-
#3240
by
spacecane
on 02 Aug, 2014 16:51
-
-
#3241
by
Jim
on 02 Aug, 2014 17:46
-
Can you describe the functionality of the anti-geyser line? Asked another way, what kind of geyser did they fear may have been created?
To allow for recirculation of the LO2 in feed line, so it does not geyser since it was a narrow tube.
-
#3242
by
OV135
on 02 Aug, 2014 21:39
-
Are there any diagrams of this line on the ET and photos of the first 3 external tanks with this line?
-
#3243
by
mkirk
on 02 Aug, 2014 23:17
-
Can you describe the functionality of the anti-geyser line? Asked another way, what kind of geyser did they fear may have been created?
I've attached a pdf of a systems brief about the geyser phenomenon that will probably over answer your question.
Can't seem to find any good diagrams of the original tanks, best bet is probably to google early images of the first missions and see if you can get a good image of the lines from those pics.
Mark Kirkman
-
#3244
by
spacecane
on 03 Aug, 2014 16:50
-
Can you describe the functionality of the anti-geyser line? Asked another way, what kind of geyser did they fear may have been created?
I've attached a pdf of a systems brief about the geyser phenomenon that will probably over answer your question.
Can't seem to find any good diagrams of the original tanks, best bet is probably to google early images of the first missions and see if you can get a good image of the lines from those pics.
Mark Kirkman
Thanks for that PDF. Now I understand what the geyser phenomenon is all about. It's always nice to learn about things that you don't think about if you aren't a rocket designer like the thermal effects on the LO2 feedline.
-
#3245
by
OV135
on 03 Aug, 2014 17:31
-
I can't open the pdf. Could someone get the diagrams and photos from it please?
-
#3246
by
DaveS
on 03 Aug, 2014 22:00
-
Does anyone know the average max Q experienced by the stack during ascent? I thinking the average of max Q calculated over all the 135 launches.
-
#3247
by
wolfpack
on 04 Aug, 2014 13:55
-
Does anyone know the average max Q experienced by the stack during ascent? I thinking the average of max Q calculated over all the 135 launches.
It's around 700 lbs/sq ft. Are you looking for more precision than that?
-
#3248
by
DaveS
on 04 Aug, 2014 14:54
-
Does anyone know the average max Q experienced by the stack during ascent? I thinking the average of max Q calculated over all the 135 launches.
It's around 700 lbs/sq ft. Are you looking for more precision than that?
No, that's precise enough, thanks.
-
#3249
by
psloss
on 04 Aug, 2014 15:04
-
The old public revision of the "Green Book" data (published in 1999 or 2000) has a pretty large Max-Q data set, though the Max-Q data only runs about 80 launches or so:
http://www.spaceflight.nasa.gov/shuttle/reference/green/ascorb.pdf(Updates for some of these data sets were posted on L2, but not sure about this one...I'd be interested in the Max-Q numbers after the "Performance Enhancements" that were done for Freedom/ISS after ASRM was cancelled.)
Edit: my bad, didn't look hard enough at the oft-cited
Missions Summary Book; the Max-Q data is in there (including what I would take to be (P)redicted vs. (A)ctual numbers).
-
#3250
by
Hog
on 04 Aug, 2014 16:35
-
What is this feed line next to the LO2 gaseous press line on the ET for STS-1? http://images.ksc.nasa.gov/photos/1981/high/KSC-381C-2366.03.jpg
It's not on the tank for STS-7, which is the same SWET as that for STS-1. http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/2163main_sts7_et_hi.jpg
anti-geyser line, which was removed for STS-4
Can you describe the functionality of the anti-geyser line? Asked another way, what kind of geyser did they fear may have been created?
Great question.
Ive always had a mental picture of a geyser scenario, but I've never understood how the anti-gyser system functions.
It's also interesting to read about the effects of "water/fluid hammer". This can be very destructive.
The " hot slug" of LOX during tanking is also interesting, hard for the "layperson" to grasp as we are dealing with temps. of approx 89° Kelvin/-183°C/-297ºF. Good on the teams for figuring that issue out.
-
#3251
by
DaveS
on 05 Aug, 2014 16:45
-
Does anyone know the dry mass of the Standard Casing SRMs used on STS-1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 8 and 9? The same for the Medium Weight Casing SRMs used on STS-41B, 41C, STS-51G and STS-51F.
-
#3252
by
Pipcard
on 06 Aug, 2014 06:04
-
How did the tail cone (for approach and landing tests) manage to fit on to the space shuttle when the body flap would get in the way of the cone's bottom wall?
image illustrating my perplexionThe reason I'm asking this is because I'm making a 3D model of the cancelled Japanese space shuttle "HOPE-X", but I'm not sure on how to make the launch vehicle's payload adapter with that body flap in the way.
-
#3253
by
AS-503
on 06 Aug, 2014 06:17
-
How did the tail cone (for approach and landing tests) manage to fit on to the space shuttle when the body flap would get in the way of the cone's bottom wall?
image illustrating my perplexion
The reason I'm asking this is because I'm making a 3D model of the cancelled Japanese space shuttle "HOPE-X", but I'm not sure on how to make the launch vehicle's payload adapter with that body flap in the way.
This image should help!
-
#3254
by
Pipcard
on 06 Aug, 2014 06:22
-
But how come there isn't an indent at the bottom of the tail cone in the image I posted?
-
#3255
by
AS-503
on 06 Aug, 2014 06:25
-
Take a closer look. The red lines are not correct. They should extend from the cone to the top of the body flap (not the bottom as the red lines indicate).
You can see in the image I posted that there are extra fairings and pieces not shown in your photo.
For example, the sides of the body flap are covered by fairings not shown in your photo.
I have re-attached your image with corrections.
The green box shows the area where the flap recesses (note the shape of the cone that matches the flap's rear edge).
Also, the green lines are drawn to show actual interface instead of the red lines.
-
#3256
by
Helodriver
on 06 Aug, 2014 06:49
-
-
#3257
by
psloss
on 06 Aug, 2014 10:38
-
But how come there isn't an indent at the bottom of the tail cone in the image I posted?
There is, but the way the image is framed or zoomed makes it more difficult to see it or gain much perspective. Is that the whole image (sure looks like it's from the MDD at Dryden)?
Link to a shot of buildup at KSC that shows it better (small thumbnail attached):
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/detail.cfm?mediaid=59472
-
#3258
by
spacecane
on 07 Aug, 2014 15:24
-
I can't open the pdf. Could someone get the diagrams and photos from it please?
This is all that was in there diagram wise. No photos, just this (which is after removal of the line) and a bunch of graphs.
-
#3259
by
Pipcard
on 08 Aug, 2014 08:07
-
But how come there isn't an indent at the bottom of the tail cone in the image I posted?
There is, but the way the image is framed or zoomed makes it more difficult to see it or gain much perspective. Is that the whole image (sure looks like it's from the MDD at Dryden)?
Link to a shot of buildup at KSC that shows it better (small thumbnail attached):
http://mediaarchive.ksc.nasa.gov/detail.cfm?mediaid=59472
I cropped it from a Wikipedia picture (I think) found via a Google image search. Sorry for not paying attention to its full context.