|
Posted by Pat Flannery on July 16, 2009, 9:18 pm
Please log in for more thread options
http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts127/090716fd2/index2.html
I dug out the calipers and figured out the size of the shed pieces near
the LOX pipe in the upper photo.
They are three to four feet long by 4-5 inches wide.
Pat
|
|
Posted by Brian Gaff on July 17, 2009, 4:47 am
Please log in for more thread options
But are they saying the whole piece came off at once. Traditionally, you get
a void, a bit pops off this creates a tiny vortex which nibbles away along
the exposed edges.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
show/hide quoted text
> http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts127/090716fd2/index2.html
> I dug out the calipers and figured out the size of the shed pieces near
> the LOX pipe in the upper photo.
> They are three to four feet long by 4-5 inches wide.
> Pat
|
|
Posted by Pat Flannery on July 17, 2009, 6:54 am
Please log in for more thread options
Brian Gaff wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> But are they saying the whole piece came off at once. Traditionally, you get
> a void, a bit pops off this creates a tiny vortex which nibbles away along
> the exposed edges.
>
Not piece, pieces. Quite a number of pieces shed from the intertank
structure, as the photos here show:
http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts127/090716fd2/index2.html
In some cases it appears the whole shed piece of foam left in pretty
much one chunk, as is visible on the video stills from the camera on the
ET: http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts127/090715gallery/ (note image
4 and 6)
On images 1, 8, and 9 it appears that some of the debris is transparent.
That could be a video artifact of some kind...or is that sheets of thin ice?
Pat
|
|
Posted by Brian Gaff on July 17, 2009, 4:59 am
Please log in for more thread options OK, a thought. This is the most fuelled refuelled tank for a long time. The
pressure changes and weight distribution on the intertank region has seen
several cycles. As its machine sprayed then there is obviously no actual
check of the adhesion until later on. I suspect the expansion and
contraction and the general stress bending has lossened it in some places.
Seems to me there is no real problem, except as has been stated, if this
situation occurs again, then if that lets loose earlier you have a problem.
Back up for this theory to me is that it did not seem affected by the much
greater aerodynamic forces and only later, when the tank was a lot emptier,
and hence forces changed, did it come off.
Its also interesting to note that despite protestations to the contrary,
the assembly of this tank was not inspected properly, as if it had been, the
extreme tolerance stretching of the hydrogen connection skew would have
been noted earlier, and one must suspect that maybe other things were missed
as well.
Complacency near the end of a production run is quite a common problem you
know.
Brian
--
Brian Gaff - briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!
show/hide quoted text
> http://spaceflightnow.com/shuttle/sts127/090716fd2/index2.html
> I dug out the calipers and figured out the size of the shed pieces near
> the LOX pipe in the upper photo.
> They are three to four feet long by 4-5 inches wide.
> Pat
|
|
Posted by Pat Flannery on July 17, 2009, 7:06 am
Please log in for more thread options
Brian Gaff wrote:
show/hide quoted text
> Its also interesting to note that despite protestations to the contrary,
> the assembly of this tank was not inspected properly, as if it had been, the
> extreme tolerance stretching of the hydrogen connection skew would have
> been noted earlier, and one must suspect that maybe other things were missed
> as well.
> Complacency near the end of a production run is quite a common problem you
> know.
They are now looking at poor adhesion between the foam and the primer on
the exterior of the tank in the intertank structure, and checking out
all of the specifics of this particular tank's production history. At
least one tank got very wet during hurricane Katrina when part of the
production facility was damaged:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michoud_Assembly_Facility
If their primer works like house paint primer, then it should be
applied, then allowed to dry for a specific amount of time, but not too
long...or it will lose some of its desired tackiness for the final coat
to adhere to. So any production upset at Michoud could have affected the
foaming process adversely.
Pat
|
| Similar Threads | Posted | | Damage or no damage, safe return still questionable? | July 30, 2005, 8:09 pm |
| SCA Shuttle photos | August 20, 2005, 4:54 am |
| Shuttle Damage | August 23, 2007, 2:18 pm |
| Shuttle tile damage images | December 13, 2006, 12:45 am |
| Shuttle Damage Photo/Info from Earlier Flight? | July 28, 2005, 4:09 pm |
| With the shuttle being rollbacked, can they run tests on it to check for lightning damage? | August 28, 2006, 9:38 pm |
| Hail Damage Forces Shuttle Atlantis Off Launch Pad | February 27, 2007, 8:50 pm |
| PAL ramp photos | August 12, 2005, 9:31 am |
| New Discovery debris photos | July 30, 2005, 9:00 am |
| flown gap filler photos | August 2, 2005, 10:24 pm |
|
XML Sitemap
> I dug out the calipers and figured out the size of the shed pieces near
> the LOX pipe in the upper photo.
> They are three to four feet long by 4-5 inches wide.
> Pat