A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

'Elektron' repair fails



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old September 15th 04, 08:47 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jeff Findley wrote:
I agree with your point, but you keep asserting that the US could do better
on its first try than the Russians have done with a series of Elektron units
that have actually been flown in zero gravity. That's a completely baseless
assertion.


One must, however, consider the *possibility* that with all its experiences,
Russia never bothered to change the design of the unit to prevent problems,
having decided it is simpler to just fix them as they arise in space. In such
a theoretical scenario, it is therefore possible for the USA to use that
acquired knowledge and design its new system that turns out to be more
reliable than the russian one.


This assumes that the design of the US O2 generator would not have been cast
in stone prior to ISS being crewed and feedback on design flaws of Elektron
being returned to NASA via US crewmembers.

The thing is that we just don't know. But we do know that systems that handle
liquids and especally those with bubbles are very different in space than on
earth. And unless the system is built in transparent aluminium, it is also
very hard for the crew members to actually see what happens inside to cause
the problem.
  #32  
Old September 15th 04, 11:02 PM
Mike Walsh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Doe" wrote in message ...
Mike Walsh wrote:
To the Russians credit, they actually have a working system up there and
if their Elektron fails then they might have to burn one of their
oxygen generating "candles" that have worked so well in the
past, at least if they didn't cause a major fire.


They are using O2 from Progress right now, from what I have read. In

terms of
the O2 candle fire, as long as it doesn't occur again over a statistically
significant period of time , one can conclude that the russians have

learned
their lesson and have changed procedures/design to help prevent this from
occuring again.


That does not follow at all. From what I have read, the main procedure
change was
not to use old canisters or canisters that didn't have good tracking data.
This is
not the same as determining the cause of the problem and then fixing it.

The major fire on Mir showed that a malfunctioning capsule can produce a
deadly
stream of flame that will continue unabated until the oxygen supply runs
out. There
is nothing that can be done to stop it once it gets thoroughly started. You
may be
able to damp it and cool it down so that it goes out if there is a minor
fire at startup
but there is no way it can be stopped with the equipment aboard a space
station,
and rather doubtful even with a ground fire fighting system.

What should have been done is that a series of attempts should have been
made
with a set of "doubtful" canisters to see if the problem can be duplicated
and a
cause determined.

If this has not been done then the "candles" are a potential disaster just
waiting for the wrong series of events to happen.

One negative is that I don't believe we even know whether or not
Russia has anyone actually spending the money to have any organization
actively trying to improve Elektron.


Hard to improve something before you know what actually happens to cause

the
problem. And that is exactly what the crews are doing right now. And yes,
judging from comms, they do have engineers in russia providing support.

But
again, until they know what exactly goes wrong in 0g, the ground engineers
can't really fix anything.


It certainly helps to have the 0g data available, but it isn't true that
they
have to know exactly what went wrong before trying to fix it. It is true
that they won't know whether or not the fix works until they actually keep
it running in 0g.


It appears to me that rather than accepting the Russian equipment as
super-qualified because it has been around for a long time that a
combined U.S. Russian program to improve certain specific
capabilities (Elektron, space suits, oxygen generating devices) could
be very productive.


No offense to americans, but they have exactly 0 experience with O2

generators
actually running in 0g, unless you count the handfull of US crewmembers

who
have worked on elektron. So the USA really couldn't contribute much to

fixing
Elektron problems.


Well, someday, somehow U.S. engineers will require similar devices and
observing
and troubleshooting the existing Elektron is a way to do this.

You seem to assume that the USA engineers on the ground couldn't help
fixing Elektron problems because they don't have experience running them.
I believe the Russian engineers have exactly the same amount of "hands on"
0g experience as the US engineers (none) unless they have a former
cosmonaut working the problem.

If the U.S. engineers lack anything it is the design and construction
details
of the Elektron. And very likely the Russians don't send their engineering
reports to NASA.

Mike Walsh




(Snipped out the rest)


  #33  
Old September 15th 04, 11:13 PM
Mike Walsh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"dave schneider" wrote in message
om...
"Mike Walsh" wrote:
[...]
if their Elektron fails then they might have to burn one of their
oxygen generating "candles" that have worked so well in the
past, at least if they didn't cause a major fire.


AIUI, those "candles" are similar to US oxygen generators, including
the one that left a hole in the Everglades that included a bunch of
human remains.

Russia has no lock on mistakes with these familiar and well-understood
devices, but they do lead in micro-g experience with uncontained
flame; one hopes that the lessons learned from that incident are
still learned.


This isn't exactly comforting information.

If these are such familiar and well-understood devices
(and really similar to the Russian oxygen generator)
then perhaps someone really knows what happened on
board Mir, but I haven't read any explanation of it.

Mike Walsh


  #34  
Old September 15th 04, 11:21 PM
Mike Walsh
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"John Doe" wrote in message ...
Jeff Findley wrote:
I agree with your point, but you keep asserting that the US could do

better
on its first try than the Russians have done with a series of Elektron

units
that have actually been flown in zero gravity. That's a completely

baseless
assertion.


One must, however, consider the *possibility* that with all its

experiences,
Russia never bothered to change the design of the unit to prevent

problems,
having decided it is simpler to just fix them as they arise in space. In

such
a theoretical scenario, it is therefore possible for the USA to use that
acquired knowledge and design its new system that turns out to be more
reliable than the russian one.

Assuming that the information is available to the US and that Russia
is not holding the necessary data from the ISS from NASA. On
Mir it was Russia's station and their program so they could do what
they wished. ISS is supposed to be a cooperative program.

Not sure whether NASA recognizes this either or what the
Congressional limits are on information interchange.


This assumes that the design of the US O2 generator would not have been

cast
in stone prior to ISS being crewed and feedback on design flaws of

Elektron
being returned to NASA via US crewmembers.

The thing is that we just don't know. But we do know that systems that

handle
liquids and especally those with bubbles are very different in space than

on
earth. And unless the system is built in transparent aluminium, it is also
very hard for the crew members to actually see what happens inside to

cause
the problem.


In the long term I believe the ISS should be used to test new and improved
hardware not saddled with the immediate operational requirement of providing
breathing oxygen to the station.

Mike Walsh


  #35  
Old September 16th 04, 08:20 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Doe wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:
Utterly false. Elektron has been *in orbit* for four years, not *in
operation*. It's spent a goodly part of that time partially or
completely inoperable.


I wouldn't say that it spent such a great deal of time "inoperable". Problem
is that you only hear about it when it has hiccups. But the rest of the time,
it does function.


Another partial truth that masks reality. We've heard a great deal
about it because it has had ongoing hiccups. The'rest of the time' is
meaningless.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
  #36  
Old September 16th 04, 08:22 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mike Walsh" wrote:

That does not follow at all. From what I have read, the main procedure
change was not to use old canisters or canisters that didn't have good
tracking data. This is not the same as determining the cause of the
problem and then fixing it.


That's the situation in a nutshell. The cannisters are not fixed, nor
are the causes of the fire known.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
  #37  
Old September 16th 04, 08:28 PM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Jeff Findley" wrote:

"Derek Lyons" wrote in message
...
"Jeff Findley" wrote:


Elektron works better than the US O2 generator.


In the same sense that my buddies $150 beater (which blows smoke,
leaks every fluid, runs crappy only when ambient is above 70F and runs
not at all below that) works 'better' than the car which proceeded it
does currently. (Said car tossed a rod.)


Not at all. To my knowledge, the US has never operated an oxygen generation
system in space, at least not one that cracks H2O to get O2 and H2. That's
like saying you'd have complete confidence in the US ability to create a
nuclear powered aircraft that couldn't possibly crash on the first flight.


Utter bull****. If you note I compared an existing beater (Elektron)
to a former, and no longer operating beater (the US system, which
actually hasn't been tested yet and thus can be regarded as
inoperable).

Remember the "unsinkable" Titanic? It looked great on the drawing board,
but sank anyway.


In *this* ficton, 'unsinkable' was a term applied to the Titanic by
the press, not by it's designers or operators. In fact, the damage
control system on the Titanic functioned more-or-less as intended, the
ship sunk slowly and in a controlled fashion. With discipline and
more lifeboats, much fewer lives would have been lost. (Had doctrine
been followed and the berg been taken head on, probably none would
have been lost.)

You can't say the same thing wouldn't happen to a US O2 generator when it is
ran in zero gravity.


Never claimed that the a US O2 generator would not have problems.

My point is, and has long been, that Russian hardware isn't the
all-singing all-dancing fully tested, fully proven, completely and
utterly dependable system(s) that it's often portrayed as being in
these groups and elsewhere. Statement like 'the Elektron is better
than the US system' and 'the Elektron has years of operation' conceal
and obscure the truth.


I agree with your point, but you keep asserting that the US could do better
on its first try than the Russians have done with a series of Elektron units
that have actually been flown in zero gravity. That's a completely baseless
assertion.


That's a lack of reading comprehension on your part. I have never
once asserted that a US unit, on it's first try, would perform any
better than Elektron. Try reading my messages in this thread, and
you'll note that I've hardly even mentioned the US unit.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
  #38  
Old September 16th 04, 09:12 PM
John Doe
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Derek Lyons wrote:
That's the situation in a nutshell. The cannisters are not fixed, nor
are the causes of the fire known.


1- Why would you think that they could be fixed in the first place ?
It is a chemical reaction that generates O2 and HEAT.

2- Ever considered the possibility that there might be absolutely nothing
wrong with the design of the canisters and that it was just a quality
control/manufacturing defect ? (or as initialy reported, just used canisters
that were too old). ?

In the later case, it is *possible* that Russia has already tackled the cause
with better process control on the ground and NASA not seeing any design changes.

Remember that the Mir fire accident happened during a time when Russia was far
more secretive than it is now, and it is likely we just won't know for a very
long time.

The one question to be asked is whether the mounting brackets on Alpha have
been positioned so that should the same accident happen again, the flames
would not burn critical items.
  #39  
Old September 17th 04, 07:37 AM
Derek Lyons
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

John Doe wrote:

Derek Lyons wrote:
That's the situation in a nutshell. The cannisters are not fixed, nor
are the causes of the fire known.


1- Why would you think that they could be fixed in the first place ?
It is a chemical reaction that generates O2 and HEAT.


There is considerable difference between heat and the fire that
occurred on MIR.

2- Ever considered the possibility that there might be absolutely nothing
wrong with the design of the canisters and that it was just a quality
control/manufacturing defect ? (or as initialy reported, just used canisters
that were too old). ?


So 'effin what? There was never a search to determine clearly what
caused the fire. No discovery of causes means no correction to
quality control and manufacturing processes to prevent the defect from
happening again.

In the later case, it is *possible* that Russia has already tackled the cause
with better process control on the ground and NASA not seeing any design changes.


That's an assumption utterly unsupported by any evidence. In fact,
what evidence is available indicates that the Russians did no such
thing.

Remember that the Mir fire accident happened during a time when Russia was far
more secretive than it is now, and it is likely we just won't know for a very
long time.


Wrong. The Soviets were quite open on many potentially embarrasing
topics, and NASA colluded with them in covering them up and hiding
them.

The one question to be asked is whether the mounting brackets on Alpha have
been positioned so that should the same accident happen again, the flames
would not burn critical items.


You really must work so hard to be so clueless.

D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
  #40  
Old September 18th 04, 02:39 AM
Explorer8939
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message . ..


When will the US O2 generator be operational on ISS so we can compare?



Big laugh. There is no US O2 generator on ISS. There is a CO2 scrubber
in the US Lab but that died after a couple of weeks (it hasn't worked
in ages).

There is an O2 supply in the US Quest airlock, but that apparently is
out of order.

Basically, US ECLSS suffers from the same fate as a lot of other US
space technology, lots of systems engineering, great viewgraphs, but
the damned thing doesn't work.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Progress on RCC Repair? ed kyle Space Shuttle 0 January 6th 04 08:38 PM
Simple paintbrush can repair damaged tiles... Brian C. Space Shuttle 0 October 9th 03 04:22 PM
MSNBC (Oberg): NASA returns to roots for tile repair James Oberg Space Shuttle 0 September 19th 03 03:33 PM
MSNBC (Oberg): NASA returns to roots for tile repair James Oberg History 0 September 19th 03 03:33 PM
No RCC Repair Kit for Next Shuttle Flight? ed kyle Space Shuttle 4 August 27th 03 02:05 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.