Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Observation on TPS damage on Orbiter
NASA photos | 2-3-03 | BoneMccoy

Posted on 02/04/2003 1:34:19 AM PST by bonesmccoy

In recent days the popular media has been focusing their attention on an impact event during the launch of STS-107. The impact of External Tank insulation and/or ice with the Orbiter during ascent was initially judged by NASA to be unlikely to cause loss of the vehicle. Obviously, loss of the integrity of the orbiter Thermal Protection System occured in some manner. When Freepers posted the reports of these impacts on the site, I initially discounted the hypothesis. Orbiters had sustained multiple impacts in the past. However, the size of the plume in the last photo gives me pause.

I'd like to offer to FR a few observations on the photos.

1. In this image an object approximately 2-3 feet appears to be between the orbiter and the ET.

2. In this image the object appears to have rotated relative to both the camera and the orbiter. The change in image luminosity could also be due to a change in reflected light from the object. Nevertheless, it suggests that the object is tumbling and nearing the orbiter's leading edge.

It occurs to me that one may be able to estimate the size of the object and make an educated guess regarding the possible mass of the object. Using the data in the video, one can calculate the relative velocity of the object to the orbiter wing. Creating a test scenario is then possible. One can manufacture a test article and fire ET insulation at the right velocity to evaluate impact damage on the test article.

OV-101's port wing could be used as a test stand with RCC and tile attached to mimic the OV-102 design.

The color of the object seems inconsistent with ET insulation. One can judge the ET color by looking at the ET in the still frame. The color of the object seems more consistent with ice or ice covered ET insulation. Even when accounting for variant color hue/saturation in the video, the object clearly has a different color characteristic from ET insulation. If it is ice laden insulation, the mass of the object would be significantly different from ET insulation alone. Since the velocity of the object is constant in a comparison equation, estimating the mass of the object becomes paramount to understanding the kinetic energy involved in the impact with the TPS.

3. In this image the debris impact creates a plume. My observation is that if the plume was composed primarily of ET insulation, the plume should have the color characteristics of ET insulation. This plume has a white color.

Unfortunately, ET insulation is orange/brown in color.

In addition, if the relative density of the ET insulation is known, one can quantify the colorimetric properties of the plume to disintegrating ET insulation upon impact.

Using the test article experiment model, engineers should fire at the same velocity an estimated mass of ET insulation (similar to the object seen in the still frame) at the test article. The plume should be measured colorimetrically. By comparing this experimental plume to the photographic evidence from the launch, one may be able to quantify the amount of ET insulation in the photograph above.

4. In this photo, the plume spreads from the aft of the orbiter's port wing. This plume does not appear to be the color of ET insulation. It appears to be white.

This white color could be the color of ice particles at high altitude.

On the other hand, the composition of TPS tiles under the orbiter wings is primarily a low-density silica.

In the photo above, you can see a cross section of orbiter TPS tile. The black color of the tile is merely a coating. The interior of the tile is a white, low-density, silica ceramic.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Editorial; Extended News; Front Page News; Government; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: columbiaaccident; nasa; shuttle; sts; sts107
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 4,541-4,548 next last
To: XBob
Bingo. Maybe.

2. I.e., is fatal elvon burn-through a more frequent potential occurance than discussed so far?"

that is the only case I saw, however, it was so serious they changed the tile layout and types of tile in that position. and now ..... dah dah dah - I heard, they hadn't done it on the colombia, yet.
641 posted on 02/08/2003 4:56:18 PM PST by Thud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 631 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
There are 22 Reenforced Carbon/Carbon (RCC) nose pieces on the leading edge of each wing, each 1.5 to 2 ft long. There is a gap seal (also RCC) between each of them. Each section is has a metal frame and is bolted onto the flat bulkhead at each end of the section.

If a gap seal was missing or damaged, hot gas would get in between two sections and eventually melt the brackets or bolts, allowing that section to flop around on one end. We see two putrutions in the photo which fits. Once the RCC sections start peeling off the soft Aluminum bulkhead can't last long. The left wing had to come off quickly.

A flat, rather than bull nose leading edge, might also explain the heating on the body above the wing.
642 posted on 02/08/2003 5:06:41 PM PST by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 637 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I had a blonde moment didn't I ? I'll go make the coffee. The rest of you keep watching the films.
643 posted on 02/08/2003 5:10:20 PM PST by freepersup (And this expectation will not disappoint us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 640 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
Did you read the report from the Wash. Post, linked on another shuttle thread, about the initial analysis- post launch, regarding the debris strike ?
644 posted on 02/08/2003 5:13:37 PM PST by freepersup (And this expectation will not disappoint us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 642 | View Replies]

To: freepersup
Don't think so. I'll try to find it.
645 posted on 02/08/2003 5:20:02 PM PST by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 644 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
>>>Here it is<<<

Debris-Hit Finding Is Disputed

Reports Challenge NASA Assumptions on Launch

By Rick Weiss

Washington Post Staff Writer

Saturday, February 8, 2003; Page A01

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42593-2003Feb7.html
646 posted on 02/08/2003 5:25:37 PM PST by freepersup (And this expectation will not disappoint us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 645 | View Replies]

To: bonesmccoy
Very interesting. This is a great thread!
647 posted on 02/08/2003 5:32:49 PM PST by clouda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freepersup
Good article. I certainly agree that ice was a possibility and the RCC could have been hit.
648 posted on 02/08/2003 5:43:16 PM PST by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 646 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I heard they were taking some foam to Ames and run some tests. I take it Ames has facilities where foam and ice can be 'fired' into tiles ?
649 posted on 02/08/2003 5:48:37 PM PST by freepersup (And this expectation will not disappoint us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 642 | View Replies]

To: freepersup
Lots of wind tunnels. This has been done before. Back in 1979 or so I dropped ice cubes on tiles from halfway up in the VAB. Scared them up. We even developed an infrared heating system to stop January icing, but it was never used. The insultation was made thicker instead.
650 posted on 02/08/2003 6:02:34 PM PST by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 649 | View Replies]

To: Eastbound
Got it, but thanks anyway!
651 posted on 02/08/2003 6:43:33 PM PST by Budge (God Bless FReepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 584 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson

The RCC leading edge.

652 posted on 02/08/2003 6:44:49 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 650 | View Replies]

To: freepersup
Hours, minutes, seconds, superimposed on a screen- click- images running- click- sensor indications displayed- click- flight position over the U S- click- vehicle condition- click... etc.

That would really be interesting, but I'll wager it will never happen.

653 posted on 02/08/2003 6:50:28 PM PST by Budge (God Bless FReepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 588 | View Replies]

To: spunkets
I've been trying to figure out just what holds the "T seal" in place except for it's shape, but can't find any mention of glue or fastners. Looks like it would come out if broken.
654 posted on 02/08/2003 6:50:43 PM PST by John Jamieson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 652 | View Replies]

To: freepersup
What I find intriguing in all of the sensor data (6 minutes 19 seconds) is the slightly off normal temperature gains. Nothing drastic.

That and nothing really out of the ordinary until the breakup.

Was it XBob that posted about the near burn-through on a super steel rod in this thread?

This reminds me of that, in a way. Very sudden.

655 posted on 02/08/2003 7:00:56 PM PST by Budge (God Bless FReepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 597 | View Replies]

To: freepersup
What I find intriguing in all of the sensor data (6 minutes 19 seconds) is the slightly off normal temperature gains. Nothing drastic.

That and nothing really out of the ordinary until the breakup.

Was it XBob that posted about the near burn-through on a super steel rod in this thread?

This reminds me of that, in a way. Very sudden.

656 posted on 02/08/2003 7:01:28 PM PST by Budge (God Bless FReepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 597 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
"I've been trying to figure out just what holds the "T seal" in place..."

Yes, that's because these "prints" are terrible. It's held in place by tight tolerance and pressure from bolts and it looks like some heavy springs, but it's not at all clear. If it's to be believed they have a CarpA bolt going though the SiC layer of the RCC section. ?

657 posted on 02/08/2003 7:09:25 PM PST by spunkets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 654 | View Replies]

To: John Jamieson
I believe it is supposed to float so it can accommodate a significant amount of thermal expansion. The diagram above suggests how its shape registers it to the RCC panel on the left while the panel on the right can slide as the overall assembly expands and contracts while maintaining a reasonable seal. The dimensions are chosen to ensure that the T-seal stays captured under worst-case thermal expansion.
658 posted on 02/08/2003 7:12:23 PM PST by SFConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 654 | View Replies]

To: SFConservative
OOPS - as I look at it again, it does suggest that it is bonded somehow to the RCC panel on the left and floats against the one on the right. More searching needed.
659 posted on 02/08/2003 7:16:22 PM PST by SFConservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 658 | View Replies]

To: XBob
where parts would be found, I haven't got a clue, but I have heard that the heaviest parts generally have been found in Lousiana

I'm just working on the assumption that perhaps a piece of the RCC came off early. I'm probably way off base.

660 posted on 02/08/2003 7:20:59 PM PST by Budge (God Bless FReepers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 614 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 4,541-4,548 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson