[AR] Re: Saturns (was Re: APCP ...)

  • From: "John Dom" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> ("johndom")
  • To: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Tue, 2 May 2023 02:40:48 +0200 (CEST)


Classical (Bossart) Atlases and Centaurs had thin walled balloon cryotanks coated with ice functioning as...*thermal isolation*. When empty, unless pressurised, balloon tanks become nasty: they crumple.

John





Verzonden vanuit Proximus Mail



Van: roxanna Mason <rocketmaster.ken@xxxxxxxxx>

Verzonden: 1 mei 2023 20:20:53 CEST

Aan: arocket@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Onderwerp: [AR] Re: Saturns (was Re: APCP ...)






  The main issue there on the


   Saturns was the manufacturing of very large, very thin ones.










This is partially true,The RL-10 powered Centaur was an order of magnitude smaller than S-II so scaling up usually presents problems  




The other part is the bulkhead had to also be insulated unlike Atlas which was a simple sheet of stainless steel.










     Ken
































On Sun, Apr 30, 2023 at 12:08 PM Henry Spencer <hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:hspencer@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:





   On Fri, 28 Apr 2023, roxanna Mason wrote:

 > Other factors which made the LH2 high risk was the requirement for a

 > common bulkhead to shorten the SII stagewhich had never been done

 > before.



No, Atlas already had a common bulkhead -- in fact, about the most minimal

 common bulkhead imaginable, a single thin sheet of stainless with LOX

above it and kerosene ullage space below it.  And the Centaur folks were

already working on a LOX/LH2 common bulkhead.  The main issue there on the

 Saturns was the manufacturing of very large, very thin ones.



> Additionally the insulation was put on the inside immersed in the LH2. 

> This is why there was no ice and thick frost on the outside of the stage

 > like the SI-C stage did on the LOx tank.

 > Ditto for the SIV 3rd stage.



Only on the third stage, actually.  Douglas's list of advantages for the

internal insulation quietly failed to mention its one big snag:  it was

heavy, because it needed compressive strength to transmit pressure loads

(pressurization and hydrostatic) out to the metal wall.  It made the S-IV,

and then the S-IVB, easier... but the S-II was too performance-critical to

accept the weight penalty, and NAA had to use external insulation.  After

some early difficulties, they eventually settled on using spray-on foam --

in fact, the original Shuttle ET foam was an improved version of the S-II

 foam.



 Henry



Other related posts: