FreeRepublic , LLC
PO BOX 9771
FRESNO, CA 93794
STOP BY A BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD (It's in the Breaking News sidebar!)
Posted on 07/07/2003 1:10:51 PM PDT by DoughtyOne
Science - AP
Shuttle Foam Test Yields Hole in Wing
59 minutes ago
By MARCIA DUNN, AP Aerospace Writer
SAN ANTONIO - The team investigating the Columbia disaster fired a chunk of foam insulation at shuttle wing parts Monday and blew open a gaping 2-foot hole, offering dramatic evidence to support the theory of what doomed the spaceship.
The crowd of about 100 gasped and cried, "Wow!" when the foam hit.
The foam struck roughly the same spot where insulation that broke off Columbia's big external fuel tank during launch smashed into the shuttle's wing. Investigators believe the damage led to the ship's destruction during re-entry over Texas in February, killing all seven astronauts.
It was the seventh and final foam-impact test by the Columbia Accident Investigation Board, and it yielded by far the most severe damage.
The 1.67-pound piece of fuel tank foam insulation shot out of a 35-foot nitrogen-pressurized gun and slammed into a carbon-reinforced panel removed from shuttle Atlantis.
The countdown boomed through loudspeakers, and the crack of the foam coming out at more than 500 mph reverberated in the field where the test was conducted.
Twelve high-speed cameras — six inside the wing mock-up and six outside — captured the event. Hundreds of sensors registered movements, stresses and other conditions.
NASA (news - web sites) will continue gathering more information about the poorly understood pieces that line the vulnerable leading edges of shuttle wings, board member Scott Hubbard said.
One month ago, another carbon shuttle wing panel — smaller and farther inboard — was cracked by the impact, in addition to an adjoining seal. This time, the entire 11 1/2-inch width of the foam chunk — rather than just a corner during previous tests — hit the wing, putting maximum stress on the suspect area.
...
This time, the entire 11 1/2-inch width of the foam chunk — rather than just a corner during previous tests — hit the wing, putting maximum stress on the suspect area.
I'm curious about this gun. Doesn't the piece of foam need to be shaped to fit the barrel ... or not?
81 seconds into the flight, a 20-inch, 2 1/2-pound piece of the foam fell off and struck Columbia's left wing. The shuttle Columbia was moving more than at twice the speed of sound. The impact is thought to have involved a relative speed of no more than 500 mph.
I'd have to research more to determine the airspeed 81 seconds into flight, but the relative speed was about 500 mph -- so the tests are on spot.
This is an MPG file
You can open your Quicktime/RealOne or other device and paste this address: http://www.knfo.net/video/foamtest.mpg
Both Quicktime/RealOne were tested, and do work.
Sorry about the prior incorrect link.
[Federal Register: November 15, 2001 (Volume 66, Number 221)] [Rules and Regulations] [Page 57511-57523] From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov] [DOCID:fr15no01-18] ----------------------------------------------------------------------- ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 40 CFR Part 82 [FRL-7101-1] RIN 2060-AH99
-
EPA received a comment from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) regarding the use of specific plastic foam products for the space shuttle. NASA identified one particular product, BX-250, a foam which is part of the thermal protection system of the Space Shuttle External Tank and which uses CFC-11 as a blowing agent. NASA stated that ``although extensive efforts have been made and continue to be made to replace this material, no viable alternative has been identified.'' NASA requested that EPA revise the proposed rule to provide an exemption for CFC-blown foam products in applications that are associated with space vehicles. NASA suggested that EPA consider using the same language that EPA has previously adopted under 40 CFR part 63, subpart GG (40 CFR 63.742) for the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) program. NASA provided EPA with additional information concerning its proactive pursuit of potential alternative blowing agents.
-
Since human space flight safety is of paramount importance to NASA, prior to implementing any new material, that material must undergo a rigorous development and qualification program for which no suitable substitute has yet been identified. NASA requested that EPA consider using the language at 40 CFR 63.742:
-
Space vehicle means a man-made device, either manned or unmanned, designed for operation beyond earth's atmosphere. This definition includes integral equipment such as models, mock-ups, prototypes, molds, jigs, tooling, hardware jackets, and test coupons. Also included is auxiliary equipment associated with test, transport, and storage, which through contamination can compromise the space vehicle performance. [[Page 57518]]
-
EPA agrees that an exception is necessary, but EPA disagrees with NASA's proposed language. This language is far broader than what EPA concludes is actually necessary based on an evaluation of the information NASA presented. If EPA were to simply exempt all foams used for any applications associated with space vehicles EPA could be exempting products where there are already suitable substitutes. NASA only provided information concerning one particular type of foam used in applications associated with the Space Shuttle External Tank. Therefore, based on that information, through this action, EPA will modify Sec. 82.66(c) to provide an exemption for foam products manufactured with or containing Class I substances that are used as part of the thermal protection system of external tanks for space vehicles and will add the definition of space vehicles found at Sec. 63.742 to Sec. 82.62. The exemption will be limited to the use of CFC-11 as a blowing agent and where no other CFCs are contained in the foam product. Although EPA did not propose this exemption or the additional definition, they are logical outgrowths of the comment submitted by NASA and thus it is appropriate to proceed to final action without providing any additional proposal or opportunity for further comment.
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.