Antares (Taurus II)

[Олег Шляпин]

anik пишет:
 ее уже переделали под новый двигатель на месте,

А это возможно?

[Salo]

Все изменения в ХО.

[che wi]

Marcia Smith ‏@SpcPlcyOnline  3m ago

Dave Thompson @OrbitalATK: expect 4 cargo missions to ISS in next 12 months - Dec & Mar on Atlas V; May & late Sept/early Oct on Antares.

Stephen Clark ‏@StephenClark1  8m ago

Orbital ATK's COO Blake Larson: Antares rollout in January for hotfire at Wallops after installing RD-181 engines, avionics, feed lines.

[Seerndv]

che wi опередил гл. ув. выс. инф. тов. АниКея  

[Salo]

National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA Independent Review Team Orb–3 Accident Investigation Report
Executive Summary
http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/orb3_irt_execsumm_0.pdf

[АниКей]

НОВО-ОГАРЕВО, 30 окт — РИА Новости. NASA ни разу не ставило перед Россией вопрос о причинах аварии носителя Antares, заявил вице-премьер РФ Дмитрий Рогозин.
"Во всех переговорах, которые мы ведем по линии госкорпорации "Роскосмос", с NASA такого рода вопроса мы в повестке дня не имели", — сказал Рогозин.
Наиболее вероятной причиной крушения ракеты-носителя Antares американской компании Orbital Sciences в октябре 2014 года является взрыв ракетного двигателя AJ-26, сделанного на основе советских НК-33, говорится в опубликованном в пятницу отчете NASA.

РИА Новости http://ria.ru/science/20151030/1310817050.html#ixzz3q4cJykwg

[АниКей]

"Независимая группа NASA IRT представила детальный анализ состояния ракеты Antares до и в момент запуска, а также фотоснимки и видеозаписи, на которых зафиксирован запуск и момент крушения. Основываясь на этих данных, IRT постановила, что наиболее вероятной причиной крушения Antares был взрыв ракетного двигателя AJ-26", — отмечено в отчете агентства.
В отчете говорится, что взрыв произошел в турбонасосе для жидкого водорода E15, вследствие чего был поврежден ракетный двигатель. Взрыв привел к потере тяги в двигателе, после чего носитель упал на землю и был полностью разрушен, как и находившийся в нем груз. В числе причин, приведших к взрыву турбонасоса, приводятся заводской брак и попадание в него инородных предметов.
Ранее сообщалось, что Antares комплектуется двигателями AJ-26, сделанными на основе советских НК-33, законсервированных еще со времен незавершенной лунной пилотируемой программы. Представитель компании Дэвид Томпсон сообщал, что Orbital Sciences намерены отказаться от использования ракетных двигателей AJ-26 до тех пор, пока не будет полностью доказано, что они могут использоваться для полетов.

РИА Новости http://ria.ru/science/20151030/1310822802.html#ixzz3q4cigCxh

[Apollo13]

В отчете говорится, что взрыв произошел в турбонасосе для жидкого водорода E15

В охумору.

[АниКей]

Apollo13 пишет:
 http://apollo-13.livejournal.com/

Отчет НАСА об аварии Антареса
 
Отчет НАСА об аварии Антереса 28 октября 2014 года.

http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/atoms/files/orb3_irt_execsumm_0.pdf

Непосредственной причиной названо радиальное смещение ротора приведшее к касанию и трению между вращающимися и неподвижными частями кислородного насоса. В результате произошло возгорание и пожар в кислорнодном насосе.

Точная причина вызвавшая смещение не установлена. Наиболее вероятными причинами названы:

1. Неадекватная проектная надежность кислородного насоса и подшипника турбины двигателя AJ26.
2. Попадание в кислородный насос двигателя Е15 посторонних частиц из двуокиси кремния и титана. Значительные повреждения от посторонних частиц не обнаружены. Также не обнаружены никакие свидетельства того что посторонние частицы прямо или непрямо привели к отказу двигателя Е15.
3. Производственный дефект двигателя Е15. Обнаружен дефект подшипника. Дефект возник в процессе изготовления и присутствовал в подшипнике до приемочного тестирования и пуска Антареса. Изучение двигателя Е17, взорвавшегося на стенде в Стенисе в мае 2014 года показало наличие похожего дефекта подшипника. Изучение Е16 и других двигателей показало, что аналогичные дефекты в них отсутствуют. Без дополнительного расследования и тестирования других двигателей невозможно определить всегда ли такой дефект приводит к аварии.

Там еще много довольно сложных нюансов, которые я не стал преводить.

Рекомендации на будущее - увеличить количество телеметрии двигателя, поставить более надежные фильтры и тестировать, тестировать, тестировать.

UPD: Видимо речь идет не о самом подшипнике, а о корпусе турбины в месте установки подшипника.

( Read more... )
 

[Salo]

http://spacenews.com/nasa-orbital-differ-on-root-cause-of-antares-launch-failure/

NASA and Orbital Reach Differing Conclusions on Antares Failure
by Jeff Foust — October 29, 2015
  An Orbital Sciences Corp. Antares rocket exploded seconds after liftoff from Wallops Island, Virginia, Oct. 28. Credit: NASA  
 
WASHINGTON — A NASA investigation into last year's failure of an Orbital ATK Antares launch vehicle identified three possible technical root causes of the accident, a conclusion consistent with, but not identical to, Orbital's own investigation.
An executive summary of a NASA Independent Review Team (IRT) report into the October 2014 loss of an Antares shortly after liftoff, released by NASA Oct. 29, concluded there was an explosion in the liquid oxygen turbopump in one of the two AJ-26 engines, designated E15, in the vehicle's first stage about 15 seconds after ignition. The vehicle lost thrust and crashed to the ground near its launch pad.
The explosion was triggered when rotating and stationary components in part of the turbopump came into contact. "This frictional rubbing led to ignition and fire" in the turbopump, and thus the explosion, the report states.
The report, though, could not determine what cased the turbopump problem in the first place. "The IRT was not able to isolate a single technical root cause for the E15 fire and explosion," the report states. Instead, investigators identified three potential root causes, "any one or a combination of which could have resulted in the E15 failure."
One potential root cause was an "inadequate design robustness" of the engine. Investigators said the nature of the engine's design made it susceptible to oxygen fires and failures similar to the one experienced on the Antares mission. Acceptance testing of the engines was not sufficient to detect those problems, according to the report.
A second potential root cause was foreign object debris, in the form of silica and titanium, found in the engine after the accident. Investigators concluded there were not "gross levels" of such debris in the engine, based on the lack of additional damage to the engine, but could not determine how much debris was in the engine prior to the explosion.
The final potential root cause was a manufacturing defect with the engine. Investigators found a defect in the engine similar to one found in another AJ-26 engine that exploded on a test stand at NASA's Stennis Space Center during acceptance testing in May 2014. The report said it wasn't clear that this defect alone would be sufficient to cause the explosion.
 AJ-26 rocket engine being test fired. Credit: Aerojet Rocketdyne

That finding regarding technical root causes is different from the Orbital's own Accident Investigation Board. An executive summary of that report, submitted to the Federal Aviation Administration and obtained by SpaceNews, agreed with NASA's conclusion that elements of the turbopump came into contact and ignited the fire that caused the explosion.
The Orbital report, though, identified a single "highly probable" technical root cause of the failure: a machining defect in turbine assembly of the turbopump that dates back to when the engine was manufactured in the former Soviet Union more than 40 years ago. An adjacent piece of the engine, recovered with little damage after the explosion, showed a "clear defect" in its machining, according to the report.
Orbital's report also identified several other technical root causes it deemed "credible" but less likely to have caused the explosion. Those additional causes included other technical problems with the engine and "poor long-term storage" of the engine, causing corrosion of engine components.
Foreign object debris, one of the leading root causes of the NASA investigation, was considered "possible but unlikely" in the Orbital report. "No credible opportunities for contamination were found," it stated. The Orbital report did not address the "design robustness" issue identified as a potential root cause by NASA.
The dismissal of foreign object debris by Orbital puts it at odds with Aerojet Rocketdyne, who suggested earlier this year that such debris contributed to the failure. Aerojet announced Sept. 24 it would pay Orbital $50 million to end the dispute between the companies about the accident.
Aerojet Rocketdyne spokesman Glenn Mahone did not respond to a request for comment late Oct. 29 about the accident investigation reports. However, he said Sept. 25 that there was little he could publicly discuss about Aerojet's own investigation into the accident, citing proprietary data.
The NASA report also found that both Aerojet and Orbital lacked sufficient information of the AJ-26 engine, including "failure history knowledge" dating back to its Soviet origins. "A lack of design and operating insight into the AJ-26 engines creates a low level of confidence in loss-of-mission predictions made by Orbital ATK and Aerojet Rocketdyne," the report stated.
The report added that there were some issues in how NASA and Orbital understood and communicated risk as part of its Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) contract, which the failed Antares launch was part of. However, investigators concluded that "that the CRS model is generally working as intended."
Orbital has since moved on from the AJ-26 engine that caused the Antares failure, replacing it with the Russian RD-181 engine. A static fire test of the first Antares equipped with RD-181 engines is scheduled for early 2016, with launch tentatively planned for May.

[Seerndv]

Salo пишет:
One potential root cause was an "inadequate design robustness" of the engine. Investigators said the nature of the engine's design made it susceptible to oxygen fires and failures similar to the one experienced on the Antares mission. Acceptance testing of the engines was not sufficient to detect those problems, according to the report.

- они "перегрева" не читают!  :evil:

[Александр Ч.]

http://www.orbitalatk.com/news-room/insideOA/AntaresUpdate/default.aspx Operations in the Horizontal Integration Facility (HIF) at NASA's Wallops Flight Facility where Orbital ATK assembles and tests its Antares medium-class rocket are in full force asthe team preps the upgraded vehicle for its upcoming "hot fire" test in early 2016. The hotfire test will utilize an Antares first stage with its new RD-181engines to verify the vehicle's performance and its compatibility with the launch pad, and will certify the system for flight. During the test, Antares will fire its engines at 100% thrust. Following a successful hot firetest, Antares launches are slated to resume next year for Orbital ATK's Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) missions to deliver cargo and supplies to the International Space Station (ISS) for NASA.All major components of the Antares hot fire test vehicle are at Wallops, including the two all-new RD-181 engines that will power the launch vehicle. The RD-181 engines completed certification and acceptance testing prior to arriving at the HIF, and now the team is busy assembling the test vehicle and verifying its systems. "We have the engines and other major subsystems installed and are preparing to begin integrated testing of the first stage," said Mike Pinkston, Orbital ATK Vice President and Antares GeneralManager. "We have seen incredible dedication by our team to hit our milestones, enabling us to remain on schedule to support our mission of delivering vital supplies to the crews aboard the space station."In order to accommodate the RD-181 engines, several modifications were made to the Antares vehicle design. Upgrades completed and installed over the summer include a newly-developed and qualified thrust adapter structure, modifications to the first stage core propellant tanks, modified engine controlavionics and new propellant feedlines.In addition to the work being conducted for the hot fire test, the team is also receiving hardware for the full Antares rocket that will be used for its return to flight in the spring of 2016. The crew will be assembling that vehicle in parallel with the hot fire test vehicle. The next set of Antares engines recently completed acceptance testing and is scheduled to arrive at Wallops in December."These new engines are robust, flight-heritage powerhouses that provide Antares with extra performance to lift more cargoto the ISS for NASA," said Pinkston. "It is great to be in full integration operations, performing pad testing and working towards our next launch."The Virginia Spaceflight Authority completed repairs toPad 0A at the Mid-Atlantic Regional Spaceport (MARS) atthe end of September and is finishing performance testing of the new systems that were installed to support the upgraded Antares. Testing andcertification of the launch pad is set to be completed this month.

[Apollo13]

http://novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/forum/messages/forum10/topic14401/message1432954/#message1432954

[Salo]

http://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/files/5-Status_of_ISS.pdf
 

[Salo]

http://spacenews.com/cygnus-prepared-for-atlas-launch-to-space-station/

Orbital ATK plans to resume Cygnus launches on an upgraded version of its Antares rocket in May from Wallops.
"Things are going very well at Wallops," Culbertson said, praising work by NASA and the state of Virginia to repair the pad damaged in last October's launch failure. "They modified some of the systems, replaced a few items, and painted everything. It looks great."
Orbital is planning to conduct a hot-fire test of the Antares, now equipped with two RD-181 engines from the Russian company Energomash, on the pad in March. Culbertson said the integration of the new engines into the Antares first stage has gone well, and that only minor changes to the pad were needed to accommodate the engine.
The long-term future of both Antares and Cygnus, though, hinges in large part on whether Orbital ATK can secure another NASA contract to deliver cargo to the station. The company was one of several that submitted proposals to NASA nearly a year ago for the agency's Commercial Resupply Services (CRS) 2 competition. NASA has delayed awarding CRS-2 contracts several times, and now plans to announce them as late as the end of January.

[salto]

АниКей пишет:
Цитата НОВО-ОГАРЕВО, 30 окт — РИА Новости. NASA ни разу не ставило перед Россией вопрос о причинах аварии носителя Antares, заявил вице-премьер РФ Дмитрий Рогозин.
"Во всех переговорах, которые мы ведем по линии госкорпорации "Роскосмос", с NASA такого рода вопроса мы в повестке дня не имели", — сказал Рогозин.
Наиболее вероятной причиной крушения ракеты-носителя Antares американской компании Orbital Sciences в октябре 2014 года является взрыв ракетного двигателя AJ-26, сделанного на основе советских НК-33, говорится в опубликованном в пятницу отчете NASA.

Хоть и с опозданием, но у меня вопрос: кто-то  в Кузнецове и в России вообще работал с телеметрией по этому пуску? Она была выложена в открытом доступе?

[Seerndv]

salto пишет:
Хоть и с опозданием, но у меня вопрос: кто-тов Кузнецове и в России вообще работал с телеметрией по этому пуску? Она была выложена в открытом доступе?

- неоднократно в статьях подчёркивалось, что все материалы по аварии Антареса эксклюзивная собственность Орбитала.
Так что ... 

[salto]

Seerndv пишет:

salto пишет:
Хоть и с опозданием, но у меня вопрос: кто-тов Кузнецове и в России вообще работал с телеметрией по этому пуску? Она была выложена в открытом доступе?

- неоднократно в статьях подчёркивалось, что все материалы по аварии Антареса эксклюзивная собственность Орбитала.
Так что

А жаль! Возможно нашлась бы и другая причина аварии.

[Apollo13]

salto пишет:
кто-тов Кузнецове и в России вообще работал с телеметрией по этому пуску? Она была выложена в открытом доступе?

Разве было когда-нибудь такое, чтобы телеметрию выкладывали в открытый доступ?

[Apollo13]

salto пишет:
А жаль! Возможно нашлась бы и другая причина аварии.

Неужели три названных комиссией НАСА возможных причины мало?  

Вы подозреваете что на самом деле причина какая-то четвертая?