The wet Shuttle ET

A few days back, workers accidentally bumped the ET for Atlantis and
left a small scratch on it. They decided to fix this, but have noted
water is now coming out of the ET's foam that apparently got into the
foam during hurricane Katrina.
Was the tank on Discovery also at the Michoud facility during the Hurricane?
http://www.cfnews13.com/StoryHeadline.aspx?id=16685
Because if it was, and water got into the foam, and that water freezes
when they tank it up....

Pat

Pat Flannery wrote in
:

A few days back, workers accidentally bumped the ET for Atlantis and
left a small scratch on it. They decided to fix this, but have noted
water is now coming out of the ET's foam that apparently got into the
foam during hurricane Katrina.
Was the tank on Discovery also at the Michoud facility during the
Hurricane? http://www.cfnews13.com/StoryHeadline.aspx?id=16685

IIRC, it was at KSC.


--
JRF

Reply-to address spam-proofed - to reply by E-mail,
check "Organization" (I am not assimilated) and
think one step ahead of IBM.

On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 15:17:30 -0500, Pat Flannery
wrote:

Because if it was, and water got into the foam, and that water freezes
when they tank it up....

Like rain doesn't get all over the Tank during the month it sits out
on the pad before launch?

Brian

Brian Thorn wrote:



Because if it was, and water got into the foam, and that water freezes
when they tank it up....



Like rain doesn't get all over the Tank during the month it sits out
on the pad before launch?



It's not supposed to soak into the tank IIRC; and that makes what
happened to the Atlantis ET worrying, as apparently water did get into
it from the hurricane. If the tanks are soaking up rain water, then you
might have one of the major causes of foam shedding - the foam gets
water in it; the water freezes when the tank is fueled, the freezing
water expands, causing cracking in the foam, and the foam sheds as the
tank warms up during ascent and the ice in the foam melts leaving gaps.
In fact, as the temperature of the ET rises during ascent and the
ambient air pressure drops, the water may actually boil, causing steam
to occur inside the foam.
The fact that water can get into the foam also leaves the possibility
that air might be coming in contact with the tank's outer surface via
the same route that's allowing the water in, and the frozen air foam
shedding problem occurring.

Pat

water is heavy, frozen or not
accelerative loads make it more so
greatly increasing the probability of failure
when shuttle launches

they gotta scrub the mission and pull those
fricken tanks apart and put them together right.

One of the nice things about reengineering ETs
for potential human habitation is that they get
RE-ENGINEERED - properly this time.

BlagooBlanaa wrote:

water is heavy, frozen or not
accelerative loads make it more so
greatly increasing the probability of failure
when shuttle launches



I don't think they can do it, but it would be interesting to be able to
weigh the stacked shuttle on the pad prior to propellant loading.
If it weighs several tens of pounds more just before you tank it up than
it did as it left the VAB, then you've got a problem whose most likely
explanation is that it's been soaking up water some way.
Although the idea of putting pinholes in the foam to allow any trapped
air that got liquefied under the foam to vent safely when ascent heating
caused it to go back into a gaseous state without causing the foam to
debond solves one problem, it also leaves a way for water to get into
the foam.

Pat

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...
I don't think they can do it, but it would be interesting to be able to
weigh the stacked shuttle on the pad prior to propellant loading.

Hey, they could weigh a loaded Saturn V- I saw it in a movie. They blamed
the weight of the stowaway on rainwater.

Although the idea of putting pinholes in the foam to allow any trapped air
that got liquefied under the foam to vent safely when ascent heating
caused it to go back into a gaseous state without causing the foam to
debond solves one problem, it also leaves a way for water to get into the
foam.

Which you solve by spraying the holes with a sealant.

Hey, Pat, I once read the ingredients on a package of air-popped popcorn.
Said popcorn was sprayed with oil after popping, to improve the taste,
according to the distributor. Of course, that wasn't mentioned on the
package itself, while "Air Popped, Not Oil Popped!" was.

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...
It's not supposed to soak into the tank IIRC; and that makes what happened
to the Atlantis ET worrying, as apparently water did get into it from the
hurricane.

So, why can't we wrap the ET in loose plastic sheets, and pop them off right
when the solids light?

Scott Hedrick wrote:



Although the idea of putting pinholes in the foam to allow any trapped air
that got liquefied under the foam to vent safely when ascent heating
caused it to go back into a gaseous state without causing the foam to
debond solves one problem, it also leaves a way for water to get into the
foam.



Which you solve by spraying the holes with a sealant.



What they really needed, particularly given the Cape's wet climate, was
a building that could entirely enclose the Shuttle to just an hour or so
before launch, like Vandenberg was going to have for its Shuttle launch
facility.
In that way you could pick a nice sunny day to roll the Shuttle out to
the pad from the VAB, and keep the rain off of it once it had arrived.

Pat

For all the technology and engineering brainpower being thrown at the
foam problem, it bothers me that NASA is essentially flying four
versions of the tank on succeeding flights: the "old" ET carried on the
fatal Columbia flight (STS-107), the modified one used on last year's
"return to flight" Discovery mission that resulted in more (although
not deadly) foam events (STS-114), the one being used on this flight
(STS-121), and the one slated for the shuttle Atlantis on the next
flight (STS-116), which will have further modifications already decided
on. It's not clear to this non-engineer that the accumulation of data
from flying four designs isn't so complex it could actually conceal a
problem rather than spotlighting it.

Matt Bille
www.mattwriter.com

Pat Flannery wrote:
Scott Hedrick wrote:



Although the idea of putting pinholes in the foam to allow any trapped air
that got liquefied under the foam to vent safely when ascent heating
caused it to go back into a gaseous state without causing the foam to
debond solves one problem, it also leaves a way for water to get into the
foam.



Which you solve by spraying the holes with a sealant.



What they really needed, particularly given the Cape's wet climate, was
a building that could entirely enclose the Shuttle to just an hour or so
before launch, like Vandenberg was going to have for its Shuttle launch
facility.
In that way you could pick a nice sunny day to roll the Shuttle out to
the pad from the VAB, and keep the rain off of it once it had arrived.

Pat