-
#40
by
DaveS
on 19 Aug, 2015 12:59
-
I have recently been involved in some discussions regarding the the O.D of the APAS units that flew on the shuttles as the Orbiter Docking System (ODS). An APAS specification document that I have found states the maximum O.D is 1552 mm but some believe this number to not take in account the thickness of thermal blankets. Is this correct or is the O.D with thermal blankets included 1552 mm?
-
#41
by
A_M_Swallow
on 21 Aug, 2015 17:43
-
A BA330 module masses 20 metric tons. Can any of the current docking or berthing ports support this weight under 1g of artificial gravity?
F = m a = 20,000 kg * 9.81 m/s/s = 196,200 N (or 44,108 lbf)
Lunar (1.622 m/s/s) or Mars (3.711 m/s/s) gravity are alternatives but in real life the mass needs increasing to allow for astronauts and consumables.
-
#42
by
sdsds
on 21 Aug, 2015 18:25
-
A BA330 module masses 20 metric tons. Can any of the current docking or berthing ports support this weight under 1g of artificial gravity?
F = m a = 20,000 kg * 9.81 m/s/s = 196,200 N (or 44,108 lbf)
I think you are asking about tensile loads. For NDS/iLIDS the trans-lunar case requirement was 100,000 N.
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110008387.pdf
-
#43
by
A_M_Swallow
on 21 Aug, 2015 22:48
-
A BA330 module masses 20 metric tons. Can any of the current docking or berthing ports support this weight under 1g of artificial gravity?
F = m a = 20,000 kg * 9.81 m/s/s = 196,200 N (or 44,108 lbf)
I think you are asking about tensile loads. For NDS/iLIDS the trans-lunar case requirement was 100,000 N.
{snip}
Thank you. Yes it was a tensile load with some shear loading because it would be a rotating system. Since there will frequently be several additional tons the module's mass will exceed the iLIDS limits. The module would have to be held by some sort of cradle able to take the mass and the iLIDS used as a form of airlock.
-
#44
by
Dante80
on 02 Nov, 2015 16:51
-
A question. Is it possible or plausible to have a spacecraft (a capsule or an automated vehicle) that can both berth and dock on a station? For example, is it possible to design the docking door as part of the berthing door and use one or the other according to whether you dock or berth?
-
#45
by
Jim
on 02 Nov, 2015 17:17
-
A question. Is it possible or plausible to have a spacecraft (a capsule or an automated vehicle) that can both berth and dock on a station? For example, is it possible to design the docking door as part of the berthing door and use one or the other according to whether you dock or berth?
Berthing just means that the spacecraft requires outside support (for the ISS it is the arm) to complete the attachment to the station, because attachment system can't handle the loads and misalignments that occur with docking.
If spacecraft has a docking system can use the outside support (arm) to aid in the attachment or just dock by itself
-
#46
by
Dante80
on 02 Nov, 2015 17:21
-
A question. Is it possible or plausible to have a spacecraft (a capsule or an automated vehicle) that can both berth and dock on a station? For example, is it possible to design the docking door as part of the berthing door and use one or the other according to whether you dock or berth?
Berthing just means that the spacecraft requires outside support (for the ISS it is the arm) to complete the attachment to the station, because attachment system can't handle the loads and misalignments that occur with docking.
If spacecraft has a docking system can use the outside support (arm) to aid in the attachment or just dock by itself
Thanks, I know that. My thought was whether its possible for the same spaceship to berth with a station, use the larger door opening to move cargo, and then unberth and dock so that it can be used as an escape capsule.
-
#47
by
baldusi
on 02 Nov, 2015 17:28
-
A question. Is it possible or plausible to have a spacecraft (a capsule or an automated vehicle) that can both berth and dock on a station? For example, is it possible to design the docking door as part of the berthing door and use one or the other according to whether you dock or berth?
Berthing just means that the spacecraft requires outside support (for the ISS it is the arm) to complete the attachment to the station, because attachment system can't handle the loads and misalignments that occur with docking.
If spacecraft has a docking system can use the outside support (arm) to aid in the attachment or just dock by itself
Thanks, I know that. My thought was whether its possible for the same spaceship to berth with a station, use the larger door opening to move cargo, and then unberth and dock so that it can be used as an escape capsule.
So you wonder if a single spacecraft can use the CBM and the NDS. The DreamChase proposal has an expendable pressurized module that can be adapted to either. But I understand that it can only use only one per mission. It would seem to attach the pressurized module by NDS, so may be, it would use CBM, discard the PCM, and then dock. But this is highly speculative (but reasonable)
-
#48
by
Dante80
on 02 Nov, 2015 18:04
-
So you wonder if a single spacecraft can use the CBM and the NDS.
CBM and IDA. Is something like that possible from an engineering point of view? For example, a Starliner variant that can do both cargo/crew, while taking advantage of the bigger CBM door for loading/unloading high volume cargo.
-
#49
by
sdsds
on 02 Nov, 2015 18:31
-
whether its possible for the same spaceship to berth with a station, use the larger door opening to move cargo, and then unberth and dock so that it can be used as an escape capsule.
Unless you do something extraordinarily clever the presence of the IDSS docking ring is going to block movement of outsize cargo through the CBM hatch.
-
#50
by
ISP
on 02 Nov, 2015 18:48
-
A question. Is it possible or plausible to have a spacecraft (a capsule or an automated vehicle) that can both berth and dock on a station? For example, is it possible to design the docking door as part of the berthing door and use one or the other according to whether you dock or berth?
Berthing just means that the spacecraft requires outside support (for the ISS it is the arm) to complete the attachment to the station, because attachment system can't handle the loads and misalignments that occur with docking.
If spacecraft has a docking system can use the outside support (arm) to aid in the attachment or just dock by itself
Thanks, I know that. My thought was whether its possible for the same spaceship to berth with a station, use the larger door opening to move cargo, and then unberth and dock so that it can be used as an escape capsule.
The only way I see this happening is if you include the separate docking & berthing mechanisms on different ends of the spacecraft, which is technically possible, but not very practical.
-
#51
by
baldusi
on 03 Nov, 2015 00:34
-
If you had an HL42 like (a DreamChaser enlarged 42% in every direction) you could fit and CBM on the back and an IDA on the top. But yes, you would need two different ports.
-
#52
by
manboy
on 14 Nov, 2015 03:50
-
A question. Is it possible or plausible to have a spacecraft (a capsule or an automated vehicle) that can both berth and dock on a station? For example, is it possible to design the docking door as part of the berthing door and use one or the other according to whether you dock or berth?
The NASA Docking System (NDS) is capable of both docking and berthing. If you're asking if it's possible to design something like NDS that fits inside something like CBM then yes but it would be heavy. You might want to design a spacecraft that can be equipped with either a docking or berthing mechanism (this was the old plan for Dragon) so that you can switch them out depending on your mission. Also the Space Shuttle would dock and then berth a cargo container to the station.
-
#53
by
te_atl
on 06 Feb, 2016 03:27
-
On the CBM's, there are 4 Control Panel Assemblies (CPAs). In pictures of CBM's, we can see the CPA's extend into the hatch pass through area, obstructing part of the passage. In other pictures, we see the hatch area is completely unobstructed. So obviously the CPA's get moved out of the way. The question is, do they fold or rotate out of the way once berthing is complete and are under the velcro cover, or are they removed by the astronauts after berthing?
-
#54
by
sdsds
on 06 Feb, 2016 03:45
-
do [CPAs] fold or rotate out of the way once berthing is complete and are under the velcro cover, or are they removed by the astronauts after berthing?
Removed. See for example:
https://blogs.nasa.gov/stationreport/2015/04/17/The Dragon vehicle was captured at 5:55 AM CDT today followed by nominal berthing, vestibule outfitting and Common Berthing Mechanism (CBM) Control Panel Assembly (CPA) removal.
-
#55
by
Nomadd
on 06 Feb, 2016 04:16
-
A BA330 module masses 20 metric tons. Can any of the current docking or berthing ports support this weight under 1g of artificial gravity?
F = m a = 20,000 kg * 9.81 m/s/s = 196,200 N (or 44,108 lbf)
I think you are asking about tensile loads. For NDS/iLIDS the trans-lunar case requirement was 100,000 N.
{snip}
Thank you. Yes it was a tensile load with some shear loading because it would be a rotating system. Since there will frequently be several additional tons the module's mass will exceed the iLIDS limits. The module would have to be held by some sort of cradle able to take the mass and the iLIDS used as a form of airlock.
What's the ratio between those maximum loads and expected failure points?
-
#56
by
high road
on 18 Jul, 2016 11:46
-
Is there a difference in size or design between big berthing ports for cargo, and berthing ports intended to permanently attach new modules? And are those differences design choices or dictated by the size and mass of the attached vehicle?
-
#57
by
Nicolas PILLET
on 18 Jul, 2016 18:39
-
Is there a difference in size or design between big berthing ports for cargo, and berthing ports intended to permanently attach new modules? And are those differences design choices or dictated by the size and mass of the attached vehicle?
I don't know for USOS, but for Russian Segment there is a difference between Zvezda's three front ports and other Russian docking ports.
On Mir, all the docking ports were SSVP type. But, after fifteen years of experience, they realized that docking ports of the large modules were enduring big efforts over the years. So, when they built Zvezda, they changed these docking ports, which became SSVP-M. It has larger hatches, but the main difference is that they can endure stronger efforts.
-
#58
by
DaveS
on 12 Sep, 2016 00:37
-
Does anyone have any information on the APDS Switching System that was used on shuttle missions STS-74 and STS-88? From what I have researched, it was used to provide TM as well as C&C for the APAS'es on the Docking Module (STS-74) and ISS PMA-1 for successful docking to Mir and the FGB respecitively.
-
#59
by
Danderman
on 22 Sep, 2016 17:45
-
Does anyone have any information on the APDS Switching System that was used on shuttle missions STS-74 and STS-88? From what I have researched, it was used to provide TM as well as C&C for the APAS'es on the Docking Module (STS-74) and ISS PMA-1 for successful docking to Mir and the FGB respecitively.
Are you asking about the relays in the Docking Module? AFAIK, all newer APAS require use of relays.