3 ms·
So I once saw a talk by one of the Steve K. Robinson, a mission specialist on the STS-114 where a gap filler came loose from one of the tiles and was protruding
by gene-h 10y ago
So I once saw a talk by one of the Steve K. Robinson, a mission specialist on the STS-114 where a gap filler came loose from one of the tiles and was protruding near the front of the shuttle. Accord to him, this was a very scary situation. The reason being that the gap filler could trip the flow near the front of the shuttle from laminar to turbulent.
This would be very very bad. So if you haven't taken fluid dynamics, turbulent flow transfers heat a lot better than laminar flow and once flow becomes turbulent it tends to stay that way. So what this meant is that pesky gap filler could have made almost all of the flow trailing it turbulent, creating a region of increased heat transfer across much of the shuttle, which could have destroyed the shuttle.
And unfortunately poor Steve knew about all of this because he did some work on hypersonic flow in grad school. So NASA engineers went all apollo 13 and macgyvered some procedures on how to turn the hack saw aboard the station into filler slicer-offer. Steve Robinson himself decided to perform the mission, this was the first and probably only time a spacewalk was performed under the shuttle's heat shield. This was a very risky mission where a small mistake could do more damage than the gap filler could do. Luckily in the end, the gap filler was loose and easily removed by pulling.
All that caused by a tiny piece of ceramic sticking out about a centimeter! Now the interesting thing is that a couple missions later, NASA engineers decided to put a turbulent trip on the shuttle on purpose, because we don't understand hypersonic boundary layer transition all that well[1]. It was near the end of the shuttle, so the region of increased heat transfer couldn't do much damage, but still performing such an experiment on the shuttle, almost right after the Columbia disaster, was pretty nuts. Necessary though, because experiments on hypersonic flow are difficult to perform in wind tunnels.
One of the reasons capsules are so compelling is that there is less distance for this laminar to turbulent transition to occur.
[0]http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/crew/EVA_gapfiller.html http://www.nasa.gov/returntoflight/crew/EVA_gapfiller.html
[1]http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20110013660.pdf http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/2011001...
- Gibbon1 10y ago>Necessary though, because experiments on hypersonic flow are difficult to perform in wind tunnels. At my dads old place of work in the early eighties was a hypersonic wind tunnel. It was made out of a WWI era battleship gun barrel. With 6000 psig tank of hydrogen and pebble bed heater at one end. A shaped charge at the other. And a window with a schlieren photography setup pointing through a window in the middle. The way it worked was an explosive disk would be blown releasing the 6000 psi hydrogen. Which would flow through the pebble bed heater heating it to 2000 deg F[1]. Then into a nozzle where it would accelerate to hypersonic speed and head down the barrel. Meanwhile at the other end the shaped charge would fire blasting the pencil eraser sized model down the other end. If everything went right take a picture through the window in the middle as the model hurled into the blast of hydrogen. [1] 2000 deg F so that when it expanded from 6000 psig it wouldn't liquefy.
- Gibbon1 10y agoFound an Ames Research center link. http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4302/ch2.11.htm http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4302/ch2.11.htm