Author Topic: Building BFR  (Read 30946 times)

Offline Johnnyhinbos

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1325
  • Boston, MA
  • Liked: 1465
  • Likes Given: 211
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #120 on: 04/19/2018 09:06 PM »
Some additional progress on the building site:

SpaceX gets approval to develop its BFR rocket and spaceship at Port of Los Angeles - Los Angeles Times

Quote
The Los Angeles Board of Harbor Commissioners voted unanimously Thursday to approve a permit that allows SpaceX to build and operate a facility at the Port of L.A. to develop its BFR rocket and spaceship system.

And did we know this?
Quote
Bruce McHugh, director of construction and real estate at SpaceX, estimated that production and fabrication of the rocket would begin in about two or three years.

Maybe he is talking about the BFR, since the next sentence talks about the BFR/BFS stack being 340 feet high.

Facility construction details in the article too...



And here's a link to the referenced article, as I didn't see it upthread...


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-spacex-port-la-20180419-story.html
John Hanzl. Author, action / adventure www.johnhanzl.com

Offline RedLineTrain

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 696
  • Liked: 408
  • Likes Given: 384
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #121 on: 04/19/2018 11:23 PM »
Here's video of the source for that article (the Harbor Commission meeting).  Starting at 35:35.

http://portofla.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=9&clip_id=1148

Online catdlr

  • Member
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5270
  • Viewed launches since the Redstones
  • Marina del Rey, California, USA
  • Liked: 1914
  • Likes Given: 1300
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #122 on: 04/24/2018 04:19 AM »
Might be a good summary video of the BFR from a fan site.

SpaceX BFR Update: Construction Begins!

NeoScribe
Published on Apr 20, 2018

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7G_ChY0Tsxw?t=001

Tony De La Rosa

Online dpark

  • Member
  • Posts: 10
  • Eastern Washington
  • Liked: 2
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #123 on: 06/09/2018 04:41 PM »
Full disclosure: Extremely bummed that this thread has slipped to the second page of the SpaceX BFR section of the forums, this post is a shameless ploy to put "Building BFR" back on the first page.  But the article does include a few nice photos of the Port of LA site.

https://www.teslarati.com/spacex-bfr-factory-four-falcon-9-fairing-halves-spied/

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 908
  • Liked: 710
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #124 on: 06/13/2018 07:16 AM »
Job opening at SpaceX: BFR Build Engineer
« Last Edit: 06/13/2018 07:19 AM by jpo234 »
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline wannamoonbase

  • Elite Veteran
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2982
  • Denver, CO
    • U.S. Metric Association
  • Liked: 684
  • Likes Given: 1123
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #125 on: 06/13/2018 02:29 PM »
The emphasis on joining of components and materials is no doubt the biggest part of building this thing.  So that's really cool to see.

The 'work evening and weekends as required, would have been ok in my 20's but at this point in my career that is a massive red flag saying 'don't make any other plans'
SpaceX, just a few things planned for 2018: FH, Starlink Prototypes, Block 5, Dragon 2, Increased launch rate.

Offline jpo234

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 908
  • Liked: 710
  • Likes Given: 103
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #126 on: 06/13/2018 03:05 PM »
The 'work evening and weekends as required, would have been ok in my 20's but at this point in my career that is a massive red flag saying 'don't make any other plans'

Sounds like an all out effort to get that bird of the ground. I would assume that after these heroics the hours become manageable again.

Is that all that different from the Apollo days? It reminds me of the "call your wives" scene in "Hidden Figures"...
You want to be inspired by things. You want to wake up in the morning and think the future is going to be great. That's what being a spacefaring civilization is all about. It's about believing in the future and believing the future will be better than the past. And I can't think of anything more exciting than being out there among the stars.

Offline Kansan52

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1067
  • Hutchinson, KS
  • Liked: 325
  • Likes Given: 374
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #127 on: 06/13/2018 03:48 PM »
Recently finished "Rocket Ranch" that is a great read and a history of the infrastructure for Apollo and the big wind down.

One of the last chapters recollected that they did 3 shifts, 7 days a week at the beginning but 1 shift (and implied less than 7 days a week) near the end. He commented that a benefit was you knew where the work left off on the last shift.

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22451
  • Liked: 761
  • Likes Given: 282
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #128 on: 06/17/2018 11:56 AM »
Do there seems to be a new white object at the temporary tent at the Port of Los Angeles that appeared between June 13-15th, you can see it when you compare Planet Satellite imagery here:

https://goo.gl/iwf2xm
"Every vision is a joke until the first man accomplishes it; once realized, it becomes commonplace." - Robert Goddard

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #129 on: 06/20/2018 04:17 PM »
Lots of talk of autoclaves here. For something this massive, anyone sane would be looking at out-of-autopclave  processes. This ranges from dry-layup with prepreg CF (using low-temperature bonding), dry-layup with non-prepreg resin sheets (laid in-between CF layers, heat of the oven melts it to infiltrate and bond the layers), or dry-layup with resin infusion (probably not for something this large and strength-critical). All these processes are common in that they do not use an autoclave just a 'low temperature' oven (generally anywhere from 80C to 180C depending on resin), they use a single-piece mould with vacuum-bagging (avoids a costly multi-piece mould), and retain the strength, weight, and low-defect benefits of pre-preg over wet-layup. Modern OOA pre-preg does not even require the store-to-tool refrigeration that it once did, eliminating that cost too.

Offline Rabidpanda

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 500
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 568
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #130 on: 06/20/2018 07:17 PM »
Lots of talk of autoclaves here. For something this massive, anyone sane would be looking at out-of-autopclave  processes. This ranges from dry-layup with prepreg CF (using low-temperature bonding), dry-layup with non-prepreg resin sheets (laid in-between CF layers, heat of the oven melts it to infiltrate and bond the layers), or dry-layup with resin infusion (probably not for something this large and strength-critical). All these processes are common in that they do not use an autoclave just a 'low temperature' oven (generally anywhere from 80C to 180C depending on resin), they use a single-piece mould with vacuum-bagging (avoids a costly multi-piece mould), and retain the strength, weight, and low-defect benefits of pre-preg over wet-layup. Modern OOA pre-preg does not even require the store-to-tool refrigeration that it once did, eliminating that cost too.

Out-of-autoclave is not the automatic answer for primary structure that is designed for many reuses. There must be a good reason composite aircraft wings and fuselages use massive autoclaves and not out-of-autoclave prepregs. If they do go with an OOA process it would almost certainly just be a typical oven-cured prepreg like what is currently used for fairings and interstages, not a resin infusion or separate resin sheet layup (Ive never heard of that).

Offline Ronsmytheiii

  • Moderator
  • Global Moderator
  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 22451
  • Liked: 761
  • Likes Given: 282
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #131 on: 06/20/2018 08:07 PM »
Do there seems to be a new white object at the temporary tent at the Port of Los Angeles that appeared between June 13-15th, you can see it when you compare Planet Satellite imagery here:

https://goo.gl/iwf2xm

Updated image from a high res skysat confirms a new white tarp/structure of some kind:

https://bit.ly/2K0R8pO
"Every vision is a joke until the first man accomplishes it; once realized, it becomes commonplace." - Robert Goddard

Offline RobLynn

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 254
  • Per Molestias Eruditio
  • London
  • Liked: 31
  • Likes Given: 26
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #132 on: 06/21/2018 12:22 AM »
Lots of talk of autoclaves here. For something this massive, anyone sane would be looking at out-of-autopclave  processes. This ranges from dry-layup with prepreg CF (using low-temperature bonding), dry-layup with non-prepreg resin sheets (laid in-between CF layers, heat of the oven melts it to infiltrate and bond the layers), or dry-layup with resin infusion (probably not for something this large and strength-critical). All these processes are common in that they do not use an autoclave just a 'low temperature' oven (generally anywhere from 80C to 180C depending on resin), they use a single-piece mould with vacuum-bagging (avoids a costly multi-piece mould), and retain the strength, weight, and low-defect benefits of pre-preg over wet-layup. Modern OOA pre-preg does not even require the store-to-tool refrigeration that it once did, eliminating that cost too.

For best properties (and high temperature capable polyimides) autoclaving probably gives best properties attainable, and SpaceX must want to get the best out of the materials.
The ASC Autoclave for the 787 body sections is 9.5 x 22m long.  500tonnes, 232C.  Boeing has three more autoclaves for 777 wings of 37mx 8.5m.

Steel is cheap, cheapest grades $0.4/kg or less in bulk, and many cheap alloys retain good strength to at least 300C.  International shipyards can manufacture big steel structures for $1-2/kg so even assuming a factor of 10x higher than that for x-raying and ASME boiler and pressure vessel code compliance + transport SpaceX could likely get an autoclave manufactured anywhere and barged to their factory for $10-20million.  Likely worth it if they plan on building 5-10 BFR's and BFS's, where each of the tanks is probably going to cost more than that.

I'm a "glass is twice as big as it needs to be" kinda guy

Offline envy887

  • Senior Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3994
  • Liked: 2060
  • Likes Given: 1236
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #133 on: 06/21/2018 12:29 AM »
Lots of talk of autoclaves here. For something this massive, anyone sane would be looking at out-of-autopclave  processes. This ranges from dry-layup with prepreg CF (using low-temperature bonding), dry-layup with non-prepreg resin sheets (laid in-between CF layers, heat of the oven melts it to infiltrate and bond the layers), or dry-layup with resin infusion (probably not for something this large and strength-critical). All these processes are common in that they do not use an autoclave just a 'low temperature' oven (generally anywhere from 80C to 180C depending on resin), they use a single-piece mould with vacuum-bagging (avoids a costly multi-piece mould), and retain the strength, weight, and low-defect benefits of pre-preg over wet-layup. Modern OOA pre-preg does not even require the store-to-tool refrigeration that it once did, eliminating that cost too.

For best properties (and high temperature capable polyimides) autoclaving probably gives best properties attainable, and SpaceX must want to get the best out of the materials.
The ASC Autoclave for the 787 body sections is 9.5 x 22m long.  500tonnes, 232C.  Boeing has three more autoclaves for 777 wings of 37mx 8.5m.

Steel is cheap, cheapest grades $0.4/kg or less in bulk, and many cheap alloys retain good strength to at least 300C.  International shipyards can manufacture big steel structures for $1-2/kg so even assuming a factor of 10x higher than that for x-raying and ASME boiler and pressure vessel code compliance + transport SpaceX could likely get an autoclave manufactured anywhere and barged to their factory for $10-20million.  Likely worth it if they plan on building 5-10 BFR's and BFS's, where each of the tanks is probably going to cost more than that.

Do they need to autoclave on the winding mandrel, or can they take it out and autoclave the empty tank?

Offline Rabidpanda

  • Full Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 500
  • Liked: 83
  • Likes Given: 568
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #134 on: 06/21/2018 01:02 AM »
Lots of talk of autoclaves here. For something this massive, anyone sane would be looking at out-of-autopclave  processes. This ranges from dry-layup with prepreg CF (using low-temperature bonding), dry-layup with non-prepreg resin sheets (laid in-between CF layers, heat of the oven melts it to infiltrate and bond the layers), or dry-layup with resin infusion (probably not for something this large and strength-critical). All these processes are common in that they do not use an autoclave just a 'low temperature' oven (generally anywhere from 80C to 180C depending on resin), they use a single-piece mould with vacuum-bagging (avoids a costly multi-piece mould), and retain the strength, weight, and low-defect benefits of pre-preg over wet-layup. Modern OOA pre-preg does not even require the store-to-tool refrigeration that it once did, eliminating that cost too.

For best properties (and high temperature capable polyimides) autoclaving probably gives best properties attainable, and SpaceX must want to get the best out of the materials.
The ASC Autoclave for the 787 body sections is 9.5 x 22m long.  500tonnes, 232C.  Boeing has three more autoclaves for 777 wings of 37mx 8.5m.

Steel is cheap, cheapest grades $0.4/kg or less in bulk, and many cheap alloys retain good strength to at least 300C.  International shipyards can manufacture big steel structures for $1-2/kg so even assuming a factor of 10x higher than that for x-raying and ASME boiler and pressure vessel code compliance + transport SpaceX could likely get an autoclave manufactured anywhere and barged to their factory for $10-20million.  Likely worth it if they plan on building 5-10 BFR's and BFS's, where each of the tanks is probably going to cost more than that.

Do they need to autoclave on the winding mandrel, or can they take it out and autoclave the empty tank?

You need the mandrel.*

*Some resins are designed to be cured on a tool at a lower temperature, removed from the tool and then post-cured at a higher temperature. Thats only advantageous if your tool is temp limited though.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #135 on: 06/21/2018 02:23 PM »
Lots of talk of autoclaves here. For something this massive, anyone sane would be looking at out-of-autopclave  processes. This ranges from dry-layup with prepreg CF (using low-temperature bonding), dry-layup with non-prepreg resin sheets (laid in-between CF layers, heat of the oven melts it to infiltrate and bond the layers), or dry-layup with resin infusion (probably not for something this large and strength-critical). All these processes are common in that they do not use an autoclave just a 'low temperature' oven (generally anywhere from 80C to 180C depending on resin), they use a single-piece mould with vacuum-bagging (avoids a costly multi-piece mould), and retain the strength, weight, and low-defect benefits of pre-preg over wet-layup. Modern OOA pre-preg does not even require the store-to-tool refrigeration that it once did, eliminating that cost too.

Out-of-autoclave is not the automatic answer for primary structure that is designed for many reuses. There must be a good reason composite aircraft wings and fuselages use massive autoclaves and not out-of-autoclave prepregs. If they do go with an OOA process it would almost certainly just be a typical oven-cured prepreg like what is currently used for fairings and interstages, not a resin infusion or separate resin sheet layup (Ive never heard of that).
Everyone not building on an existing line designed decades ago is moving away from autoclaving when they can. e.g. the LM X-55 Advanced Composite Cargo Aircraft, Boeing Phantom Eye, Solar Impulse 2, Irkut MC-21, Cirrus SR-22, JASSM, CH-47 forward pylon replacement, 787 pressure bulkhead and control surfaces, etc.

Toray are also switching towards OOA processes, particularly direct heating of the form/mandrel (rather than a convective curing oven). It would be very interesting to see the reverse side of the outer surface of the SpaceX mandrel to see if it is covered in heating elements.

Offline DistantTemple

  • Full Member
  • **
  • Posts: 264
  • England
  • Liked: 137
  • Likes Given: 276
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #136 on: 06/21/2018 03:49 PM »
Thats very interesting when we remember that the famous mandrel the EM tweeted has that complex inner structure, including a second well supported inner cylinder some 1m or so inside the outer mandrel surface. Once I/we accepted that the outer surface was where the cf would be laid up, it left the inner complexity unexplained. Heating elements to heat the mandrel from inside could be an explanation! (However my fibreglass (not even CF) experience is limited to a couple of square feet and one mold!!!)
We can always grow new new dendrites. Reach out and make connections and your world will burst with new insights. Then repose in consciousness.

Offline rsdavis9

Re: Building BFR
« Reply #137 on: 06/21/2018 03:54 PM »
How do they get CF composite off of the mandrel?
Coated with some kind of grease to slide it off?
Maybe mandrel can split into sections to become smaller?
With ELV best efficiency was the paradigm. The new paradigm is reusable, good enough, and commonality of design.
Same engines. Design once. Same vehicle. Design once. Reusable. Build once.

Offline Bananas_on_Mars

  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 112
  • Liked: 59
  • Likes Given: 12
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #138 on: 06/21/2018 04:28 PM »
How do they get CF composite off of the mandrel?
Coated with some kind of grease to slide it off?
Maybe mandrel can split into sections to become smaller?
Cool the mandrel, blow pressurised air between mandrel/shell, slightly tapered mandrel... lot's of possibilities. No grease.

Offline edzieba

  • Virtual Realist
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Posts: 141
  • United Kingdom
  • Liked: 121
  • Likes Given: 27
Re: Building BFR
« Reply #139 on: 06/21/2018 04:51 PM »
There is a Release Agent applied to the form before the CF, though it's more of a wax (or non-bonding polymer like PVA) than a grease.

Tags: