in the intended light, which is merely to be factual without coming across as overly-effusive. Let's see 'em re-fly a stage. THAT will be better grounds for all the effusive praise people want to bestow - retroactively if necessary - on the current testing being done on any recovered stages.
Quote from: gongora on 07/31/2016 01:18 amQuote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 01:01 amQuote from: gongora on 07/31/2016 12:20 amQuote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 12:03 amWith this many full duration burns in such a short period, how much in fines/Fees they will owe to McGregor City for violating new sound ordinance ?What ordinance do you think they have violated?Local Media KWTX newshttp://www.kwtx.com/content/news/McGregor--City-modifies-SpaceX-rocket-testing-rules-378857891.htmlWaco Tribune http://www.wacotrib.com/news/business/mcgregor-sets-new-limits-on-spacex-rocket-noise/article_174a13fd-652b-5139-a4fa-2d328cc89f0e.htmlCourtesy of Parabolic Archttp://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/05/11/mcgregor-spaced-rocket-testing-rules/IDK what the dB level of a F9-FT full duration is? Can anyone enlighten me?There is an ordinance, but what part of that ordinance does anyone think has been violated? As one of the articles says:QuoteCity Manager Kevin Evans said the company’s tests are typically below 100 decibels and have never exceeded the 115-decibel mark.And why would firing a stage for a full duration burn be any louder than a shorter burn?It does mention "The ordinance also limits acceptance tests to 15-seconds or less and says that if noise limits of 125 decibels are exceeded, the test must be curtailed within 3 seconds."Doesn't the long full-duration burns last beyond 15 seconds. Although, I'm not exactly sure what acceptance tests are.
Quote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 01:01 amQuote from: gongora on 07/31/2016 12:20 amQuote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 12:03 amWith this many full duration burns in such a short period, how much in fines/Fees they will owe to McGregor City for violating new sound ordinance ?What ordinance do you think they have violated?Local Media KWTX newshttp://www.kwtx.com/content/news/McGregor--City-modifies-SpaceX-rocket-testing-rules-378857891.htmlWaco Tribune http://www.wacotrib.com/news/business/mcgregor-sets-new-limits-on-spacex-rocket-noise/article_174a13fd-652b-5139-a4fa-2d328cc89f0e.htmlCourtesy of Parabolic Archttp://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/05/11/mcgregor-spaced-rocket-testing-rules/IDK what the dB level of a F9-FT full duration is? Can anyone enlighten me?There is an ordinance, but what part of that ordinance does anyone think has been violated? As one of the articles says:QuoteCity Manager Kevin Evans said the company’s tests are typically below 100 decibels and have never exceeded the 115-decibel mark.And why would firing a stage for a full duration burn be any louder than a shorter burn?
Quote from: gongora on 07/31/2016 12:20 amQuote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 12:03 amWith this many full duration burns in such a short period, how much in fines/Fees they will owe to McGregor City for violating new sound ordinance ?What ordinance do you think they have violated?Local Media KWTX newshttp://www.kwtx.com/content/news/McGregor--City-modifies-SpaceX-rocket-testing-rules-378857891.htmlWaco Tribune http://www.wacotrib.com/news/business/mcgregor-sets-new-limits-on-spacex-rocket-noise/article_174a13fd-652b-5139-a4fa-2d328cc89f0e.htmlCourtesy of Parabolic Archttp://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/05/11/mcgregor-spaced-rocket-testing-rules/IDK what the dB level of a F9-FT full duration is? Can anyone enlighten me?
Quote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 12:03 amWith this many full duration burns in such a short period, how much in fines/Fees they will owe to McGregor City for violating new sound ordinance ?What ordinance do you think they have violated?
With this many full duration burns in such a short period, how much in fines/Fees they will owe to McGregor City for violating new sound ordinance ?
City Manager Kevin Evans said the company’s tests are typically below 100 decibels and have never exceeded the 115-decibel mark.
Quote from: rabe0070 on 07/31/2016 07:34 pmQuote from: gongora on 07/31/2016 01:18 amQuote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 01:01 amQuote from: gongora on 07/31/2016 12:20 amQuote from: Wolfram66 on 07/31/2016 12:03 amWith this many full duration burns in such a short period, how much in fines/Fees they will owe to McGregor City for violating new sound ordinance ?What ordinance do you think they have violated?Local Media KWTX newshttp://www.kwtx.com/content/news/McGregor--City-modifies-SpaceX-rocket-testing-rules-378857891.htmlWaco Tribune http://www.wacotrib.com/news/business/mcgregor-sets-new-limits-on-spacex-rocket-noise/article_174a13fd-652b-5139-a4fa-2d328cc89f0e.htmlCourtesy of Parabolic Archttp://www.parabolicarc.com/2016/05/11/mcgregor-spaced-rocket-testing-rules/IDK what the dB level of a F9-FT full duration is? Can anyone enlighten me?There is an ordinance, but what part of that ordinance does anyone think has been violated? As one of the articles says:QuoteCity Manager Kevin Evans said the company’s tests are typically below 100 decibels and have never exceeded the 115-decibel mark.And why would firing a stage for a full duration burn be any louder than a shorter burn?It does mention "The ordinance also limits acceptance tests to 15-seconds or less and says that if noise limits of 125 decibels are exceeded, the test must be curtailed within 3 seconds."Doesn't the long full-duration burns last beyond 15 seconds. Although, I'm not exactly sure what acceptance tests are.Or you can watch the video and judge the noise level for yourself: https://www.facebook.com/keith.wallace.75/videos/1194215193930192/I think the bird chirping is louder than the firing, Keith Wallace said it's only 45db inside his house.
Quote from: edkyle99 on 07/31/2016 02:26 pmQuote from: AncientU on 07/31/2016 12:40 amHas anyone ever done this on a non-flown stage, let alone a flown one?We're making history here folks.SA-T, the first Saturn stage, was fired 31 times during 1960-62 at MSFC.http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/sa-t.html - Ed KyleBeen lurking here since 2011, thats when Elon caught my eye and I drank his coolaid and never looked back.Ok listen, there must be someone here who either works with rockets or has read many books on the matter. So the SA-T, when it was fired 31 times in a row, how much refurbishment was done on the engines and or body in between firings? I mean there must be books out there that would give details on this stuff and there must be people here who have read said books?Are there any other examples? What about simple engine testing where they fire an engine by itself? Has anyone ever just fired a rocket engine on the test stand, say, a hundred times in a row without doing any refurbishment at all? I mean think of a basic lighter, i can use a lighter for hundreds upon hundreds of times without having to replace it so why cant rocket engines operate on the same principle? After all they're just really big lighters when ya think about it.
Quote from: AncientU on 07/31/2016 12:40 amHas anyone ever done this on a non-flown stage, let alone a flown one?We're making history here folks.SA-T, the first Saturn stage, was fired 31 times during 1960-62 at MSFC.http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/sa-t.html - Ed Kyle
Has anyone ever done this on a non-flown stage, let alone a flown one?We're making history here folks.
Quote from: Clueless Idiot on 07/31/2016 07:55 pmQuote from: edkyle99 on 07/31/2016 02:26 pmQuote from: AncientU on 07/31/2016 12:40 amHas anyone ever done this on a non-flown stage, let alone a flown one?We're making history here folks.SA-T, the first Saturn stage, was fired 31 times during 1960-62 at MSFC.http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/sa-t.html - Ed KyleBeen lurking here since 2011, thats when Elon caught my eye and I drank his coolaid and never looked back.Ok listen, there must be someone here who either works with rockets or has read many books on the matter. So the SA-T, when it was fired 31 times in a row, how much refurbishment was done on the engines and or body in between firings? I mean there must be books out there that would give details on this stuff and there must be people here who have read said books?Are there any other examples? What about simple engine testing where they fire an engine by itself? Has anyone ever just fired a rocket engine on the test stand, say, a hundred times in a row without doing any refurbishment at all? I mean think of a basic lighter, i can use a lighter for hundreds upon hundreds of times without having to replace it so why cant rocket engines operate on the same principle? After all they're just really big lighters when ya think about it.There are NASA history resources online that may include the information, for example this onehttp://history.nasa.gov/MHR-5/contents.htmbut the single best resource that I've run across is Alan Lawries's meticulously researched book. It lists every firing and logs the history of every Saturn I/IB stage. (He authored a similar volume on Saturn V).http://www.cgpublishing.com/Books/9781894959858.htmlSA-T was tested in numerous configurations, to mimic precisely the various flight stage configurations (e.g. Block 1, Block 2, etc.). It was fired several times in each configuration, usually with a few days between each test. - Ed Kyle
Was 3 it (for now??) or am I missing some news?
Perhaps this means we might, possibly, maybe, see a 'kaboom' on the test stand?? Ooo, goody!!
Quote from: CameronD on 08/01/2016 11:14 pmPerhaps this means we might, possibly, maybe, see a 'kaboom' on the test stand?? Ooo, goody!! No...please no...no, no no!They don't need any test stands down or any collateral damage at McGregor right now. If it goes boom on the stand....so does their launch dates for a while depending on the "quality" of the boom....I want to see MORE rocket launches this year....not less.
Well how much refurbishment happened between those firings? Come one I'm sure the book tells it
Quote from: Lar on 08/01/2016 04:13 pmWas 3 it (for now??) or am I missing some news?Yep.
Quote from: ulm_atms on 08/02/2016 12:32 amQuote from: CameronD on 08/01/2016 11:14 pmPerhaps this means we might, possibly, maybe, see a 'kaboom' on the test stand?? Ooo, goody!! No...please no...no, no no!They don't need any test stands down or any collateral damage at McGregor right now. If it goes boom on the stand....so does their launch dates for a while depending on the "quality" of the boom....I want to see MORE rocket launches this year....not less. That's fair enough. I'm no metals expert, but presumably (amongst other things) SpX have to test this/a stage's tankage to destruction to determine how many re-flights they can safely do.. or is there some way to determine this categorically without filling and emptying repeatedly until that final RUD?Has Elon ever said how many re-flights the stages are designed to handle? There must be some limit on it..
Quote from: CameronD on 08/02/2016 03:05 amQuote from: ulm_atms on 08/02/2016 12:32 amQuote from: CameronD on 08/01/2016 11:14 pmPerhaps this means we might, possibly, maybe, see a 'kaboom' on the test stand?? Ooo, goody!! No...please no...no, no no!They don't need any test stands down or any collateral damage at McGregor right now. If it goes boom on the stand....so does their launch dates for a while depending on the "quality" of the boom....I want to see MORE rocket launches this year....not less. That's fair enough. I'm no metals expert, but presumably (amongst other things) SpX have to test this/a stage's tankage to destruction to determine how many re-flights they can safely do.. or is there some way to determine this categorically without filling and emptying repeatedly until that final RUD?Has Elon ever said how many re-flights the stages are designed to handle? There must be some limit on it..Kind of like how many licks to get to the center of a tootsie-pop!👅🚀