#1
|
|||
|
|||
Beta Gimbal assy
So, we have a rotating joint problem on the same side as the sarj problem. I
bit of a coincidence, don't you think? Obviously this assembly was made on a Friday afternoon after a liquid lunch? I jest, but if it turns out to be poor manufacture, I wonder what they can do abhout it? So, I'm not sure from the description exactly what occurred on Saturday. Was it a short? Brian -- Brian Gaff - Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff' in the display name may be lost. Blind user, so no pictures please! |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Beta Gimbal assy
"Brian Gaff" writes:
So, I'm not sure from the description exactly what occurred on Saturday. Was it a short? Brian If you're talking about the launch scrub, the root cause is yet to be determined. One of the engine cut off (ECO) sensors flaked out again during filling of the external tank, and the modified flight rules they were under indicated that unless all 4 sensors worked without incident, they weren't gonna fly. One of the sensors repeated its false alarming tricks of a few days (and few years) back, and they called it off pending an root cause analysis and a fix. -- Todd H. http://toddh.net/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Beta Gimbal assy
So, we have a rotating joint problem on the same side as the sarj problem. I
bit of a coincidence, don't you think? Well, there is speculation that the beta gimbal joint problem could have been a micrometeorite strike he http://www.floridatoday.com/floridat...ect-joint.html although they don't elaborate on whether there is evidence for that or whether it is just one guess among many. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Beta Gimbal assy
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:13:42 GMT, "Brian Gaff"
wrote: So, we have a rotating joint problem on the same side as the sarj problem. I bit of a coincidence, don't you think? Obviously this assembly was made on a Friday afternoon after a liquid lunch? Or much more likely, a side effect of the vibrations from the failed SARJ. Brian |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Beta Gimbal assy
Yes, I thought that as well. The loose particle sounds the most likely, but
whatever it is it is apparently conductive, which is a little worrying. So we have magnetised particles in the sarj, and conductive debris in the bga. Sounds a bit odd to me. Did anyone actually ask how come all the particles in the Sarj are standing on end as they are apparently in the photo which was shown? I thought these units were all kept in clean environments and launched clean too? Just trying to think back to the mission which installed this sarj and whether there were any issues at that time in the processing reported. Maybe the manufacturers test samples might show something, as the surface hardening of the race ring should not allow the problem to occur. If the other surface is the same, they have a problem. Be interesting to find out what the surface facing down is like. The rotary joint should be fixable I'd imagine, and its gratifying that only one is affected. Brian -- Brian Gaff....Note, this account does not accept Bcc: email. graphics are great, but the blind can't hear them Email: __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________ "Brian Thorn" wrote in message ... On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:13:42 GMT, "Brian Gaff" wrote: So, we have a rotating joint problem on the same side as the sarj problem. I bit of a coincidence, don't you think? Obviously this assembly was made on a Friday afternoon after a liquid lunch? Or much more likely, a side effect of the vibrations from the failed SARJ. Brian |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Beta Gimbal assy
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 08:48:29 GMT, "Brian Gaff" wrote:
Yes, I thought that as well. The loose particle sounds the most likely, but whatever it is it is apparently conductive, which is a little worrying. So we have magnetised particles in the sarj, and conductive debris in the bga. Sounds a bit odd to me. Did anyone actually ask how come all the particles in the Sarj are standing on end as they are apparently in the photo which was shown? I thought these units were all kept in clean environments and launched clean too? Just trying to think back to the mission which installed this sarj and whether there were any issues at that time in the processing reported. Maybe the manufacturers test samples might show something, as the surface hardening of the race ring should not allow the problem to occur. If the other surface is the same, they have a problem. Be interesting to find out what the surface facing down is like. The rotary joint should be fixable I'd imagine, and its gratifying that only one is affected. Brian We should know a lot more come Tuesday. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Beta Gimbal assy
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 20:13:42 GMT, "Brian Gaff"
wrote: So, we have a rotating joint problem on the same side as the sarj problem. I bit of a coincidence, don't you think? Obviously this assembly was made on a Friday afternoon after a liquid lunch? I jest, but if it turns out to be poor manufacture, I wonder what they can do abhout it? Brian First thing that I thought about after hearing of the problems with the SARJ was this: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/07/26/nas...eut/index.html - 'NASA finds apparent sabotage'. Anyone know when the final closeouts on S4 were? -- Brian Heil | Stay Alert! | Technology Services Systems Administrator/Programmer | Trust No One! | University of Iowa | Keep Your Laser Handy | College of Business |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Question about 3-axis gimbal | Ady[_2_] | Space Shuttle | 2 | February 20th 07 03:39 PM |
SRB Gimbal potential issues | B | Space Shuttle | 1 | December 7th 06 03:14 PM |
Google Beta And *YOU* | Alric Knebel | Misc | 2 | December 9th 04 02:37 PM |
beta-Perseus | Androcles | UK Astronomy | 4 | August 19th 04 02:55 PM |
Beta Lyrae | Jonathan Silverlight | Astronomy Misc | 0 | October 21st 03 10:09 PM |