AMOS 6 - Falcon 9-029 - Канаверал SLC-40 - 3-4 сентября 2016

[napalm]

testest пишет:
Воу-воу, я пропустил, и теперь что-то не могу найти.

Присоединяюсь, где можно посмотреть?

[Старый]

Я у него просил сделать скриншот где там "руины" но он исчез. 
Ищите по слову "руины" и потом чуть вперёд. 

[George]

napalm пишет:
Присоединяюсь, где можно посмотреть?

Заводите в поиск юутуба Amos-6 и на первой же странице есть видео длиной около 2 часов. Пожар продолжался дольше.

[m-s Gelezniak]

Старый User Сообщений: 124650 Регистрация: 24.11.2003

#1599 0   07.09.2016 11:12:33 Я у него просил сделать скриншот где там "руины" но он исчез. Ищите по слову "руины" и потом чуть вперёд.

Он тебе сейчас посоветует двухчасовое видео посмотреть... .

[pk13]

Я так понимаю, речь про двухчасовое

[Max Andriyahov]

С 57:37

[Salo]

m-s Gelezniak пишет:
Там просто ампула в своей каморе. Или несколько, для многократного запуска. Маловото для такой вспышки и
феервекка.

Ампулы это у отсталых совков и неповоротливых монополистов.

[m-s Gelezniak]

А у поворотливого доктора Зло что?
Турбоподача?
 

[Salo]

А Вы у него спросите.

[m-s Gelezniak]

Сергей, вы у нас специалист по ссылкам и НСФ. Вам я доверяю. Не без исключений конечно.
А с Эллоном шампанского не пил. По крайней мере пока.

[Salo]

В твиттере можно спросить.

[Salo]

http://www.spaceflightnow.com/falcon9/001/status.html

The flanges will link the rocket with ground storage tanks containing liquid oxygen, kerosene fuel, helium, gaserous nitrogen and the first stage ignitor source called triethylaluminum-triethylborane, better known as TEA-TEB.

Т.е. первую точно заправляют.

[Salo]

На второй походу тоже:
http://www.spacelaunchreport.com/falcon9v1-1.html

Propellant Loading for November 21, 2013 Static Test at Cape Canaveral
On November 21, 2013, SpaceX announced the cause of the Flight 6 restart problem.  Frozen fluid lines for the Merlin 1D Vacuum engine's hypergolic igniter fluid (triethylaluminum-triethylborane, or TEA-TEB) were responsible for the failed second stage restart.  The lines froze when they were exposed to liquid oxygen boiloff.  Designers added insulation to the lines and reoriented systems to prevent GOX impingement on the lines in preparation for the next Falcon 9 launch with SES 8.

[Salo]

Elon Musk Подлинная учетная запись ‏@elonmusk  
Abort was caused by oxygen in ground side TEA-TEB. Upper stage on separate internal circuit, so doesn't face same risk.
  7:28 - 30 нояб. 2013 г.

[Штуцер]

Salo пишет:
На второй походу тоже:

Похоже, заправка пусковых компонентов вакуумная?

[Salo]

http://space.stackexchange.com/questions/3002/how-does-spacex-ignite-their-engines

How does SpaceX ignite their engines?

Based on the aborted launch on Thanksgiving 2013 of the first Falcon 9 v1.1 fr om Florida, we know that an issue occurred where oxygen got into the ground based TEA-TEB sources.
I understand that TEA-TEB are hypergolic, which means they combust on contact.
SpaceX reported they replaced the gas generator on the center engine.
This sounds like they might have experienced the issue on the center engine.
What I was wondering, do they ignite the center engine with hypergolics, and then the other 8 all ignite, since there is a 145,000lb thrust fire going on just feet away? Or do they use TEA-TEB on all 9 engines during ignition?

 I know this is an old article but it bugs me that the answer is wrong. TEA and TEB are NOT hyperbolic. As a matter of fact, they are stored together. They are pyrophoric - igniting on contact with oxygen or other oxidizer. – John Mar 19 at 11:23

         1 Answer                                      
                      
Yes, they use TEA-TEB (Triethylaluminum-Triethylborane) as their first stage ignitor and this mixture is pyrophoric (i.e. hypergolic in contact with oxygen, be it atmospheric or LOX), but no, they don't ignite one engine and let that one ignite all the others, they would want to ignite them all at once. Problem with one engine igniting others is that doing so would create a pressure spike that would likely damage the engine and, according to Ben Brockert, CEO of Able Space Co., Denver:
 

The fire would then travel up into the engine wh ere it would create a massive pressure spike, definitely destroying the engine and possibly destroying engines nearby. In propulsion testing the euphemism for this is a "hard start" leading to "rapid unplanned disassembly".
 

Quote source and more information via Joseph Abbott's Joe Science blog post: The TEA-TEB glitch: Can't light a Falcon 9 without a spark

[АниКей]

Израильская компания возобновит работу со SpaceX после успешных запусков Falcon 9 http://www.jewish.ru/news/israel/2016/09/news994335358.php
07.09.2016
Израильская компания Space Communication будет готова доверить американской SpaceX еще один свой спутник только после нескольких успешных запусков ракеты-носителя Falcon 9. Об этом заявил в опубликованном во вторник интервью агентству Reuters исполнительный директор Space Communication Дэвид Поллак, пишет ТАСС.

«Не знаю точно сколько, но они должны совершить несколько успешных полетов», — подчеркнул он, говоря о потере спутника связи Amos-6 при аварии ракеты-носителя Falcon 9, которая в минувший четверг взорвалась на космодроме на мысе Канаверал (штат Флорида). «У нас пока нет резервного спутника, поэтому я надеюсь, что они успеют сделать несколько запусков перед тем, как мы подготовим новый», — добавил Поллак. По его словам SpaceX пока не сообщила итоги предварительного расследования причин аварии.

Ранее Space Communication подтвердила намерение потребовать от SpaceX компенсации в размере 50 млн долларов или бесплатного пуска в связи с потерей Amos-6. Стоимость израильского спутника, разрушенного при взрыве, составляла около 200 млн долларов. Спутник, помимо Израиля, намеревались использовать американская компания Facebook и французский оператор связи Eutelsat.

[m-s Gelezniak]

Salo User Сообщений: 61340 Регистрация: 18.02.2007

#1608 0   07.09.2016 12:30:32 В твиттере можно спросить.

Не люблю твиттер.
Ко мне обычно сами приходят если нужен.
И скучать не приходится.

[Salo]

http://www.wacotrib.com/blogs/joe_science/the-tea-teb-glitch-can-t-light-a-falcon-without/article_1b7c4ae6-5a16-11e3-afbb-0019bb2963f4.html

The TEA-TEB glitch: Can't light a Falcon 9 without a spark  
   
 Posted: Saturday, November 30, 2013 5:21 pm
 By JOSEPH ABBOTT jabbott@wacotrib.com
As noted in the previous post, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has tweeted that the problem that halted Thursday's launch attempt was with the system that lights the Falcon 9's nine Merlin 1D first-stage engines using a chemical mixture called TEA-TEB.
I asked Ben Brockert (aka @wikkit on Twitter), CEO of Denver-based Able Space Co., to expand on that — and boy, did he ever come through. For the tl;dr crowd (that's how the cool Internet kids say "too long; didn't read"), the money quote: "t was like they expected 180 proof TEA-TEB but only got 100 proof. The fire in the engines was monitored and was less than the launch computer expected, so it shut the engines down rather than proceeding to full thrust."
 
Here's the full response:
 

Hypergolic ignition is one of the neat concepts in rocketry that don't have a great parallel in day-to-day life. It's an rare thing that would be scary if it was something that happened often. Hypergolic simply means that, when exposed to each other, two chemicals will burst into flame without a spark or other ignition source.
 
 The ignition process on a rocket engine is critical and must be of high reliability. On a vehicle with multiple engines, if 8 out of 9 lit but one was just dumping un-lit propellant out the end, the fire fr om the others would ignite that propellant. The fire would then travel up into the engine wh ere it would create a massive pressure spike, definitely destroying the engine and possibly destroying engines nearby. In propulsion testing the euphemism for this is a "hard start" leading to "rapid unplanned disassembly".
 
 SpaceX is solving the problem of absolute ignition reliability by using hypergolic ignition. They use a mix of two chemicals, triethylaluminum and triethylborane, aka TEA-TEB. Each is basically a metal atom (aluminum or boron) holding on to three hydrocarbon molecules (tri-ethyl), ready to break at a moment's notice.
 
 These two chemicals will spontaneously and near instantaneously burst into flame upon contact with oxygen. It can be oxygen in air or liquid oxygen in a rocket engine. The boron in the TEB is what causes the green flame when the engines start. To start the engine, LOX is flowed through the rocket injector into the chamber from the vehicle's tank, TEA-TEB is injected into the chamber to create ignition, then RP-1 (fancy kerosene) is flowed in from the vehicle tank to start burning. The flows are increased, thrust is made, and the rocket launches.
 
 To save weight on the first stage apparently they are flowing the TEA-TEB from a tank on the ground. Elon's tweet was "Abort was caused by oxygen in ground side TEA-TEB. Upper stage on separate internal circuit, so doesn't face same risk."
 
 So there was some oxygen that inadvertently got in the TEA-TEB tank. Could have just been atmospheric oxygen that got in when the tank was refilled, or could have been a bit of oxygen that flowed back in from a previous engine test. That would then react with the TEA-TEB in the tank and reduce its concentration, so that the tank then contained a mix of TEA-TEB and combustion products.
 
 In other words, it was like they expected 180 proof TEA-TEB but only got 100 proof. The fire in the engines was monitored and was less than the launch computer expected, so it shut the engines down rather than proceeding to full thrust.
 
 The other common approach for igniting restartable liquid engines is the "spark torch igniter". A spark plug ignites normal propellants in a little rocket engine, which fires into the big rocket engine. This is what most of the smaller New Space rocket companies use because working with hypergols is unpleasant. Hypergolic chemicals are expensive, usually poisonous, some are carcinogenic, and by nature any spills or contamination can result in unexpected fires.
 
 In theory, hypergols are more reliable. In practice, that seems to not necessarily be the case.

[Salo]

Штуцер пишет:

Salo   пишет:
На второй походу тоже:

Похоже, заправка пусковых компонентов вакуумная?

Кабы знать.