SpaceX And/Or Rocketry In General

AgentB
AgentB
Joined: 17 Mar 12
Posts: 915
Credit: 513211304
RAC: 0

robl wrote:For some reason I

robl wrote:

For some reason I was under the impression this was their 1st recyclable flight.  I thought it was posted in this thread.  Oh well.  If your correct then the loss of this rocket during a test scenario is more disturbing.  

For list of future launches see here

(about SES-10) First payload to fly on a flight-proven first stage. Will reuse first stage from CRS-8.[160][161]

I would be surprised if this event was related to anything on the first stage (even if reused).

If there's a problem with the rocket, it looks to be second stage or higher (fuel leak from payload etc).

 

Gary Charpentier
Gary Charpentier
Joined: 13 Jun 06
Posts: 2064
Credit: 106838498
RAC: 55615

I suspect we are all

I suspect we are all overlooking the obvious.

Fuel and LOX transfers happen all over the world every day.  99.99% of the time nothing happens.  So what is different filling a tank on a rocket sitting on a pad?

1) The amount of fuel

2) The rate of transfer

3) The latches and seals

4) The flow indicators

5) The remotely actuated valves

6) ?

To have the ignition outside the rocket, that might mean some repair to a fuel flow sensor or valve actuator didn't get done in a manner to suppress an electric spark.  Or even on a different electric umbilical cord or connector.  That provides the ignition, now as to the stuff that burns, there is always some leak and purge involved.  A small bang can dislodge things and become a big boom very quickly and travel in hoses and pipes to tanks all over.

I could see when fueling the purge valves are wide open leaving a path direct into the tank for any outside fire.  What I can't see is at this stage of the game that the tanks were not filled with a non-flammable gas before fueling so as to prevent the interior of the tank from reaching the explosive range.

As I don't see evidence of a rupture of a external fuel or LOX line it has to be purge that initially ignites.  The only possible exception is an ignition inside the fuel line and the first frame we see is the line rupture for over pressure.  Last is tough as the fuel an LOX should be separate so nothing can mix to burn.  The other hard part is this didn't happen at the start or end of the fueling operation when valves and such would be being actuated.  (The pumps are on the ground so they should not be a factor.)

Without access to the numbers data on the fuel flows, pressure, valve commands, and the like we really have no clue.  If that data is clean, that might leave contamination as the only answer.

 

Anonymous

Article today states SpaceX

Article today states SpaceX to resume launches in November flying from a nearly completed "new/modified" launch pad used earlier for the shuttles.  

Gary Charpentier
Gary Charpentier
Joined: 13 Jun 06
Posts: 2064
Credit: 106838498
RAC: 55615

http://dailycaller.com/2016/0

http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/16/china-successfully-launches-its-second-space-station/

Quote:
China successfully launched its second space station into orbit Thursday, significantly accelerating the new space race with America.

 

Gary Charpentier
Gary Charpentier
Joined: 13 Jun 06
Posts: 2064
Credit: 106838498
RAC: 55615

http://www.theverge.com/2016/

http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/23/13031308/spacex-falcon-9-rocket-explosion-cause-cryogenic-helium-system

Quote:
SpaceX’s recent Falcon 9 explosion seems to have been caused by a breach in the "cryogenic helium system" of the vehicle's upper oxygen tank, according to an update from the company. However, SpaceX says the accident is not connected to last year's Falcon 9 explosion, when a rocket disintegrated en route to the International Space Station.

 

AgentB
AgentB
Joined: 17 Mar 12
Posts: 915
Credit: 513211304
RAC: 0

This video of CRS-4 Second

This video of CRS-4 Second stage LOX  i think shows at least two black COPV which would contain the helium in the LOX tank. 

 

Mike Hewson
Mike Hewson
Moderator
Joined: 1 Dec 05
Posts: 6591
Credit: 320728594
RAC: 426052

Quote:Three weeks ago, SpaceX

Quote:
Three weeks ago, SpaceX experienced an anomaly at our Launch Complex 40 (LC-40) at Cape Canaveral Air Force Station. This resulted in the loss of one of our Falcon 9 rockets and its payload.

The Accident Investigation Team (AIT), composed of SpaceX, the FAA, NASA, the U.S. Air Force, and industry experts, are currently scouring through approximately 3,000 channels of engineering data along with video, audio and imagery. The timeline of the event is extremely short – from first signs of an anomaly to loss of data is about 93 milliseconds or less than 1/10th of a second. The majority of debris from the incident has been recovered, photographed, labeled and catalogued, and is now in a hangar for inspection and use during the investigation.

At this stage of the investigation, preliminary review of the data and debris suggests that a large breach in the cryogenic helium system of the second stage liquid oxygen tank took place. [Updated 09/24: At this time, the cause of the potential breach remains unknown.] All plausible causes are being tracked in an extensive fault tree and carefully investigated. Through the fault tree and data review process, we have exonerated any connection with last year’s CRS-7 mishap.

The teams have continued inspections of LC-40 and the surrounding facilities. While substantial areas of the pad systems were affected, the Falcon Support Building adjacent to the pad was unaffected, and per standard procedure was unoccupied at the time of the anomaly. The new liquid oxygen farm – e.g. the tanks and plumbing that hold our super-chilled liquid oxygen – was unaffected and remains in good working order. The RP-1 (kerosene) fuel farm was also largely unaffected. The pad’s control systems are also in relatively good condition.

SpaceX’s other facilities, from the Payload Processing Facility at the Cape, to the pad and hangar at LC-39A, are located several miles from LC-40 and were unaffected as well. Work continues at Pad 39A in preparation for bringing it online in November. The teams have been in contact with our Cape Canaveral and Kennedy Space Center partners and neighbors and have found no evidence of debris leaving the immediate area of LC-40.

At SpaceX headquarters in Hawthorne, CA, our manufacturing and production is continuing in a methodical manner, with teams continuing to build engines, tanks, and other systems as they are exonerated from the investigation. We will work to resume our manifest as quickly as responsible once the cause of the anomaly has been identified by the Accident Investigation Team. Pending the results of the investigation, we anticipate returning to flight as early as the November timeframe.

Other efforts, including the Commercial Crew Program with NASA, are continuing to progress. Getting back to flight safely and reliably is our top priority, and the data gathered from the present investigation will result in an even safer and more reliable vehicle for our customers and partners.

Sort of a good-news/bad-news. Hmmm, possibly a breach of the second stage He cryo system, but during which 93 milliseconds ? WRT the external footage I mean. Still, what was the hot thingy ..... oh no ... do we still stir cryo tanks ?

Cheers, Mike.

I have made this letter longer than usual because I lack the time to make it shorter ...

... and my other CPU is a Ryzen 5950X :-) Blaise Pascal

David S
David S
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 2473
Credit: 22936222
RAC: 0

Mike Hewson wrote: Still,

Mike Hewson wrote:
Still, what was the hot thingy ..... oh no ... do we still stir cryo tanks ?

Cheers, Mike.

I'm sure we do, but helium is not explosive, so even an Apollo 13 type fault should not be a problem in the He tank.

Hmmm... Did someone put H in the tank instead of He?

David

Miserable old git
Patiently waiting for the asteroid with my name on it.

Gary Charpentier
Gary Charpentier
Joined: 13 Jun 06
Posts: 2064
Credit: 106838498
RAC: 55615

Mike Hewson wrote:Sort of a

Mike Hewson wrote:

Sort of a good-news/bad-news. Hmmm, possibly a breach of the second stage He cryo system, but during which 93 milliseconds ? WRT the external footage I mean. Still, what was the hot thingy ..... oh no ... do we still stir cryo tanks ?

In flight I'm sure.  No need when filling.  However a liquid HE tank rupture into LOX, well that liquid HE is a lot colder than LOX so as soon as it hits the LOX it boils like mad.  Quick over pressure in the LOX tank and kaboom!

They are going to have to spend a lot of time looking at the materials and methods used to weld the tanks and the rate of temperature change as they fill the tanks.  Something split open.

Maybe the hot thingy, ignition source, was outside where you spotted the initial flame.  Perhaps if it wasn't there we would have just seen a coke bottle with mentos.  Mind you a really big one.

David S
David S
Joined: 6 Dec 05
Posts: 2473
Credit: 22936222
RAC: 0

Gary Charpentier wrote:Mike

Gary Charpentier wrote:
Mike Hewson wrote:
Sort of a good-news/bad-news. Hmmm, possibly a breach of the second stage He cryo system, but during which 93 milliseconds ? WRT the external footage I mean. Still, what was the hot thingy ..... oh no ... do we still stir cryo tanks ?

In flight I'm sure.  No need when filling.

Come to think of it, 13's cryo tanks were not in the Saturn V booster, they were in the Service Module, providing power to the occupied modules for life support, computers, etc. Falcon 9 by itself doesn't have any need for such, does it? (The more I revise this post, the more things I think of.) Although, if they fill and then empty the cryo tanks for ground tests, there's a good chance they still do it the same way as 50 years ago, with an internal heater to boil out the last of the substance. So are we or are we not comparing apples to oranges?

David

Miserable old git
Patiently waiting for the asteroid with my name on it.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.