-
#20 by manboy on 24 Mar, 2015 22:40
-
None.
Is it the case that 3 petals in a mated pair are no longer removeable, or 6 petals in a mated pair are no longer removeable?
That's outdated info. The passthrough diameter is now 800 mm (31.5 in), the petals are no longer removable.Can the NDS act as the space side of an air lock?
What's the inner diameter? AIUI, astros prefer a big door with little chance of entangling.
It may need a door.
NDS - The NASA Docking System has a passage for crew and cargo with a diameter of 685 millimetres (27.0 in), which can be increased to 813 millimetres (32.0 in) by removing the petals of the capture mechanism after mating. IMHO An outer door will probably have the petals present.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NASA_Docking_System -
#21 by manboy on 24 Mar, 2015 22:50
-
Do you have a source for that? I've been working on the wikipedia page and I've been having trouble finding reliable info on the hybrid docking system.What's stopping a docking port passageway from being larger than around 0.8 meters? I heard that it was because docking ports were less rigid than berthing ports (so larger diameters would be harder to keep airtight), but I need more reasons why we can't have a passage that's 1 or even 1.3 meters in diameter.
The Russian hybrid docking system has a passage that is 1100 mm in diameter. -
#22 by Danderman on 25 Mar, 2015 13:16
-
Do you have a source for that? I've been working on the wikipedia page and I've been having trouble finding reliable info on the hybrid docking system.What's stopping a docking port passageway from being larger than around 0.8 meters? I heard that it was because docking ports were less rigid than berthing ports (so larger diameters would be harder to keep airtight), but I need more reasons why we can't have a passage that's 1 or even 1.3 meters in diameter.
The Russian hybrid docking system has a passage that is 1100 mm in diameter.
My sources are either NASA documents or L2 material.
-
#23 by manboy on 26 Mar, 2015 04:54
-
Can you be more specific? Also I'm on L2.
Do you have a source for that? I've been working on the wikipedia page and I've been having trouble finding reliable info on the hybrid docking system.What's stopping a docking port passageway from being larger than around 0.8 meters? I heard that it was because docking ports were less rigid than berthing ports (so larger diameters would be harder to keep airtight), but I need more reasons why we can't have a passage that's 1 or even 1.3 meters in diameter.
The Russian hybrid docking system has a passage that is 1100 mm in diameter.
My sources are either NASA documents or L2 material. -
#24 by Danderman on 26 Mar, 2015 13:16
-
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23673.0
The first messages in this topic contain documents concerning the Node module, and in these documents are references to the dimensions of the hybrid docking adapters used on the Node module. -
#25 by Nicolas PILLET on 26 Mar, 2015 16:48
-
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23673.0
The first messages in this topic contain documents concerning the Node module, and in these documents are references to the dimensions of the hybrid docking adapters used on the Node module.
OK, you speak about the FUTURE "hybrid" system.
The "hybrid system" currently used on RS (SSVP-M) has only 1000mm diameter.
http://www.kosmonavtika.com/vaisseaux/ssvp/tech/3/3.html -
#26 by DaveS on 26 Mar, 2015 16:58
-
I originally posted this in the Shuttle Q&A thread but I think it's better at home here:
What is the diameter of the APAS-95 structural interface ring? I know that the petal-to-petal diameter is 800 mm but what is the diameter of the structural interface ring? -
#27 by Danderman on 27 Mar, 2015 14:12
-
http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23673.0
The first messages in this topic contain documents concerning the Node module, and in these documents are references to the dimensions of the hybrid docking adapters used on the Node module.
OK, you speak about the FUTURE "hybrid" system.
The "hybrid system" currently used on RS (SSVP-M) has only 1000mm diameter.
http://www.kosmonavtika.com/vaisseaux/ssvp/tech/3/3.html
Unfortunately, I cannot release any proprietary documents, but documents from the source are clear that the internal diameter of the existing hybrid system is 1100 mm.
Also, MLM and Node module docking systems are compatible with existing docking systems at ISS, and therefore the "new" hybrid adapter would have the same inner diameter as the existing hybrid adapters, or else docking would be impossible. Of course, the newest hybrid hybrids that are located axially on the Node module are hybrids with an internal hatch diameter of 800 mm, but that is a special case.
-
#28 by Danderman on 27 Mar, 2015 14:12
-
I originally posted this in the Shuttle Q&A thread but I think it's better at home here:
What is the diameter of the APAS-95 structural interface ring? I know that the petal-to-petal diameter is 800 mm but what is the diameter of the structural interface ring?
Your question is not clear, but the APAS-89 and later variants have the same structural ring as hybrid and therefore the diameter is 1100 mm. -
#29 by DaveS on 27 Mar, 2015 18:17
-
The structural ring I'm talking about is the one with hooks/latches. And it's the outer diameter of this ring I'm interested in.
-
#30 by Danderman on 27 Mar, 2015 20:01
-
The structural ring I'm talking about is the one with hooks/latches. And it's the outer diameter of this ring I'm interested in.
What about the brackets? These are non-standard, and may vary from application to application.
-
#31 by DaveS on 27 Mar, 2015 20:26
-
What brackets? Are you talking about about the four interface connectors (X1 through X4)?The structural ring I'm talking about is the one with hooks/latches. And it's the outer diameter of this ring I'm interested in.
What about the brackets? These are non-standard, and may vary from application to application.
-
#32 by AnalogMan on 28 Mar, 2015 00:29
-
The structural ring I'm talking about is the one with hooks/latches. And it's the outer diameter of this ring I'm interested in.
Not sure if this will help, and you may already be aware of this, but there are some engineering drawings of the ISS docking system in a document titled "Procurement Specification for the Androgynous Peripheral Docking System for the ISS Missions" available on L2 (page 202 - 229).
On a quick look I was not able to see the particular dimension you are interested in called out directly on the various drawings, but you could scale from other radial dimensions given (they are bit-map images so results will inevitably be subject to a certain amount of uncertainty).
For the document see: http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=22452.0 -
#33 by Danderman on 28 Mar, 2015 14:02
-
A photo of moi with Dr. Vladimir Syromiatnikov, who developed APAS-89. All dockings since 1975 have been conducted using systems developed by him, US, Russian and Chinese.
-
#34 by manboy on 29 Mar, 2015 07:57
-
I originally posted this in the Shuttle Q&A thread but I think it's better at home here:
What is the diameter of the APAS-95 structural interface ring? I know that the petal-to-petal diameter is 800 mm but what is the diameter of the structural interface ring?
-
#35 by manboy on 29 Mar, 2015 08:03
-
In that case I have a second question. Can you explain what's different between APAS-89 and APAS-95?http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23673.0
The first messages in this topic contain documents concerning the Node module, and in these documents are references to the dimensions of the hybrid docking adapters used on the Node module.
OK, you speak about the FUTURE "hybrid" system.
The "hybrid system" currently used on RS (SSVP-M) has only 1000mm diameter.
http://www.kosmonavtika.com/vaisseaux/ssvp/tech/3/3.html
Unfortunately, I cannot release any proprietary documents, but documents from the source are clear that the internal diameter of the existing hybrid system is 1100 mm.
Also, MLM and Node module docking systems are compatible with existing docking systems at ISS, and therefore the "new" hybrid adapter would have the same inner diameter as the existing hybrid adapters, or else docking would be impossible. Of course, the newest hybrid hybrids that are located axially on the Node module are hybrids with an internal hatch diameter of 800 mm, but that is a special case. -
#36 by Danderman on 29 Mar, 2015 13:28
-
In that case I have a second question. Can you explain what's different between APAS-89 and APAS-95?http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23673.0
The first messages in this topic contain documents concerning the Node module, and in these documents are references to the dimensions of the hybrid docking adapters used on the Node module.
OK, you speak about the FUTURE "hybrid" system.
The "hybrid system" currently used on RS (SSVP-M) has only 1000mm diameter.
http://www.kosmonavtika.com/vaisseaux/ssvp/tech/3/3.html
Unfortunately, I cannot release any proprietary documents, but documents from the source are clear that the internal diameter of the existing hybrid system is 1100 mm.
Also, MLM and Node module docking systems are compatible with existing docking systems at ISS, and therefore the "new" hybrid adapter would have the same inner diameter as the existing hybrid adapters, or else docking would be impossible. Of course, the newest hybrid hybrids that are located axially on the Node module are hybrids with an internal hatch diameter of 800 mm, but that is a special case.
I used to know this, but my memory is vague.
I believe that APAS-95 is almost the same as APAS-89, but some elements are "locked down" to create a completely passive system. -
#37 by manboy on 29 Mar, 2015 18:28
-
But the Shuttle also used APAS-95.
In that case I have a second question. Can you explain what's different between APAS-89 and APAS-95?http://forum.nasaspaceflight.com/index.php?topic=23673.0
The first messages in this topic contain documents concerning the Node module, and in these documents are references to the dimensions of the hybrid docking adapters used on the Node module.
OK, you speak about the FUTURE "hybrid" system.
The "hybrid system" currently used on RS (SSVP-M) has only 1000mm diameter.
http://www.kosmonavtika.com/vaisseaux/ssvp/tech/3/3.html
Unfortunately, I cannot release any proprietary documents, but documents from the source are clear that the internal diameter of the existing hybrid system is 1100 mm.
Also, MLM and Node module docking systems are compatible with existing docking systems at ISS, and therefore the "new" hybrid adapter would have the same inner diameter as the existing hybrid adapters, or else docking would be impossible. Of course, the newest hybrid hybrids that are located axially on the Node module are hybrids with an internal hatch diameter of 800 mm, but that is a special case.
I used to know this, but my memory is vague.
I believe that APAS-95 is almost the same as APAS-89, but some elements are "locked down" to create a completely passive system. -
#38 by Danderman on 29 Mar, 2015 22:48
-
Shuttle used APAS-95 to be compatible with the APAS-95 on Mir, which was modified as a purely passive system.
IIRC.
-
#39 by manboy on 31 Mar, 2015 01:01
-
Shuttle used APAS-95 to be compatible with the APAS-95 on Mir, which was modified as a purely passive system.
The Kristall module used APAS-89, as did Soyuz TM-16. Buran was also planned to used APAS-89. So I don't believe passiveness has anything to do with the APAS-89/95 designation.
IIRC.
The APAS-89 used on the Kristall module and Mir Docking Module were only semi-passive, judging from pictures they both have soft capture latches and possibly even actuators (but lack seals). I've seen it been claimed that APAS-89 and APAS-95 are "essentially" the same but I'm still curious about what the difference between them are (electronics? connections?).
Some quotes from Energiya-Buran: The Soviet Space Shuttle (2007).
"For space station missions Buran would have carried a Docking Module (SM) in the forward part of the payload bay. It consisted of a spherical section (2.55 m in diameter) topped with a cylindrical tunnel (2.2 m in diameter) with an APAS-89 androgynous docking port, a modified version of the APAS-75 system developed by NPO Energiya for the 1975 Apollo-Soyuz Test Project." (Page 141)
"The plan was for the orbiter to be launched unmanned and and fly to the Mir space station, where it would dock with the axial APAS-89 docking port of the Kristall module." (Page 246)
"In the late 1980s NPO Energiya was ordered to build three Soyuz spacecraft (serial numbers 101, 102, 103) with APAS-89 docking ports." (Page 246)
"Soyuz craft nr. 101 was eventually launched as Soyuz TM-16 on January 1993, carrying another resident crew (Gennadiy Manakov and Aleksandr Poleshchuk) to Mir space station. Equipped with an APAS-89 docking port, it was the only Soyuz vehicle to ever docking with the Kristall module. Soyuz "rescue" vehicle nr. 102 and 103, which had only been partially assembled, were modified as ordinary Soyuz TM spacecraft with standard "probe" docking mechanisms and were given new serial numbers." (Page 249)
"In July 1992 NASA initiated the development of the Orbiter Docking System (ODS) to support Shuttle flights to Mir. Mounted in the forward end of the payload bay, the ODS consists of an external airlock, a supporting truss structure, and an APAS docking port. While the first two elements were built by Rockwell, the APAS was manufactured by RKK Energiya. Although Energiya's internal designator for the Shuttle APAS is APAS-95, it is essentially the same as Buran's APAS-89. While the ODS was slightly modified for Shuttle missions to ISS, APAS remained unchanged." (Page 380)