You are on page 1of 443

Copy No.

MSC-A-R-66-4

POSTLAUNCH REPORT FOR MISSION A S - 2 0 1
(Apollo Spacecraft 0 0 9 )

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION MANNED SPACECRAFT CENTER HOUSTON, T E X A S

May6, 1966
____ (NASA-TM-X-72334) POSTLAUNCH REPORT FO'R MISSION A S - 2 0 1 (APOLLO SPACECRAFT 0 0 9 ) (NASA) 4 3 8 p 00/98

@

N75-71338 Unclas 17602

n', 0,
'

i .

.

A P O D SPACECRAFT FLIGKC HISTORY

Mission
PA-1

Spacecraft

Description
First pad abort

h u n c h date
NOV.

Launch s i t e White Sands Missile Range, N. Mex. White Sands Missile Range, N. Mex.

BP-6

7, 1963

A-001

BP-12

Transonic abort

k y 13,

16 94

AS-101

BP-13 3P-15
BP-23
,

Nominal launch and e x i t environment Nominal launch and exit environment
Maximum dynamic

b y 28, 1964
Sept.
Dec.

Cape Kennedy,
Fla.

As-102
A- 002

18, 1964
8 194 , .6

Cape Kennedy, Fla.
White Sands Missile Range, N. Mex. Cape Kennedy, Fla

pressure abort

AS-103
A-003

BP-16
BP-22

Micrometeoroid experiment Low-altitude. abort (planned higha l t i t u d e abort)
M i crome t e o r oi d experiment and service m o d u l e RCS launch environment

Feb.
Pky

16, 1965

.

19, 1965

White Sands Missile Range,
N. Mex.

AS-104

BP-26

P ~ 25, Y

1965

Cape Kennedy, Fla.

PA-2

BP-23A

Second pad abort

June 29, 1?65

White Sands Missile Range , E Mex . Cape Kennedy, Fla.

AS-105

BP-9 A

Micrmeteoroid experiment and service module

July 30, 1965

RCS launch
environment

A-004

sc-002

Power-on tumbling boundary abort
Supercircular ree n t r y with high heat rate

Jan. 20,

1966

White Sands Missile Range, N. Mex. Cape Kennedy, Fla.

AS-201

sc-009

Feb. 26, 1966

MSC-A-R-66-4

POSTLAUNCH REPOF3' FOR MISSION AS-201 (Ap0LZ;o SPACECRAFT 009)
Comment Sheet

In keeping with the President's policy 011 cost reduction and in order to update the distribution of this document please detach, fill in and return to MSC-FM4. I this document is no longer needed please destroy, or if at MSC return to PM~. f

To:

PM4

National Aeronautics and Space Aaministration Manned Spacecraft Center Houston, Texas 770% Subject: Comments AS-201 Distribution Postlaunch Report for Mission AS-201, Apollo Spacecraft 009 MSC-A-R-66-4.

-

-

-

1 This office has received . (EC-A-R-66-4).
This office

copies of the AS-201 Postlaunch Report

(does or does not) have need of this document and (does or does not) wish to receive future Postlaunch Reports on Apollo flights. Distribution changes (please show present recipient and address according to current distribution list).

a .

Change quantity from Name

copies to

copies.

(present recipient) Mailing Info m t i o n

b .

Add
Name

copies for: (additional distribution)

Complete miling address

Signed
I

Date
I

MSC-A-R-66-4

POSTLAUNCH REPORT FOR MISSION AS-201
(APOLLO SPACECRAFT 009)

MissFon Operkions Division

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

MANNED S P A c E C r n CENJlER

HOUSTON, TEXAS

6, 1966

i l

Unless otherwise specified, zero time (T-0) f o r all data i n t h i s report is referenced t o "Range zero" which is the first i n t e g r a l second o f Range time p r i o r t o "lift-off." Lift-off i s the instant of Saturn Instrument Unit umbilical disconnect.

0

NASA-S-66-6155 MAY 6

Lift-off, Mission AS-201.

6-8
6.2

Aerothermodynamics

"he evaluation of the performance of the Apollo heat-shield material requires knowledge of the t e h& envlronment. In order to determine the environment, pressure transducers and surface-mounted calorimeters were installed on spacecraft 009. Pressure measurements.- A total of 36 pressure transducers were installed around the command module: 12 on the aft heat shield, and 2 on 4 the conical section. Of the 36 transducers, 3 did not operate, 17 gave no usable data, 6 (on the conical section) exhibited erratic histories, 0 and 1 (on the aft heat shield) provided usable data. Histories of the pressures measured on the aft heat shield are shown The data appear smooth until "1635 seconds when a drop in figure 6.2-1. in the data can be observed. Examination of oscillograph records reveals a significant loss of data at this time and a return 1 second later. Recorded data were not usable after approximately mi665 seconds, which was 25 seconds after peak pressure was measured. The measurements sham in figure 6.2-1 are raw data corrected for the deviation from zero that existed for each transducer prior t o reentry.

In order to correlate the flight data M t h results obtained in windtunnel tests, distributions of measured pressure divided by a calculated stagnation pressure were obtained and are shuwn in figure 6.2-2. The theoretical stagnation pressure was computed using the relation for equilibrium real air behind a normal shock. The calculations were made for the time interval from T+1610 to T4-1630seconds (M = 25 to 21) when the data are of relatively good quality. The flight measurements are com0 pared with wind-tunnel data measured at a W c h number of 1 and an angle of attack of 220, and with a flow-field solution calculated for a lbch number of 20.7 and an angle of attack of 2 P . Close agreement can be obsemd for times ~i-1625 ~ 1 6 3 0 and seconds. The earlier measurements 0 are approximately 1 percent lower, which may be due to the lower magnitudes of the absolute pressures at the earliest times. The reasonable agreement sham indicates that aft heat-shield pressures used in Apollo aerothermodyndc analyses are on a sound basis.
i n g rates around the cormnand module.

Calorimeters.- Two types of calorimeters were used to measure heatOne was an asymptotic calorimeter

for low range measurements (below 50 Btu/ft 2/sec) and the other a high range sensor which consisted of several graphite wafers stacked one above the other to a l l o w removal of single wafers by aerodynamic forces when the surrounding heat-shield material ablates away.

CONTENTS Section
TABLES

Page

10 .
2.0

3.0

........................ vii FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiii Abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxiii . m i Symbols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MISSIONSUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 IWRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 TEST OBJECTIVES AND PERFORMANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . 3-1 3.1 Test Objectives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.2 Performance Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-4
SPACE VEHICLE DESCRIPTION

4.0

4.1 4.2

............... Spacecraft Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . Launch Vehicle Description . . . . . . . . . . .

4-1

4-3 4-8

5.0
6.0

.................. AERODYNAMICS AND AERCrPHERMODYNAMICS . . . . . . . . . .
FLIGHT TRAJECTORIES

5-1
6-1 6-1 6-8 7-1 7-1 7-28 7-56 7-65 7-88 7-98 7-104 7-145 7-175

6.1 6.2

Aerodynamics Aerothermodynamics

..................
...............

70 .

SPACECRAFT SUBSYSTE~

7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7- 8 7.9 7.10

Mechanical Subsystems Earth Landing and Impact Attenuation Subsystems Service Propulsion Subsystem Launch-Escape Subsystem Reaction Control Subsystems Pyrotechnic Devices

................. Structural Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structural Dynamics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Heat Transfer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Heat Protection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
..............

.................. .......... ............. ........... ...............

7-147

Section

Page

8.0

9.0

1. 00

.............. ........... .............. .......... ................. ............ ......... ............. ............... ........... ... LAUNCH VEHICLE PERFORMANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . FLIGHT 0P.ERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.1 Flight Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.2 Network Instrumentation and Communication . . . . 9.3 Recovery Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . POSTFLIGH!T TESTING AnlD ANOMALY SUMMARY . . . . . . . . 10.1 Postflight Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Control Programer E l e c t r i c a l Power Subsystem Sequentiel Subsystem Emergency Detection Subsystem 7-15 Instrumentation 7.16 Communications Subsystem 7-17 Environmental Control Subsystem 7 1 C r e w Station Acoustics .8 7-19 Spacecraft Windows 7.20 Crew Related Dynamics
10.2 Surmnary of Failures. Malfunctions. and Deviations
ll.0

7.11 S t a b i l i z a t i o n and Control Subsystem and

7184 7-210 7-228 7-231 7-236 7-248 7-256 7-265 7-268
7-274

8-1

9-1
9-1 9-4

9-7
10-1

10-1

11.0
12.0

.................. CONCLUDINGREMARKS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...................... Spacecraft History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10-3
111

APPENDMA

12-1

13.0

................ APPENDIXB . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 Photographic Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.2 Metric Data Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
12.2

12.1

12-1

Launch Operations

12-4
13-1

13-1

13-6
14-1

14.0

REFERENCES

......................

vi

Table
2.0-1
MISSIONEVEWTS
e

Page

.
..

4.1-1
5.0-1

M S PROPEKCIES AT LAUNCH FOR MISSION AS-201 AS

. . .....

2-2

4-5 5-3 5-8

COMPARISON OF PIAlQED AND A C T W TRAJECTORY PARAME;TERs, MISSION AS-201

5. 0-11
i. -1 '1

...... .. .. IMPACT AND TOUCHDOWN POINTS FOR MISSION A S - 2 0 1 . . . .
EVENTS AND COM>ITIONS SIGNIFICANT TO STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS

i. 1 1 ' -1

. .... . ........ ........ CM FORWAEiD LONGERON AND A I €JEAT SHIEI;D STRESSES FOR F' MISSION AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . .
SM RADIAL BEAM TRUSS STRESSES FOR MISSION AS-201
SM RADIALBEAM CAP AND CM/SM TENSION-TIE STRESSES FORMISSIONAS-201

7-7
7-10

.

7-12

.............. ... .....
. .....
e

7-13

'7.1-v
'T. 1-VI

SLA SKIN AND STABILIZING MEMBER STRESSES FOR

MISSIONAS-201

... .. ....

7-14
7-16

SLA STABILIZING CABLE LOADS FOR MISSION AS-201 LOAD COMPARISON FOR MISSION A S - 2 0 1

7.1-VI1
'7.2-1

7-17
7-33

STRUCTURAL DYNAMIC MEASUREMENTS, MTSSION AS-201
COMPARISON OF MFASURJZD AND PREDI-

7-4-1

PERF'0RMA"EDATA

.

BEAT

SmI;D

7-69
7-E
7-113
7-115

'7.7-1
7.7-11 7.7-111

7- 7-rV

.......... CRITICAL SPS PROBLEX DURING KSC CHECKOUT O SPACEF cmoog. ..................... PROPELTAXC AND PRESSURANT S-CING SIONAS-201.. . . . . . . . . . OF.SF3.FOR .MIS-. . . . . . . RESULTS OF cI;EANLINESS ANALYSES OF PROPELLAWPS AND PRESSURANT FOR MISSION AS-201 . ..... .
SPS PE.FU?OFWANCE FOR MISSION AS-201

7-116

7.7-v

ON-PAD JDNITORING OF SPS SEJlVIm SUBSYSTEIG FOR KlSSIONAS-201.

. .

7-117

vi1

Table

Page

7.7-VI
7.7-VII

CRITICAL LIFE COMPONENTS. MISSION AS-201

.......
.....

7-118
7-119
7-120

PRE-IGNrmION SFS M Au E E S KISSION AS-201 E sR M m .

7.7-VIII FIFST SPS BURN. MISSION AS-201

7.7-IX

7.7-x
7.9-1

7.9-11
7.9-111

............ COAST CONDITIONS (T+1395.2 t o T.tl3lO.7SECONDS) . . . . M4IPUNCTION MODE EVALUATION MATRIX. MISSION AS-201 . . RCS ENEWT TIMELINE. MISSION AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . S RCS P R O P E W SERVICETG. MISSION AS-201 . . . . . . M
ANALYSIS. MISSION AS-201

7-121
7- I22
7-156

7-158
7-3-79

RCS PROPELLANT

........
........
..

7.9-IV

S RCS HELIUM SERVICING. MISSION AS-201 M S M RCS

7-160

7- 9-v
7.9-VI 7.11-1

I I I L OPERATION PfYEWEITRS. MISSION AS-201 NTA

7-161
7-162

CM RCS PIIEPARATION. MISSION AS-201

..........

CONTROL PROGRAMMER COMMANDS SEQUENCE

7.15-1
7.19-1
7.20-1 9.2-1

FLIGRI!

MEASUREMENT SUMMARY

......... ..............
. ..........
.
AS-201

7-191
7-243 7-270 7-276

EMISSION SPECTROGRAPHIC AI'IAI.YSIS O WINDOW CONTAMllUTES F F R MISSIONS A.004, O AS.20L. AND AFDC ENGINE TESTS

SUMMARY OF POWER SPECTRAL DENSITlES
RKDAR AND
7TIXMETRy

9.3-1

..... RECOVERY SUPPORT F R MISSION AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . O
TIMES FOR MISSION AS-201
ACW

3-6 9-11

13.1-1
13.2-1 13.2-11

PROTOGRAPHIC

DATA . PROEESSING

..... ....................
COVERAGE.
MXSION

13-2
13-8 13-9

SOURCES OF MS I N I SO
EVALUATION

.....................

AS-201 m

m

TIME USED IN

viii

FIGURES Figure
2.0-1
IC 0-1

Page

.

I+ 1-1
IC 1-2

.
.

........ Space vehicle. Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . Apollo spacecraft 009. Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . . .
Sequence of major events. Mission AS-201 Apollo spacecraft body axis system Ground track for Mission AS-201

2-3

4-2

4-6

1.501
! j

........... ............

4-7
5-9

.0-2

Time histories of trajectory parameters for Mission AS-201 launch phase (a) Inertial velocity and inertial flight-path angle (b) Relative velocity and relative flight-path angle (c) Altitude. longitude and geodetic latitude (a) Mach number and dynamic pressure (e) Longitudinal acceleration

........................ ....................... ......... ..... .............

5-10
5-11

5-32 5-13

5-14

13.0-3

Time histories of trajectory parameters for Mission AS-201 midcourse phase (a) Inertial velocity and inertial flight-path angle
(b) Relative velocity and relative flight-path

........................
.....

5-15

angle
(c)

........................

5-16
5-17

Altitude. longitude and geodetic latitude

.? 0-4

.

Time histories of trajectory parameters for Mission AS-201 reentry phase

(a) Inertial velocity and inertial flight-path angle (b) Relative velocity and relative flight-path angle (c) Altitude, longitude and geodetic latitude (a) bbch number. maximum g load and dynamic pressure
5.0-5

....................... ........................ ..... .....................
ix

5-18
5-19
5-20

5-21 5-22

Time history of altitude and downrange. Mission A.0 s21

........................

Figure

Page Altitude plotted against downrange, Mission AS-201

5.0-6

...
..

5-23

6.1-1

Varistion of peak deceleration loed during reentry with lift-to-drag r a t i o f o r several density deviations from the 1962 Standard Atmosphere, Mission AS-201 Correlation of f l i g h t data with preflight data i n the , high Mach number region, Mission AS-201 Angle of attack as determined from f l i g h t r a t e data with corresponding Ma,ch number, Mission AS-201

6-4
6-5
6-6

6.1-2

. . . . .' .

6.1-3
6.1-4

....
...

F l i g h t r o l l coefficient determination, Mission AS-201

(a) Averaged r o l l r a t e buildup from postflight simulations compared w i t h flight measured data

(b) Averaged roll coefficient from postflight simul a t i o n s and estimated f l i g h t r o l l coefficient

. ...

6-7

6-7

6.2-1

T i m e h i s t o r i e s of measured pressures on the blunt face of the CM, Mission AS-201

CKU~P, YO, ~ 7 5 ,S/R 1 o . CAll42P, YO, Z-71, S/R .9&7 . CAll43P, YO, Z p , S/R .947 (a) CKU45P, Y p , ZO, S/R .947 ( e ) c U ~ YO, P , S/R .81 ~ z61, ( f ) CAll47P, YO, 255, S/R .73 (g) CAllk8P, YO, Z39, S/R .51 (h) CAl&5OP, 0 9 , ZO, S/R .5l (i) CKU51p, Y-39, ZO, S/R .51
(a)

(b) (c)

(j)

C A U ~ ~ PYO, ZO, S/R ,

o

............. . ... ....... . . . . . . .,. . . . . . .... ...... ............. . ....... ...... ..........,.. ............. .......... . . .. ............
..

6-10 6-11 6-12 6-13 6-14

6-15 6-16
6-17 6-18 6-19 6-20

Comprison of measured pressure distribution with windtunnel data and flow f i e l d program, f i s s i o n AS-201

T i m e h i s t o r i e s of actual heating r a t e s on the CM conical surface of Mission AS-201

CAl253R, Xc44, go", S/R (b) C A U ~ ~ R , Xc60, goo9 S/R ( c ) CA1259R, Xc81, go", S/R ( d ) cA1262R, Xcl12.25, 9O", (e) c ~ l - 3 4 ~ 1pex. a,
(a)
X

.......... ......... ........... ......... ........,.........
1.42 . 1.67 . . 1.99 S/R 2.47

6-21 6-22 6-23 6-24 6-25

Figure

Page

6.2-3 (Continued) XC23.2, 135.. S/R 1.1 Xc44. 180" S/R 1.42 . . Xc81. 188.. S/R 1.99 Xc88. 185'. S/R 2.1 ~ ~ 1 2 8 xc23 2. 225.. S/R 1.1 0~. CA1286R. Xc40. 214O. S/R 1.36 ~ ~ 1 2 9 XC50. 228.. S/R 1.51 8~. CA1332R. ~ ~ 6 7 . 270.. S/R 1.77 CAl295R. XcL12.25, 270.. S/R 2.47 CA1277R. Xc23.2, 180.. S/R 1 1 . (p) ~ ~ 2 . 2 8 3 ~ . Xc21.5, 270.. S/R 1 0 .9 CA1265R. CAl323R. CAll68R. CAl274R.

..........

.

.......... ........... ........... ...........

........... ...........

.........

..........

......... ..........

6-26 6-27 6-28 6-29 6-30 6-31 6-32 6-33 6-34 6-35 6-36

6.2-4

Instrumentation locations on the conical surface of the CM. showing actual maximum heating rates. Mission
AS.201

........................

6-37

6.2-5

Time histories of high range calorimeter temperatures. Mission AS-201

7.1-1 7.1-2 7.1-3

................ ................ CM heat shield. Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)

(a) ~ ~ 1 2 and8 CAl234R 2 ~ C A l 2 l 3 R and ~ ~ 1 3 8 2 ~

6-38 6-39 7-18 7-19 7-20 7-21 7-22 7-23

Boost protective cover. Mission AS-201 Service module structure.

......... Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . .
........

714 .7.1-5 7.1-6 7.1-7

Spacecraft . adapter. Mission AS-201 LEM

Wind velocity obtained at 60 ft level during launch of mssion AS-201 at Complex 34 Tower and CM lift-off accelerations. Mission AS-201 Launch winds. Mission AS-201
(a) hunch wind magnitude (b) Launch wind direction xi

.............

..

...............

...............

7-24 7-25

Figure

Page Longitudinal acceleration time history, Mission AS-201 (a) S-IB inboard and outboard engine cutoff (b) S m engine buildup -

7.1.8

............... ......

7-26 7-26 7-27 7-35
7-36
7-37

7.1-9 7.2-1
7.2-2

Longitudinal acceleration time history, S-IVB engine cutoff, Mission AS-201

................ .........
......

Acceleration spectral density of _‘,-axis tower acceleration at lift-off, Mission AS-201
S - I B engine thrust buildup, Mission AS-201.

7.2-3

Cormnand module inner structure accelerometer locations, Mission AS-201

....................

7.2-li

Acceleration rms time history, Mission AS-201 (a) Inner structure forward bulkhead X-axis acceleration (b) Inner structure aft sidewall radial acceleration Inner structure aft bulkhead X-axis (e) acceleration

...................

(a)
7- 2-5 7.2-6 7- 2-7 7.2-8
7.2-9

................... ................... Lower equipment bay cable tray Z-axis acceleration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
......

7-38 7-38 7-39 7-39
7-40

Acceleration spectral density of CM inner structure forward maximum vibration, Mission AS-201

Acceleration spectral density of CM inner structure of sidewall maximum vibration, Mission AS-201

.... Acceleration spectral density of CM inner structure aft bulkhead maximum vibration, Mission AS-201 . . . .

7-42 7-43

Acceleration spectral density of lower equipment bay cable tray maximum vibration, Mission AS-201 Acceleration spectral density of CM inner structure aft sidewall vibration during transonic flight, Mission AS-201 Comparison of CM inner structure maximum vibration with criteria, Mission AS-201 xii

.....

....................
............

7-44 7-45

*

7.2-10

Figure

7.2-ll 7.2-12

SM accelerometer locations, Mission AS-201. (SPS engine dome location not shown. )

........

7-46

Acceleration spectral density of SM helium pressurization panel radial vibration during transonic flight, Mission AS-201

....................

7-47

7.2-13

Acceleration spectral density of SM helium pressurization panel tangential vibration during transonic flight, Mission AS-201 Acceleration spectral density of m a x i m SPS engine dome, radial vibration, during supersonic flight, Mission AS-201 Acceleration spectral density of SPS engine dome radial vibration during SPS burn, Mission AS-201

................

7-48

7.2-14

....................
...

7-49
7-50

7.2-15 7.2-16

Acceleration spectral density of m a x i m SPS engine dome longitudinal vibration during supersonic flight, Mission AS-201.

...............

7-51 7-52

7-2-17
7.2-18

SLA skin panel .accelerometer locations, Mission
AS-201..

......................
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .......... .................
.......

Comparison of SLA shell panel vibration with criteria,

Mission AS-201
(a) *Lift-off (5) Transonic flight (c) Supersonic flight

7-53 7-54 7-55

7.3-1

Peak temperatures measured on service module outer surface during launch on Mission AS-201. (Sensors in cork insulated area are under the cork. )

7-59

7.3-2

Longitudinal variation of peak temperatures measured on the service module surface during launch on Mission AS-201

....................

7-60

7.3-3

Circumferential. variation of peak temperatures measured on service module surface during launch on mssion AS-201
Temperature time histories for service module sensors SA79llT and SA7912T, Mission AS-201 xiii

....................
.........

7-61
7-62

'7.3-4

Figure

Page

7.3-5

7.34

. . . . . .'. . . . . . . . . . Temperature time h i s t o r i e s f o r SLA. sensors AA7931T and AA7932T, Mission AS-201 . . . . .........
Command module three-part heat shield, Mission AS-201. C / M shear compression pad and tension t i e M S type, Mission AS-201. .

Peak temperatures measured on spacecraft - L E M adapter outer surface during launch on spacecraft 009, Mission AS-201..

...

-7- 63
7-64
7-70

.

...... .. . ... ...
. ..

-

Block I

7-n
7-72

7.4-3

CM a b l a t o r thickness distribution, Mission AS-201

7.4-4

A f t heat shield ablator measurement locations, Mission AS-201

........ . ... . . ... ... ..........

7-73 7-74

7.4-5

Temperature measurement locations on CM forward and crew compartment, Mssion AS-201 .
Char condition of a f t heat shield, Mission AS-201

7.4-6

(a)
(b)

General view from -Z-axis t o - Y - a x i s V i e w from center toward + Z - a x i s

....... ..........

7-75 7-76

7.4-7

A f t heat s h i e l d measurements, 'MissionAS-201

(a) Station YO (b) s t a t i o n ZO, YO .. ( c ) Station Z-71,YO (a) Station ZO, ~ 3 9 (e) Station ZO,

zn, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................. .. ..... ........ . ........... ....... ........... .......
.. ...

7-77 7-78 7-79 7-80 7-81 7-82 7-83 7-84

7.4-8 7- 4-9 7.4-10 7.4-11

Typical a f t heat s h i e l d core (2-71) , Mission AS-201
A f t heat s h i e l d core measurements, Mission AS-201.

Char and erosion around CM RCS system A roll engines a f t e r propellant depletion burn, Mission AS-201 Char condition of conical section, Mission AS-201
(a)
(b)

...

(c)

General view, 3.2 axis General v i e w , -Y axis General view. -Z axis xiv

............... .. .. .... .. ..... ...............

7-85 7-86 7-87

Figure

Page
CM uprighting subsystem, Block I, Mission AS-201

7-5-1

(a)
(b)

CM stable f l o t a t i o n attitudes Location of a i r bags, stowed and deployed

........... .....

7-92 7-92 7-93 7-94 7-95

7.5-2 7-5-3 7-54 7.5-5 7 5-6 9 7.6-1 7.6-2

Uprighting subsystem and recovery a i d components, Mission AS-201

................ .. . . Uprighting subsystem canister and valve location, Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Uprighting subsystem compressor location, Mission
AS-201..

.. ................ . ..
.

Sea dye marker canister and mechanism, Mission AS-201. Original pressure hatch pinion gear which was replaced with ground-handling unit f o r Mission AS-201 S t r u t impact load mechanism, Mission AS-201

7-96
7-97 7-101

..... ......

Impact attenuation s t r u t design load - stroke curves for unmanned mission, Mission AS-201 (a) (b)
(c,

X-x foot s t r u t X-Xheadstrut
Y-Ystrut..

(a)
7.7-1 7- 7-2 7- 7-3 7.7-4

Z-z

........... ....... .... . . . . . . . .' . .... . .... . ........ .... .. strut . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

7-102
712 -0 7-103

7-103

Chamber pressure during first burn, ApoUo Mission

... ..................... Second SPS burn, f i s s i o n AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . Service propulsion subsystem, Mission As-201 . . . . . .
As-201
SPS c r i t i c a l measurements during launch and exit,

7-124
7-125

7-126

Mission AS-201
(a) S-IB booster e f f e c t s (b) S-IVB booster e f f e c t s (c) Various g e f f e c t s

.... . . ..........

. .............. ....... .. ......

7-127 7-128 7-129 7-130

7.7-5

Oxidizer retention reservoir (zero g can), fission
As-201

.

.......................

Figure

Page Propellant tank and interface pressures during first burn, Mission AS-201 (a) Oxidizer tank pressure . (b) Oxidizer engine interface pressure (c) Fuel tank pressure . (a) Fuel engine interface pressure . .

7.7-6

..... ...... ., ., . ... ... ..... . ... .... .. ..... ..
.. .... .......

.

7-131 7-131 7-131 7-131 7-132
7-133
7-134

7.7-7 7.7-8
7.7-9
.

SPS helium consumption during first burn, Mission AS-201.

. .

.

Oxidizer tank and interface pressure plotted against time, (second SFS burn) , Mission AS-201 . Fuel tank and interface pressures plotted against time, (second SPS burn), Mission AS-201

7.7-10 7.7-11 7.7-12 7.7-13

Engine feed line temperatures (SFOOOgT and SPOOO8T) plotted against time, fission AS-201 First SPS ignition chamber pressure transient (SPS on at E U . ~ sec) Mission AS-201

.........

7435

...... .. Second SPS ignition chamber pressure transient, Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
,
Propellant valve opening times, Mission AS-201 (a) First SPS ignition (b) Second SPS ignition

7-136
7-137

................ ................

7-138 7-139

7.7-14 7.7-15 7.7-16

First SPS shutdown chamber pressure transient, Mission AS-201 ..

........ ... .. . ... . Second SPS shutdown chamber pressure transient, Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
P r o p e U t valve closing times, mssion AS-201 (a) First SPS shutdown (b) Second SPS shutdown

...... ....... . .. ........... .....

7-142 7-143

7.7-17

Comparison of calculated chamber pressure and observed chamber pressure during first SPS burn, fission
As-201..

................ .....

7-144

Figure

Page hunch escape subsystem, Block I configuration, Mission AS-201 . .

7.8-1 7.9-1 7.9-2 7.9-3

........ ..... .....
0

7-146

....... Schematic of typical SM RCS quad, Mission AS-201 . . . .
0 0

Service module reaction control subsystem, Mission As-201

..... .

. . .

S RCS quad engine package temperatures, Mission AS-201 M

(a) Engine (b) &n @e (c) Engine (d) Engine

package package package package

quad quad quad quad

A

(SR5065T) B (SR5066T) C (SR5067T) D (SR5068T)

.......... .... . . .. . . .......... .......... ..., ...... . . ..... .
7-166 7-166 7-166 7-166

7- 9-4

S RCS quad A fuel valve and injector head temperatures, M

Mission AS-201
('a) -Pitch engine injector head temp ( S R m 3 T ) (b) -Pitch engine fuel valve temp (SRn45T) c ) CCW r o l l engine injector head temp ( S R n 3 4 T ) a) CCN r o U engine fuel valve temp ( ~ ~ 7 1 4 8 ~ )

t

7- 9-5

S M RCS helium source pressures, Mission AS-201

7.9-6 7- 9-7

............. .......... ... ............ . ............. SM RCS quad B forward f i r i n g engine injector head temperature, Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(a) He press (b) He press ( c ) He press (a) He press
quad quad quad quad
A (SR5001P)

B (SR5002P) C (SR3003P) D (SR5004P)

7-168

CM RCS component location, Mission AS-201

7.9-8
-.
!*

9-9

.................... ....... . ......... Schematic of CM RCS propellant distribution, fission As-201. . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . Schematic of C M R C S engines, Mission AS-201 . . . . . .
(a)
axis is..

(b) - Y a ~ i s . .

7-151 7-172
7-173

7.9-10 7.9-11

CM RCS propellant tank pressures, Mission AS-201

....

CM RCS helium source tank pressures, Mission AS-201

..

7-174

xvii

Figure

Page Spacecraft - L E M adapter separation system, Mission As-201 , .....

71.01 7.10-2

.......... ...
-

. ... .

7-177 7-178 7-179 7-180

Spacecraft L;EM adapter separation system, explosive .. . train schematic, Mission As-201 . . . .

.

.

7.10-3 Spacecraft - L E M adapter panel attenuation and retention, Mission AS-201

7.10-4

7.10-5

.............. Charge, explosive train, Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . Confined detonating cord assembly, Mission AS-201 . .
As-201 As-201

7- 8 11
7-182 7-183 7-193
7-194

7.10-6 Umbilical disconnect, service module to SLA, Mission

........,..............

7.10-7 Pressure cartridge, explosive train initiated, Mission
7.u-1
7.11-2

............. . ... . . . . . . Stabilization and control subsystem, Mission AS-201. . ...... .

Pitch rate a d attitude transients during S-IVB/CSM separation, Mission AS-201 . ..

7.11-3

... CSM coast phase limit cycles, Mission As-201 . . . . .
T h r u s t vector control operation, second - X translation, t

7-19?
7-196

7.11-4
7.11-5

1st gimbal position set, Kission AS-201

......

Thrust vector control operation, +X translation, 2nd gimbal position set, 2nd SPS AV manewer, Mission AS-201 . , . . . .. ...

........ ...

.

.

7-197 7-198 7-199
7-200
7-201

7. U-6

Thrust vector control operation, 1st SFS AV maneuver, Mission AS-201 .

............... ...

7 11-7 9

Ere-separation pitch maneuver, SC rate and attitude errors, Mission AS-201 . . ......

7.11-8 Pitch ARS

.. gimbal angle, Mission AS-201 . . . . . . . .
..

.. .. .

7.11-9 Spacecraft rates and attitude errors et CM/SM separation, Mission AS-201

.............
. ..

7 1 - 0 CM pitch and r o l l maneuvers, SC rates and attitude .11 errors, Mission AS-201 ... .

... .....

7-202

-4 i i

Figure

Page Sequential events control system block diagram, Mission AS-201 .
AS-201.

7.13-1 7.14-1 7.14-2

........ ... .... . ...

7-230 7-232 7-233 7-234 7-235 7-244 7-245
7-246

EDS launch vehicle and &-ball interface, Mission

.......................
...

Emergency detection subsystem automatic abort c i r c u i t , showing open-loop configuration,. E s s i o n AS-201 Spacecraft automatic abort and LV engine cutoff, MissionAS-201.

7.14-3
7.14-4

................... &-ball vector sum output, Mission AS-201 . . . , . . . .
R & D instrumentation subsystem f o r command module, Mission AS-201

7.15-1
7.15-2

.................. ..

7.17-3

.. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . GFE instrumentation CM P MF / M telemetry package A / MF and 90 10 commutators, Mission As-201 . . . . . . .
As-201
X

Instrumentation system block diagram f o r Mission

7.15-4 7.16-1 7.17-1 7.17-2 7.17-3 7.17-4 7.17-5
7.18-1

GFE instrumentation SM PAM/FM/FM telemetry package, Mission AS-201

............. . ......
........

7-247 7-255 7-260 7-261 7-262 7-263 7-264 7-267 7-271

Comunication subsystem, Mission AS-201

.................... ECS cabin pressure relief valve, Hission AS-201 . . . .
Coolant c i r c u i t evaporator o u t l e t l i q u i d temperature,
MissionAS-201.

Flow diagram of ECS water/glycol coolant c i r c u i t , Mission AS-201

................... Commaad module cabin e n v i r o m n t , Mission As-201 . . . .
Power and control diagram f o r ECS back pressure . control, FEssion AS-201

......... .....

Overall sound pressure level t i m e h i s t o r i e s of crew
s t a t i o n acoustics, Mission AS-201

7.19-1 Window contaminate smear locations,

.......... Mission AS-201 . . .

@

Figure

Page of left side window. Mission AS-201

7.19-2 Spectral transmission and reflection characteristics 7919-3 lhtegrity sphere spectral transmission and light
scattering characteristics. Mission AS-201 (a) Left side window (b) Left rendezvous window

.........

7-272

................. ..............
....... .......
CM for-

7-273 7-273 7-278 7-279 7-280

7.20-1 Detemination of accelerometer resultant for
ward bulkhead conditions. Mission AS-201
7.20-2

Lift-off X-axis vibration. Mission AS-201
Mission As-201

7.20-3 Resultant acceleration
7.20-4

....................

(CKOOO4A. CKOOO5A. and CKOOO6A).

Resultant acceleration amplitude spectral density. g ( r m s ) . Mission AS-201 Mission AS-201

...............

7.20-5 X-axis vibration amplitude spectral density. g (rms)

....................

7.20-6

9.1-1 9.3-1
9- 3-2
9.3-3

.................... Mission AS-201 operation and support plan . . . . . . . Recovery force deployment. Mission AS-201 . . . . . . .
Spacecraft in water. collar attached. Mission AS-201
Forward heat shield. mssion AS-201

Y-axis vibration amplitude spectral density. g (rms) Mission AS-201

.

.

7-281 7-282 7-283
9-3

..

9-12 9-13
9-14

..........
Boxer. Mission

93-4
12.1-1

Spacecraft being hoisted aboard U.S.S. A.0 S21

........................
009

9-15
12-2

A p o l l o spacecraft OOg at Dmey. preflight A p o V o spacecraft

12.1-2
12.2-1

. .

.......

Cape Kennedy. preflight

....

12-3

Countdown. Mission AS-201 (a) February 20th through 2 r 3d (b) February 25th through 26th

............

............

12-7
12-8

Figure

13.1-1 13.1-2
13.2-1

Camera locations, Mission AS-201 Long r a g e camera locations,

....... ... .. blission AS-201 . . . . . .
...-

13-4

13-5
13-U.

Data coverage of f l i g h t time, Mission AS-201

..

xxii

ABBREVIATIONS AND SYM6OLS Abbreviations
m-VKF

Arnold Engineering Development Center - Von Karman Facility Air Force Eastern Test Range Antigua Island auxiliary propulsion system attitude reference system Ascension Island Bermuda boost protective cover Computation and Data Division computation and data flow integrated subsystem confined detonating charge command module Carnarvon control programmer command and service module central timing equipment Department of Defense differential pulse duration modulation data storage equipment environmental control subsystem emergency detection subsystem xxiii

AFETR

ANT
APS
ARS

ASC
BDA
BPC

CADD CADFISS CDC CM CNV

CP
CSM

CTE DOD
DPDM

DSE
ECS
EDS

EL6 ELSC

earth landing subsystem earth landing sequence controller electrical power subsystem frequency modulation flight qualification recorder guidance and navigation Grand Bahama Island t . ground elapsed time government furnished equipment Greenwich mean time
Goddard ground

EPS
F M
FQR
G&N

GBI
g. e.

GFE
Gm t .. .
GRTS

real-time subsystem

GSE
GSFC

support equipment

Goddard Space Flight Center Grand T u r k Island inboard engine cutoff impact predictor interrange instrumentation group instrument unit Kennedy Space Center lighter, amphibious, resupply, carrier landing craft, utility lift-to-drag ratio launch-escape sasystem launch-escape tower
xxiv

GTK
IECO

I P
LRIG

IU KSC
LARC

LCU
L/D
I;ES

m

LOX
LPH

l i q u i d oxygen
landing platform, helicopter

LWR
EC-H

landing vehicle, tracked, reconnaisance Mission Control Center, Houston Mission Control Center, Kennedy
m i l d detonating fuse

WC-K

MDF

msc
MILIA

master events sequence controller
Merritt Island Launch Area

KFC

mrshall Space Flight Center
mean sea level minesweeper, ocean Manned Spacecraft Operations Building non-return-to-zero change operational checkout procedures outboard engine cutoff Patrick A i r Force Base pulse code modulation
pyro continuity v e r i f i c a t i o n box
'

m. s. 1 .
MSO

KOB NRZ-c
OCP OEC 0 PAT

E M
PCVB

PLSC
RCC

postlanding sequence controller radio command control radio command equipment reaction control subsystem reaction control subsystem controller radio frequency
xxv

RCE
RCS
RCSC

m

RKV
XTlS

Rose Knot Victor root mean square remote site data processor real-time computer facility
room temperature vulcanizing

RSDP
RTCC
RTC

SCE

signal conditioning equipment spacecraft operations office stabilization and control subsystem sequential events control subsystem spacecraft electronic package spacecraft - L?3M aAapter service module service module jettison controller service module reaction control subsystem Satellite Operations Control Center sound pressure level service propulsion subsystem single side band system support room Telemetry 2 Telemetry 3 tower-jettison motor ultra violet-infrared waste management system

sco

scs
SECS

SEP
SLA

SM

SMJC

SM RCS
SOC
SPL

SPS

SSB
SSR
TEL 2

EL3
TJM
w-IR
W E

Symbols
gravitational constant

I

:p ;

resolution of specific impulse product of i n e r t i a , X-Y axis product of i n e r t i a , X-Z axis product of inertia, Y-Z axis Mach number dynamic pressure,
(lb/sq f t >

I

:y C

I:cz
1
;jrz

M

ft

product of dynamic pressure and angle of attack

T X

launch t i m e longitudinal axis of the spacecraft and launch vehicle longitudinal location, referenced t o the spacecraft (fig. 4.1-2) longitudinal location, referenced t o the command module (fig. 4.1-2)

xL

longitudinal location, referenced t o the launch-escape subsystem (fig. 4.1-2) longitudinal location, referenced t o the service module (fig. 4.1-2)

Z

l a t e r a l axis of the spacecraft, passing through the center of the main hatch and normal t o the X axis l a t e r a l axis of the spacecraft, normal t o the X-Z p l a n e angle of attack, deg pressure d i f f e r e n t i a l velocity d i f f e r e n t i a l Flight t e s t symbols, Saturn-Apollo: Saturn symbol withi n Apollo symbol. Basic symbols: Greek and Roman. xxvii

Y
a

1-1

1 0 MISSION SUMMARY .

Mission AS-201was accomplished using Apollo spacecraft 009 and a B Saturn I launch vehicle. The unmanned spacecraft was launched from Cape Kennedy, Florida, on February 26, 1966 at ll:12 a.m. e.s.t. after several holds in the countdown due to adverse weather and launch vehicle technical difficulties. Apollo spacecraft 009 was essentially of the Block I type configuration, consisting of a launch-escape subsystem, a command module, a service module, and a spacecraft - LEM adapter. The major differences between spacecraft 009 and the Block I configuration were the omission of fuel cells, crew equipment, suit loop, cabin postlanding ventilation, ciyogenics subsystem, guidance and navigation subsystem; and the inclusfion of the mission control programmer, battery power only, open-loop energency detection subsystem, and inoperative radiators for the environmental control subsystem and the electrical power subsystem. The Saturn E two-stage launch vehicle, consisting of stages S-E3 3 a i S-TVB and an instrument unit, performed satisfactorily. First-stage rd ignition, lift-off, programmed r o l l and pitch, and cutoff were executed as planned. Separation and second-stage ignition occurred as planned, wt-th S - N B cutoff and command and service module/spacecraft - L E M aCLapter/S-IVB separation 1 seconds later than predicted. At separation 0 the trajectory was near nominal, with the greatest deviation being a range of 22.2 nautical miles.
Tower and boost protective cover j e t t i s o n occurred on time a t

.

T e 7 seconds. As a result of the delay in S-IVB cutoff the spacecraft il2
ccmtrol programmer was activated 10 seconds later t h a n planned.

Conse-

quently, subsequent event times reflected this initial delay. The spacecraft structural behavior during the launch phase was generally as expected with no serious structural responses occurring. The service module reaction control subsystem provided adequate +E: translation for the S-IVB/command and service module separation and ullage for the two service propulsion subsystem burns. However, the +E: translations produced a velocity increment that was less than nominal because the quad A oxidizer isolation valve failed to open. Preflight test experience had indicated a tendency toward valve seizure because of' incompatible materials. The service m o d u l e reaction control subsystem successfully provided spacecraft;attitude and rate control even though quad A was inactive and a negative yaw engine in quad B or quad D wzs inoperative

.

1-2

Mission AS-201 was the f i r s t f l i g h t test of the service propulsion subsystem. Although the reaction control subsystem +X translation resulted in 25 t o 45 percent of the ullage velocity increment expected, the ignition f o r the f i r s t service propulsion subsystem burn occurred successfully a t T+l.2ll.2 seconds. Performnce was near nominal f o r the f i r s t 80 seconds of the 184-second burn. A t engine cutoff the chamber pressure had decayed t o approximately 70 percent of nominal. The second burn, i n i t i a t e d a t T+1410.7 seconds and planned f o r a lo-second duration, w s very e r r a t i c w i t h chamber pressure oscillations ranging from 1 t o a 2 70 percent o f nominal. The below-nominal performance of the service propulsion subsystem has been attributed t o helium ingestion. Orientation of the spacecraft f o r command module/semtice module separation was i n i t i a t e d a t T+1424.1 seconds and accomplished as planned, and a t T+1455.0 seconds satisfactory separation occurred. The pitch and roll maneuvers required t o orient the cormnand module t o the reentry ine r t i a l attitude were completed a t T+l?l5.l seconds.
The p a r t i a l environmental control subsystem, as installed i n spacec r a f t 009, performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y throughout the f l i g h t except t h a t water-glycol evaporator l i q u i d outlet temperatures were lower than planned.

Spacecraft communications blackout began a t ~+1580 seconds and lasted u n t i l ~+1693 seconds. Reentry was i n i t i a t e d w i t h a space-fixed velocity of 26 481 ft/sec. The command module was subjected t o a maximum reentry heating r a t e of 164 Btu/ft /sec a t Ti-1631.7 seconds, and a maximum deceleration of 14.3g a t T+1639.7 seconds. The command module structure and heat shields adequately performed i n the reentry environment with no adverse effects.
A t ~+1635 seconds, c i r c u i t breaker CB18 opened, resulting i n a l o s s of power t o logic bus B and pyro bus B. This event removed power from certain comand module reaction control subsystem functions and from the earth landing subsystem system B. A t T+1641 seconds, power t o system A of the reaction control subsystem was l o s t , followed by a l o s s of power t o system B a t T+1649 seconds. Postflight analysis and t e s t i n g revealed t h a t two wires i n the reaction control subsystem propellant isolation main bus A and B l i n e s had shorted t o the ground support equipment r e s e t line.
2

The l o s s of power t o the command module reaction control subsystems systems A and B resulted i n an uncontrolled r o l l i n g (excess of 26 deg/sec) reentry instead of the planned l i f t i n g reentry. The vehicle r o l l was attributed t o the e f f e c t s of spacecrafi protuberances (scimitar antennas) coupled with the o f f s e t center of gravity.

With t h e return of power t o reaction control subsystem system A a t
T-I-2121 seconds, the required depletion burning of the cormnand module

reaction control subsystem propellants was accomplished through the syst e m B r o l l engines. Apex cover jettison, drogue parachute deployment, and m a h parachute deployment occurred as planned. The command module landed uudamaged, upright i n t h e stable I attitude a t B2239.7 seconds, 30.8 seconds earlier than the preflight prediction.

Upon landing, the recovery aids deployed, including the HI? antenna; however, signals from the Bl? transceiver were not received. The main parachute disconnect on system A w s accomplished but the system B l e g a remained attached because of the e l e c t r i c a l power subsystem malfunction.
The point of t o u c h d m w s 8.18" S. latitude and 11.15" W. longia tude, 45 miles uprange northwest of the recovery ship. The main paracjnutes were cut loose from the command module by the recovery forces and t h e spacecraft was aboard the recovery ship a t 2:20 p.m. e.s.t. (:3 hr 8 min after l i f t - o f f ) .

Postflight tests were conducted f o r the evaluation of subsystem performance and f o r the 'resolution of anomalies.

2-1

2.0 INTRODUCTION

Mission AS-201 (Apollo spacecraft 009) was the first flight test of a production Apollo Block I type spacecraft utilizing the Saturn IB launch vehicle. Lift-off of the unmanned suborbital flight from Launch . Complex 34, Cape Kennedy, Florida, occurred at U:X? a.m. e. s. t (1G:12 G.m. t. ) February 26, 1 6 . The spacecraft command module landed 96 safely in the primary landing area near Ascension Island, approximately 37 minutes later (16:49 G.m.t.), and was recovered as planned. The major spacecraft mission objectives were to demonstrate the compatibility and structural integrity of the spacecraft/Saturn IB configuration and to evaluate the spacecraft heat-shield performance during E high heat rate reentry. The complete test objectives are presented in section 3 . 1 of this report. The mission profile is presented in figure 2.0-1 and the times of mission events are given in table 2.0-1. This report includes an evaluation of the mission, a brief sumnary of the launch vehicle performance, and an analysis of the spacecraft performance on the basis of flight-test data and results of completed postflight tests.

In addition to the analysis and pertinent data included in this report, the complete plotted flight data are contained in a companion voluie, "Flight Data Report for Mission AS-201 (Apollo spacecraft 009)" (ref. 1 . )
Prior to Mission AS-201, one other production type spacecraft and ten boilerplate type spacecraft had been flight tested (see inside front cover). A I L were unmanned. The results of the missions, which included functioning spacecraft subsystems, have been presented in mission or postlaunch reports (refs. 2 to 9 ) . M e s s otherwise specified, zero time (T-0) for all data in this report is referenced to range zero, which is the first integral second before lift-off. (Lift-off is the instant of umbilical disconnect of the launch vehicle instrument unit. )

Range time, sec Event
Lift-off
IE jettison ;T

)ifference,

kedict e d

Actual

sec
0.06

0.31 172.3 652.7 654.7 832- 7 834.4 836.2 854.2 1170.7 1200.7 1201.7
131~.2

Control programer start Onboard recorders o f f

S-IVB/CSM separation command S-IVB/CSM separation
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n 1 on RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n 1 off RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n 2 on SPS thrust on burn 1 RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n 2 o f f Tape recorders on SPS thrust o f f burn 1
R S +X t r a n s l a t i o n 3 on C
SPS thrust on burn 2

0.37 172.6 663.1 665.2 . 843.2 844. g 846.7 864.6
18. 112

*3 10.4 10.5 10.5 10.5
10.5

10.4
10.5
10.5

1 l .2 2l
1212.2

10.5

132J-O 9

RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n

3

off

SPS thrust o f f burn 2 Pitch r a t e (-5 deg/sec) i n i t i a t e Pitch rate ( - 5 deg/sec) terminate
CM/SM separation command
CM/SM separation physical (0.25 ft)

13%- 7 1385.2 1400.2 1401.2 1410.2 1413.7 1431.7 1443.7 1444.2 1452.2 1468.7 1468.7 1504.7 1954.1 1994.9 2360.6

CM pitch r a t e (-5 deg/sec) i n i t i a t e CM pitch r a t e (-5 deg/sec) terminate CM r o l l r a t e (5 deg/sec) i n i t i a t e CM r o l l r a t e ( 5 deg/sec) terminate
Drogue parachute deployment Main parachute deployment Touchdown

1395-2 1395.7 1410.7 lkll. 7 1420.7 1424.2 1442.1 1454.7 1455.0 1462.6 1479.1 1479.2 1515.1 1855.4 1908.4 2239.7

10.7 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.4

u0 .
10.8

10.4 10.4 10.5 10.4
-98.7 -86.5 -120. g

2- 3
NASA-S-66-6156 M4Y 6

I

I

I

I

1

I

1

I

0

400

800

1200

1600

2000

2400

2800

3200

3

Downrange, n. mi.

Actual time from lift-off, sec
1

2 3 S - D B cutoff 4 Separation attitude achieved 5 S-LPBICSM separation 6 Ap o w 7 1st SPS burn on 8 1st SPS burn off 9 2nd SPSburnon 10 2nd SPS burn off 11 CMlSM separation 12 Blackout 13 End of blackout 14 Drogue parachute deployment 15 Main parachute deployment 16 Touchdown

Lift-off OECO

~11:12:01 m. e. s. t. 1 a.

146.9 602.9 728.3 840.9 lceO.0 1211.2 1395.2 1410.7 1420.7 1455.0 1580.0 1695.0 1855.4 1908.4 2239.7

Figure 2.0-1.-

Sequence of major events, Mission AS-201.

3.0

TEST OBJECTIVES AND P R O M N E CRITERIA EFR AC

3.1 Test Objectives
The spacecraft t e s t objectives for Mission AS-201 were accomplished t o the degree indicated i n the following l i s t i n g : General t e s t objectives. Primary t e s t objectives: ( a ) Demonstrate the s t r u c t u r a l i n t e g r i t y and compatibility of the launch vehicle and spacecraft, and confirm launch loads. Satisfactorily demonstrated and confirmed, objective accomplished. (b) Demonstrate separation of the S-IVEi from the S-IB, the launch escape subsystem (IES) and boost protective cover (BPC) from the command . and service module (CSM), the CSM from the S-IVB/insti-ument unit (IU)/ spacecraft - I;EM adapter (SLA), and the command module (CM) from the service module (SM) S a t i s f a c t o r i l y demonstrated, objective accomplished.

.

( c ) Verify operations of the launch vehicle propulsion, guidmce and control, and e l e c t r i c a l subsystems. Launch vehicle objective, see reference 13.

(a)

Verify operation of the following spacecraft subsystems:

1 CM heat shield adequacy for entry from low e a r t h orbit. . Verified, objective accomplished.
2. Service propulsion subsystem, including r e s t a r t . Verified i n i t i a l start capability i n space, nominal performance during f i r s t 80 seconds of i n i t i a l burn, and s a t i s f a c t o r y operation of subsystem excLuiLing standpipe in retention reservoir. Output performance after f i r s t 80 seconds below nominal. Restart e r r a t i c . Objective p a r t i a l l y accomplished.

3. Environmental control subsystem pressure and temperature control. Ereezing of evaporator coolant c i r c u i t and back-pressure cont r o l problems were known before f l i g h t and corrected f o r Mission AS-204. CRi jective accomplished.

4.

Cornmication (partial). N signals received from HF o
Objective par-

ti-ansceiver; all other cornmications were satisfactory. ti-ally accomplished.

3-2

5. CM reaction control subsystem. Operation verified for maneuvering CM to proper reentry attitude and for CM attitude control through reentry maximum q and first part of blackout. Loss of electrical power to systems A and B prevented use of CM RCS during balance of reentry. Depletion burn operation, after return of parer to system A, verified. Objective partially accomplished.

6 SM reaction control subsystem. Quad A did not operate . and the equivalent of one negative yaw engine on quad B or quad D did not operate; however, the subsystem completed operational functions required. Objective partially accomplished.

7 Stabilization and control subsystem. Operation verified, .
objective accomplished.

8 .
accomplished.

Earth landing subsystem.

Operation verified, objective

9.

Electrical parer subsystem. The shorting of nondeadfaced
opera-

28 volt w i r e s after CM/SM umbilical disconnect prevented n & o

tion of the subsystem. Proper operation of the protective circuit breakers made it possible to return pmer to some circuits in time to satisfactorily recover the spacecraft. Objective not accomplished. (e) Evaluate the space vehicle emergency detection subsystem ( D S ) in the open-loop configuration. Subsystem evaluated, objective accomplished. (Also see ref. 13.)
(f) Evaluate the CM heat shield ablator at a high heating rate of 2 approximately 200 Btu/ft /sec during reentry at approximately 2 000 ft/ 8 2 sec. Maximum reentry heating rate was above the 160 Btu/ft /sec minimum; haremr, complete evaluation of the ablator was not possible because of loss of temperature data during the time of maximum reentry heating. abjective not accomplished.

(g) Demonstrate the mission support facilities required f o r launch, mission operations, and CM recovery. Satisfactorily demonstrated, objective accomplished. Secondary test objectives: The secondary test objective for Mission A - 0 was to determine subsystem performance other than the miniS21 mum required to demonstrate manned orbital capability. Detailed spacecraft test objectives. Primary test Objectives:

-

3-3
(a) Demonstrate structural integrity and compatibility of the launch vehicle and spacecraft, and confirm launch loads, including:
1 Demonstrate compatibility and structural integrity of . CSM/Saturn IB. Satisfactorily demonstrated, objective accomplished.
2 Determine structural loading of the spacecraft adapter . when subjected to the Saturn I launch environment. Loading determined, B objective accomplished.

(b) Demonstrate separation of the S-IVB from the S-IB, the I;ES and boost protective cover from the CSM, the CSM from the S-IVB/IU/SIA, and the CM from the SM. Satisfactorily demonstrated, objective accomplished.
(c) Determine CM adequacy for manned entry from low earth orbit. Adequacy determined, objective accomplished.

(a) Verify SPS operation for a minimum of 20 seconds after at least 2 minutes in a space environment and verify restart capability. Verified satisfactory operation for more than 20 seconds and satisfactory start after more than 2 minutes in space environment. Restart was erratic and below specifications. Objective partially accomplished.
(e) Determine performance of the SCS, CM RCS, SM RCS, ECS (pressure and temperature control), EPS (partial) and communication (partial), and determine their adequacy for manned orbital flight. Satisfactory performance and adequacy for manned orbital flight were determined for the SCS, for the CM RCS except for the inoperative period after reentry maximum q until main parachute deployment, and for communications except for the HF transceiver and antenna. Prior to Mission AS-201, the equipment and system associated with the problems encountered with the SM RCS and the ECS pressure and temperature control were superseded by newer S24 designs for btLssion A - 0 . Performance of the EPS was below specifications due to the shorting of nondeadfaced 28 volt wires in the CM after umbilical disconnect. Objective partially accomplished. (f) Demonstrate operation of the parachute recovery subsystem and recovery aids following reentry. Satisfactorily demonstrated, objective accomplished. (g) EvdLuate the space vehicle emergency detection subsystem (EDS) in the open-loop configuration. Subsystem evaluated, objective accomplished. (Also see ref. 13.) (h) Evaluate the CM heat shield ablator at a high heating rate of 2 approximately 2 0 Btu/ft /sec during entry at approximately 2 0 0 ft/sec. 0 8 0 Complete evaluation of the ablator was not possible because of the loss

3 -4
of temperature h t a during the time of reentry heating. Objective not accomplished. (i) Demonstrate the mission support facilities required for launch, mission operations, and CM recovery. Satisfactorily demonstrated, objective accomplished . Secondary test objectives: (a) Determine long duration (approximately 200 sec) SPS performance including shutdm characteristics. Performance and shutdown characteristics determined for below specification levels after first 80 seconds. Objective partidly accomplished.
. (b) Obtain data on SPS engine firing stability. Data obtained for 60 seconds of stable operation and for a helium ingestion condition f o r the balance of the time. Objective p a r t i a l l y accomplished.

3.2

Performance Criteria

In addition to the analysis relative to the accomplishment of the test objectives, the mission evaluation was required to present information in this report which could be used to establish whether or not the following perfomnance criteria were fulfilled on Mission A - 0 . S21
(a) Establish that launch environment did not stress CSM beyond structural design limits requiring redesign of CSM structure. (b) Establish that Launch environment did not stress SLA beyond structural limits requiring redesign of SUI structure.
(c) Establish that the LJlS did separate from CSM/SLA/S-IVB combination at time specified and in a m e r which did not compromise completion of the planned mission.

(a) Establish that the CSM did separate from the S-IVB at the time specified and in a manner which did not prevent completion of the planned m i s sion.
(e) Establish that the CM did separate from the SM at the time specified and in a manner which did not prevent completion of the planned miss ion. (f) Establish that the SPS did operate for a minimum of 20 seconds within specified limits, having started after at least 2 minutes i n space environment.

3-5
' ( g ) Establish that the SPS did restart and burn after a coast period, and that the restart and bum were within specified linhits.

0 (h) Establish that the SPS did burn for a minimum total of 2 0 seconds, and that thrust, stability, shutdown characteristics, and thrust tailoff during the burn were within specified limits.

(i) Establish that each of the following subsystems performed within specified limits: SCS, CM RCS, SM RCS, ' I S pressure control, EC EFS, Communications, and Instrumentation.
(j) Establish that no false abort signal was generated by the spacecraft EDS.

0 (k) Establish a high heating rate of approximately 2 0 Btu/ft2/sec during reentry at approximately 28 OOO f%/sec.
(1) Establish that heat shield data were within specified limits to the extent that no redesign requirement is indicated for completion prior to Saturn V mission heat-shield certification.

(m) Establish that the EIS did operate at the specified altitude and that deceleration and descent velocities were within specified limits.

(n) Establish that the recovery aids did operate at the specified times and within the specified limits.

4-1

4.0

SPACE VEHICLE DESCRIETION

The space vehicle for Mission AS-201 consisted of a Saturn I B launch vehicle and an Apollo spacecraft of Block I type configuration. The launch configuration is indicated in figure 4 0 1 .-.

4-2

NASA -S-66-6157 MAY 6

C
J

?QR 7
/ W . I

LES

A
1

4d5
II

f

II

l

Spacecraft (SC-009)

SM
155

---

I

L

1(

-

1

Jz
---- -- 5-2 engine

I-

1 I U SLA
Space vehicle 0 2t 3

- I
8 H - 1 engines
-

t
S-IB
962

Launch vehicli

(Y201)

3 9

m -&a%
-V I

Notes: All dimensions are i n inches A l l dimensions are approximate Drawing not t o scale

Figure 4.0-1.-

Space vehicle, Mission AS-201.

4-3

4 1 Spacecraft Description .
Apollo spacecraft 009 consisted of a Block I type configuration for the launch escape subsystem ( I ) command module (CM) service module LB, (SM), and spacecraft LEM adapter (SLA) as indicated in figure 4 1 1 .-. Reference 1 describes the typical Apollo Block I spacecraft, and the 0 differences between the configuration of spacecraft 009 and Block I are presented in reference l . The differences included: l

-

,

(a) Omission of the guidance and navigation subsystem (b) Omission of couches, space suits, and crew provisions

(c) Omission of S-band comications equipment

(a)

Omission of biomedical instrumentation

(e) Omission of crew station displays

(f) Use of batteries in place of fuel cells
(g) Use of CM control programmer

(h) Use of open-loop emergency detection subsystem

For Mssion AS-201the following operational subsystems and major components were included on a flight test for the first time:
(a) Service propulsion subsystem
(b) CM and SM reaction control sribsystems

(c) A f t , crew compartment, and forward heat-shield assemblies

(a)

Spacecraft

- IXMadapter structure

In addition, partial operational sribsystems being flight tested for the first time Included portions of the environmental control subsystem, communications subsystem, and instnmaentatim subsystem.
r l s properties for spacecraft OOg for the mission are slmmRrizcd in Ja s table 4.1-1. Weights and centers of gravity for each module were measured prior to stacking. Changes accomplished prior to launch were monitored, and measured d a t a revised as required. Inertial d u e s axe calculated for the actual weights shown. The mass properties of the ring retained with the service module following sepwation from the adapter were calculated, but total weight and centers of gravity of the adapter were measured.

4-4
Spacecraft launch weights shown in table 4.1-1 did not vary significantly from the predicted d u e s used in operational trajectory calculations. PropeUant loading difficulties resulted in a deficiency of approximately 311 pounds of f'uel and an excess of approximately 336 pounds of oxidizer. Propellant tanks were X-rayed to verif'y propellant quantities. Loading accuracy cannot be accurately established; however, actual uncertainty of propellant loading w i l l exceed predicted values based on loading equiplIhent accuracies. Other expendable loading did not vary from predicted d u e s . Spacecraft body axes are indicated in figure 21 ref. 1 .

4.1-2. (Also see

45
I
3

4
c u r l
d

rl

P

-vi

:
QI

rn

0
rl

8
a
k

d

-A M

[ I

c
rn

ld

rn

i

d
~

j

C;

k

0

zf

rl

0

ln

0

w

r(

\n

n

+
V
P)

X
rl
4

I

4-6
NASA-S-66-6158 MAY 6

+Z
180" -Y++y

Q-ba I I

Canards (deployed)

0"

'
-Jettison

Pitch-control motor motor Launch-escape motor

-Z
27 0"
View looking aft

11 -1

L E S tower Command module, -

CM/ S M fairing Service module S M RCS engines-

4
m
l\

m
t-

1

/LES/CM

separation plane

CM/ S M separation plane

.p

E P S ,. -, .. radiator-(I nacti vel

LE C S radiator

SC LEM adapter (SLA)

1

t-------t I
.

\

\ > , V i e w looking on

-Z

axis

Figure 4.1-1.- Apollo spacecraft 009, Mission AS-201.

4-7
NASA-S-66-6 159 M A Y 6

Launch-escape subsystem

Command module

launch azimuth

Direction Longitudinal Lateral
Vertical

Axis

Moment

Positive direction

Spacecraft maneuver 8, .symbol
~~~

Linear ve Ioc it y
U
V

Angular velocity
-~

X Y
Z

L

M
N

to x X toy

Y to

z

z

Roll

Q,

P
9

Pitch c ) Yaw $

W

r

Pitch

Yaw

Rol I

X O0

X O0

-+900y

%pd
O0

Y

180'

10 8'

18' 0
Z

Figure

4.1-2.- Apollo

spacecraft body axis system.

4-8 4.2
Launch Vehicle Description

The two-stage Saturn I B launch vehicle consisted of stages S-E3 and S-IVB, an instrument u n i t ( N ,and various fairings and adapters. I) The general EuTan@;ement of the launch vehicle is shown i n figure 4.0-1. The S-IB stage dry weight was 92 500 pounds with a propellant capacity of apprcadmstely 880 500 pounds (rxrX and RP-1) E i g h t H-1 engines mounted in two clusters, four inboard and four outboard, produced a t o t a l sea-level thrust of 4.6 m i l l i o n pounds.

.

The S-NB stage dry weight was 23 400 pounds With a propellant capacity of apprcudmately 228 500 pounds (LF$ and LOX). The single
5-2 engine of the S - I w stage produces a thrust of 200 OOO puunds a t vacuum conditions.

The instrmment unit contained most of the f l i g h t control equipment,
including t h e vehicle i n e r t i a l guidance and control system and the air-

borne hardware of two tracking systems and four telemetry links. The N also had 8n i n t e g r a l parer supply and distribution system, cooling systems, and a gaseous nitrogen supply s y s t e m . The IUbegan t o function p r i o r t o lift-off i n order to cormand S-IB st& sequencing and t o m i n tain programming, sequencing, and flight control t h o u g h S-IB and S-IVB
stage operation and coast.

U Vehicle telemetry systems were prcndded f o r each stage and the I . These telemetry systems included four airborne l i n k s i n the S-IB stage (two FM/FM, one PCM, and one single side band (SSB) ), five i n the S-IVB stage (three FM/FM, one PCM, and one SSB), and f o u r links i n the IU (two FM/F’M, one PCM, and one SSB). O e tracking system was located i n n the S-IE stage and two i n the TU.
A detailed description and the performance of the Saturn I B launch vehicle,.SA-201, i s presented i n reference 13.

5 0 FLIGHT TRAJECTORlES .
The trajectories referred to as "planned" are preflight-calculated nominal trajectories (ref. 14) and the trajectories referred to as "actual" are based on the Manned Space Flight Network tracking data. The "actual" launch trajectory presented in this report was calculated by the Marshall Space Flight Center. The "actual" midcourse and reentry trajectory phases were calculated by the W n e d Spacecraft Center. A ground track for this mission is presented in figure 5.0-1.

,

The actual trajectory parameters are compared with the planned significant event times during the launch phase, midcourse phase, a d reentry phase in table 5.0-1. hunch phase.- The trajectory parameters for the actual and pLanned The actual data in general show launch phase are shown h figure 5.0-2. good agreement with the planned trajectory for the first 300 seconds; however, the actual parameters are slightly l m r than the planned tra0 jectory from 'p-1.300 seconds until S-IVB cutoff, which occurred 1 seconds later than the nominal time. Midcourse phase.- The trajectory parameters for the actual and planned midcourse phase are presented in figure 5.0-3. This phase is from S-IVB cutoff +10 seconds to the time when the cormnand module (CM) reaches an altitude of 4 0 000 feet. The actual data up to the ullage 0 prior to the first semLce propulsion subsystem (SPS) burn were calculated from Antigua radar data, and the actual data from the end of the second SPS burn down to an altitude of 4 0 000 feet were calculated 0 from Ascension radar data. Since radar tracking was not obtained during the SPS burns, the actual trajectory data were s&e itd during this phase, based on the thrust conditions that had been obsemred. At the end of the secbnd SPS burn (see table 5 0 1 the velocity was 850 ft/sec .-) lower and the flight-path angle was 08' higher than the p h e d con.3 ditions. These differences indicated that the SPS performmce was somewhat less than planned, and resulted in the separation of the cormaand .-) module at a higher altitude than planned (see table 5 0 1 . Reentry phase.- The low performance of the SPS resulted in a degradation of the reentry (400 OOO ft altitude) conditions. The inertial velocity at reentry was 7'78 ft/sec lower and the flight-path angle was 0.44" shalluwer than the planned conditians. (See table 5.0-1 and A a result, the total maximum heating rate and maximum s fig. 5.0-4.) structural loading produced was less than expected (188 Btu/fi2/sec and 16.0g respectively, expected). The calculated total maximum heat rate

5-2
achieved was 164 Btu/Ft2/sec ( t o t a l convective, 151.3; t o t a l radiative, 12.8) and surpasses the minimum heat-rate t e s t 'requirements of 160 Btu/ft2/sec. of 14.3g. The s t r u c t u r a l loads during reentry reached a maximum

During reentry a t T+1649 seconds, the control system ceased t o function and a positive r o l l r a t e developed'instead of the planned lifting reentry. The reentry t r a j e c t o r y was calculated by using the position and velocity vector a t 400 000 f e e t based on the Ascension radar tracking data. This position velocity vector was integrated through reentry by using a lift-to-drag (L/D) r a t i o of 0.33, a density p r o f i l e defined i n "Arcasonde Ascension Data" (dated Feb. 26, 1966, measured a t 1830 d.m. t. ) , and a - 0 bank-angle orientation for the spacecraft i n t o blackout u n t i l 1' 'p-1649 seconds. Actual. r o l l - r a t e data were employed t o simulate the t r a j e c t o r y t o drogue parachute deployment a t ~ 1 8 5 5 . 4 seconds (24 552 ft altitude). W i n parachutes were deployed a t "+lg08.4 seconds corresponding t o an estimated a l t i t u d e of 10 016 f e e t which i s 734 f e e t lower than the planned deployment at 10 750 feet. The simulated reentry t r a j e c t o r y agrees closely w i t h maximum g and the time of drogue parachute deployment recorded onboard the spacecraft, and mtches the actual impact point (8.18" S. latitude, 11.15" W. longitude) as reported by the recovery ship. If the roll r a t e s had not occurred, the cormnand module would have Landed a t l a t i t u d e 9.40" S. and longitude 9 . 1 8 O W. which i s 58 nautical miles daJnrange of the planned landing point. The a c t u a l landing point was 40.6 nautical miles uprange of the planned landing point ( l a t i t u d e 8.7'7' S. and longitude 10.72' W . ) as can be seen in f i g ure 5.0-5. Table 5.0-11 presents the calculated actual impact and touchdown points f o r the S-IB, launch-escape tower, the S-ID, service module, and corrrmagd module. The a c t a range plotted against d t i t u d e in figure 5.0-6 was close t o planned during the launch p e s e and the midcourse phase up t o the first SPS burn. During the burn, the range versus a l t i t u d e was abthe planned until blackout. After blackout, the actual range was l e s s than planned.

5-3
TABU3 5 0 1 .-.
COMPARISON O €"WED AND ACTUAL TRAJECTORY PARAMGPERS, F MISSION AS-201

Condition

Planned

Actual

.......... Altitude, f t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Altitude, n mi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ra.nge,n.mi. ............. Space-fixed velocity, Ft/sec . . . . . .
Longitude, deg West

....... Time from zero, min:sec . . . . . Geodetic latitude, deg North. . ..
Time from range zero, sec
range

... Space-fixed heading angle, deg E a s t of North . . . . . . . . . . . .
Space-fixed flight-path angle, deg

146.6 2 26.6 : 28.38 79.95 193 035 31. a 33.5 7 473.043

146. g
2 26. g :

28.37

79.94
igo 521

24.77
102.32

31.4 33.9 7 499.66 24.52
124 0.6

I
Time from range zero, sec

s-IVB cutoff

I
592.7 09: 52.7
23.66
602. g 1 :02. g 0

..... ....... Longitude, deg West . . . . . . . . . . Altitude,ft.. . . . . . . . . . . . . Altitude, n. mi. . . . . . . . . . . . . Range,n. ............. Space-fixed velocity, f t / s e c . . . . . . Space-fixed flight-path angle, deg . . . Spacecrfixed head.angle, deg EastofNorth . . . . . . . . . . . .
Time from raage zero, min:sec
Geodetic latitude, deg North

........

23.55

65.56 854 793
140.7 898 5. 22 7 8 9 6.8 79 .3
u2.00

mi.

65.30 -2 857 6 7 141.2 857.9 22 769.23 7.94
u2.12

5-4
TABU3 5.0-1.COMPARISON OF PUNNED AM> ACTUAL TRAJECTORY PARAMWE%. MISSION AS-201

.Continued

r-

Condition

I

Planned

I

Actual

S-IVB cutoff -1-10 (insertion) sec

....... Time from range zero. & s e :e ..... Geodetic ‘Istitude. deg North . . . . . . Longitude. deg West . . . . . . . . . . Altitude. f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . % Altitude. n . mi. . . . . . . . . . . . . Range. n. ............... Space-fixed velocity. ft/sec . . . . Space-fixed flight-path angle. deg . . Space-fixed heading angle. deg EastofNorth . . . . . . . . . . . .
Time from range zero. sec
mi

602.7 10: 0 . 27 23.44 65.01

62.9
10:12.9

23- 33 64.74 887 7 6
146.1

885

780

145.8
894 22 747 7.80
U.2 24

909 22 750

78 .1
Lf-2 .37

.

I

CSM/S-IVB sepasation

....... Time from range .. s e ..e . .. .. .. .. .. .&:North Geodetic latitude. deg Longitude. deg West . . . . . . . . . . Altitude. f . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t Altitude. n . mi. . . . . . . . . . . . . Range,n.mi. .............
Time from raage zero. sec

034.4 12:54.4 17.84 53.00 1423 640 234.3 1647 22 049 4.12 ~6.83

844.9 14: 04.9 17-70 52974 1 427 377 235.1

Space-fixed velocity. ft/sec Space-fixed flight-path angle. deg

...... ... Space-fixed heading angle. deg EastofNorth . . . . . . . . . . . .

1664
22 050

4.13 u6.92

e

5-5
TABIX 5.0-1.

.COMPARISON

OF

PLANNED AND ACTUAL TRAJECTORY PARAMGPERS,

MISSION AS-201

.Cm-binued
Planned Actual

Condition

Time from range zero. sec

.......
.

...... Longitude. deg West . . . . . . . . . . Altitude. ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' Altitude. n . mi . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Geodetic Latitude. deg North

Time from range zero. min:sec

..

1 170.7

1 181.2

............. Space-fixed velocity. f't/sec . . . . . . Space-fixed flight-path angle. deg . . . Space-fixed heading angle. deg EastofN&h ............
Range,n.mi. Second SPS cutoff Time fKnn range Tinre f r o m range

19:30.7 8.70 56 371575 924 259.4 2 702 21 853 -1.70
120.72
?

19:41.2 85 .3 37.34 1 586 803 261.2 2724 a851 -1.64 120.80

(+3 sec

f

...... .......... Altitude.ft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Altitude. n. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Range. n. mi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Space-fbed velocity. f t / s e c . . . . . . Space-fixed flight-path angle. .
Geodetic h t i t u d e . deg North Longitude. deg West
mi deg

.. .. . . . . . .

tailoff)

sec

.......

min:sec

.....

1 413.2 2 : 33.2 3

1423.7 23:43.7
.99

1-07 25.81 920 024 151.4 3 540 26 674 -9.88
120.68

25.72

969 858 159.6 2553 25 824 9 m .
120.69

Space-fixed heading angle. deg EaStOfNarth

5-6
TAXtX 5 0 1 - COMPARISON O PLANNED AND A T A TRAJECTORY-P .-. F CU L , MISSION AS-201 Continued

-

Condition

Planned

Actual

~

Time from range zero, sec

Time from range zero,

. . . Longitude, deg West . . . . . . . . . . Altitude, f t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Altitude, n m i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Range, n, mi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Space-fixed velocity, f t / s e c . . . .
Geodetic Latitude, deg South Space-fixed flight-path angle, deg Space-flxed heading angle, deg E a s t of North

....... min:sec . .

1444.2

..

24: 04.2 03 24. Og ?79 3J-5 128.4 3 663 26 831 -9.68
EO. 70

1 455.0 24: 15.0

09 24.04 844 244
138.9 3 660 25 968

-8.90
EO. 69

............

I
1

....... Time from range zero, min:sec . . . . . Geodetic l a t i t u d e , deg South . . . . . . Longitude, deg West . . . . . . . . . . Altitude, f%. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Altitude, n. mi. . . . . . . . . . . . . Range, n. mi. - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Space-fixed velocity, f t / s e c . . . . . . Space-fixed flight-path angle, deg . . , Space-fixed heading angle, deg East of North . . . . . . . . . . . .
Time from range zero, sec

1 530.3

25t30.3 3.l.8 19.18
400 000

1565.6 26: 05.6

65.8 4 012 27 260 -9; 04
E O -55

3*99 17-94 400 000 65.8 4 107 26 481 -8.60
120.47

5-7 WRlX 5.0-1.- COMPARISON OF PLANNED AND ACTUAL 'TRAJECTORY PARAMETERS,

MISSION AS-201

- Concluded

Condition

Planned

Actual

. ... .. Reentry aynamic pressure, ft . heat rate, Btu/ft2/sec . . .
Reentry acceleration, g
Maximum

....... . . ........ ... Space-fixed velocity, ft/sec . . . . Earth-fixed velocity, ft/sec . . ..
&it acceleration, g. Exit dynamic pressure, lb/sq ft Altitude, n. mi.
lb/sq

41 .

626 264.8 27 393
26 og2 16.0

1043

188.4

41 . 617 265.7 26 620 25 318 14.3 930 164.1

I1ABL;E

501. .-1

-

IMPACT AND TOUCHDOWN POINPS FOR MISSION AS-201

I

System

Elapsed t i m e ,
sec

Latitude,
del3

Longitude, de@;
-76.04

Range, n mi. .
~~

27-30
Tower

251

687.5 1916.6

27.09

-75.26
-10.08

295

S-IVB
SM

-9.66
-6.93

4677
4437

-13.3

CM

2239- 7

-8.18

-u. 15

4577

5-9

rl
I

.

0
N

a

t n

Y

u m

d

0

I

5-10

d m m t
m 2 -

n .u c c

N v)

B
a

0 c .VI .-

u )

I

e
m P) L
c
P)

L

5
L

: :
2
m
L

0 c V P)

.-

0

.-

m
P)

L 0 c m

.r

E .I -

+ :
E 3 m .-L L

5-11

5-12
0

8

d

8

d

8

$ i
8
; 0 i

9

> a r
m

9
r(

8

9 I 9 9
I

UJ

a U J a z

I

5-13
NASA-S-66-6164 MAY 6

900
800

700

200

100

0
10

a

2

0
L

20
1

40

60
I

80
I

loo

120

140

160

180

200

220

240

Ground elapsed time, set
I

1

I

I

L

mo o

Kk30

01:00

01:30 02:00 02:30 Ground elapsed time, min:sec td) Mach number and dynamic pressure. Figures 5.0-2.

03:m

03:30

M0 :0

- Continued.

5-14

5-15
NASA-S-66-6166 MAY 6

14

r

12
10

-

-

a-

-10

- 12 600
700

800

900

loo0

1100

1200

1300

1400

1500

1600

Ground elapsed time, sec 1&00
L

12:00

I

14:M)

I

la00

1&00

d

2&00

I

D:00

I

24:00

I

2600 J

Ground elapsed time, min:sec (a) Inertial velocity and inertial flight-path angle Figure 5.0-3. - Time histories of trajectory parameters for Mission AS-201 midcourse phase.

5-16
NASA-966-6167 MAY 6

14

-

1210

8-

6-

4

2
0

-2

-4 -6

-8

-io

- 12
Ground elapsed time, sec
I
I
I I I

I

I

I

J

la00

1: 2W

14:OO

lO QO

1&00 2Q00 2ZOO Ground elapsed time, min:sec

24:OO

2600

(b) Relative velocity and relative flight-path angle. Figure 5.03.

- Continued.

5- 17
NASA-S-66-6168 MAY 6

Ground elapsed time, sec
L
I I
I I

I

I

1

I

l&OO

12:OO

14:OO

lCOO

1&00

2O aO

ZOO

24:OO

2CoO

Ground elapsed time, min:sec (c) Altitude, longitude and geodetic latitude.

Figure 5.0-3.

- Concluded.

5-18
NASA-S-66-6169 MAY 6 10 8

6 4

2

0
-2
'CI w

wl

-4
E

E m ..m

s k
L

m

-6

L

-a
-1c

c 0)

-12

-14
-lt

-11
-21

-2: Ground elapsed time, sec
I
1

I

I

I

1

1

I

I

I

I

E00

27:00

2b00

3140

33:00

3S:OO

37:OO

3h00

41:OO

43:00

4500

Ground elapsed time, minsec (a) Inertial velocity and inertial flight-path angle.

Figure 5.0-4.- Time histories of trajectory parameters for Mission AS-201 reentry phase.

5-19
NASA-S-66-6170 MAY 6 7 6

5'
41
31

21

1t
u

g: F (
-10

m m

e .-n .-

:
5
> W

:f
I -

-20

iY W

-30

-40
-50 -60
-70

-80
-90

(b) Relative velocity and relative flight-path angle.

Figure 5.0-4.

- Continued.

Q

u

i
‘apni!ilV

8
N

&

s

c N

8

IE

N

5-21

1-22

5-23

6-1

6.0 AF,RODYNAMICS AND AEROI'RERMODYNAMICS
6.1 Aerodynamics
Summary.- Analysis of the preflight wind-tunnel aerodynamic data f o r the reentry configuration of Apollo spacecraft 009 resulted i n a hypersonic lif't-to-drag r a t i o (L/D) of 0.34 f 0.04. The hypersonic t r i m angle of attack (a) was correspondingly 1570 f 3'. On the basis of a preliminary analysis of limited f l i g h t data and postflight simulation, both the L/D r a t i o and the t r i m angle of attack during the mission were within the p r e f l i g h t estimates even though the corrrmand module (CM) was not attitude-controlled during reentry from T+1649 seconds u n t i l drogue parachute deployment a t T+18gg.g seconds (see section 7.9). The control t h a t was exercised during the i n i t i a l portion of t h e reentry adequately maintained the proper spacecraft t r i m a t t i t u d e i n t h e f u l l l i f t - v e c t o r up position. During the uncontrolled portion of t h e f l i g h t , postflight simulations indicate that, while r o l l i n g about t h e velocity vector, the i n the p i t c h and yaw planes CM was a l s o o s c i U a t i n g approximately about the nominal aerodynamic t r i m angle. The CM r o l l was a t t r i b u t e d t o the e f f e c t s of protuberances coupled with the Y and Z o f f s e t of the tenter of gravity.

Instrumentation.- The analysis of the aerodynamic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s

@

Df spacecraft 009 during reentry was based on two types of data from the

f l i g h t instrumentation: accelerometer data and angular rate data. Be(cause of unforeseen d i f f i c u l t i e s during the f l i g h t these data must be qualified. The lift- and drag-axis l i n e a r accelerometer readings were ton t h e f l i g h t qualification tape recorder only and therefore are considered unusable where t h e &ta from this recorder becomes e r r a t i c a t about T+1653 seconds. These data were the sole source f o r t h e flightmeasured peak deceleration load during reentry and although they disagree isomewhat w i t h the calculated value of section 5 , it was thought that the measured values were m o r e pertinent t o the analysis of t h i s section. Structural X-, Y-, and Z-axes l i n e a r accelerometer data w e r e available throughout reentry; however, t h e X - a x i s accelerometer had an upper limit of +log and therefore did not measure the peak g load. Rate gyro data about t h e spacecraft body axes were available during reentry with one exception: t h e r o l l rate instrumentation reached i t s saturation point (26 deg/sec) a t approximately seconds and remained saturated t r n t i l the drogue parachutes were deployed a t r+1853.4 seconds.

'~l+lm

Performance, attitude-controlled phase.- The reaction control subs y s t e m (RCS) positioned t h e CM i n a blunt-end-forward a t t i t u d e p r i o r t o reentry. During the portion of the f l i g h t that the vehicle was-controlled (:considered t o be u n t i l T+1649 sec) it was stable i n an aerodynamically %rimmed attitude. The predominant control observed during t h i s time was

6-2

'bothnegative r o l l (-R) engines firing frequently, indicating the presence of a positive aerodynamic roll force.

To determine the lift-to-drag ratio during the controlled phase of the reentry, a parametric study was made varying L/D and the atmospheric density. Figure 6.1-1 shows the family of curves resulting f r o m this study. An extension of the curve representing a nominal 1 6 S t a n d a r d 92 Atmosphere to the line of the flight-measured maximum deceleration load gives a L/D of 0 3 6 Arcasonde atmosphere data were extrapolated ab.2. 200 000 feet and showed a density deviation from -2 percent to almost +9 percent in the altitude region to peak g. Extension of the curve representing an average deviation of +10 percent indicates an L/D approximstely equal to 0.32. These values so obtained are for a high bbch number region and agree well with the preflight estimates as shown on figure 6 1 1 .-.
By using flight data f r o m the body-axis accelerometers, values of the ratio of aerodynamic nornoal-force coefficient to axial-force coefficient, CN/CA, were calculated and are presented in the top half of figure 6 1 2 as a function of k c h number. The ratio is presented rather .than the individual aerodynamic coefficients to eliminate the effects of atmospheric density. In the lower half of the figure the same ratio, %h CN/CA, is shown as obtained from the preflight wind-tunnel data ( c numbers from 6 to 25). For the same CN/CA values, the flight data indi-

cate an angle of attack of appraxinstely 159. This corresponde to an L/D = 0 3 from preflight data and supports the previous determination .2 of L/D from the trajectory study, although these accelerometer data show a large band of uncertainty due to data scatter. Performance, attitude-uncmtrdlled phase. At T+16@ seconds the CMlost a l l rate and attitude control. Due to Its inherent aerodynamic characteristics, the vehicle began rolling quite rapidly to rates above 6 the instrumentation limit of 2 deglsec. During this t h e the yaw rate was also increasing negatively indicating a coordinated roll about the velocity vector. This condition allowed the determination of the angle of attack, u A time history of calcubted u is sham in fig-. ure 6 1 3 compesed with weflight data. The flight data show 811 OSCUL .latory characteristic about an averaged trim y l e of attack as shown by the dashed line. The data agree to within 3 of preflight data at the higher hbch numbers where this type of analysis is questionable due to the low roll rates. Agreement is better at later Mach rimers where the roll rates were considerable. From the flight data and from postflight SiuniLations the indication is that the vehicle was oscillating in the aerodynamic pitch yaw plane approximtely 9about the aerodynamic trim angle while rolling about the velocity vector.

-

-

6-3
Prefli@t prediction evaluation.- Preflight wind-tunnel measurements (from tests conducted at the AEDC-VKF on July 16 1965) of the aerodynamic roll coefficient due to protuberances where offset terms
,

(CIA),

are negligible, indicated that the CM would roll negatively, whereas the flight-measured data show a positive roll rate. Subsequent wind-tunnel tests have been conducted (AEDC-VKF, April 15, 1966), m d the combined results were used in postflight simulations. Figure 6.1-4 presents the time histories of the averaged roll rate (p)avg and the averaged roll coefficient C

Comparing the rates so generated with the actual flight-measured rates in figure 6.1-k(a) indicated that when the +0.00002 uncertainty was included the results of the latest tests would predict flight comparable roll rates in the positive direction. The variation of the average roll coefficient from additional postflight simulations that bracketed the flight-measured roll rate was interpolated to give an estimate of the actual flight roll coefficient time history In view of these which is sham as a dashed line i figure 6.1-4(b). n results, a revision to the roll coefficient uncertainties in the Apollo Mission Data Specifications will be made for a l l affected subsequent mission spacecraft.
+0.00002 included.

( dvt3

with effects of a roll coefficient uncertainty of

The absence of tumbling during the uncontrolled portion of the reentry indicated that the actual flight damping characteristics were better in the l o w W c h number regime than the preflight data yould predict. Using preflight wind-tunnel damping coefficient data C " a ) (mq and comparable flight roll rates in a simulation of the CM reentry dynamics will cause a tumbling motion just prior to drogue parachute det ployment. I should be noted, however, that the damping data used represents the "worst case," the philosophy being that the control system should be adequate to contain this possible destabilizing energy input. This would lndicate that the dynamic trim angle of the spacecraft during the reentry phase was other'than that for the "worst case."

+

64

6-5
NASA-S-66-6176

MAY 6

Figure 6.1-2.-

Correlation of flight data with preflight data in the high Mach nunber region, Mission AS-201.

6 6

Y

-0

m m

I-

E .-

P;

a
5

6- 7
NASA-S-66-6178 MAY 6

(a) Averaged roll rate buildup from postflight simulations compared with flight measwed data.

Time, s a

( b ) Averaged roll coefficient from postflight simulations and estimated flight roll coefiicient.
Figure 6.1-4.Flight roll coefficient detmination, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

6- 9
There were 22 asymptotic calorimeters on the conical section, 1 2 high-range calorimeters on the a f t heat shield, and 1 high-range calorimeter on the conical section. Only 19 of t h e asymptotic calorime t e r s operated with 3 of these not functioning properly. The remaining 16 heating-rate histories are shown in figure 6.2-3 along with r a t e s calculated f o r the entry trajectory based on wind-tunnel data f o r 22' angle of attack and the hemispherical stagnation-point theory of Detra, Kemp, and Riddell f o r laminar theory. Turbulent calculations are based on the flat-plate theory of V a n Driest. Most of the asymptotic calorime t e r s experienced an apparent burst of irregular heating between ~+1580 and T+1595 seconds which i s unexplained. Since some of the calorimeter outputs went t o zero a f t e r the irregular burst, no attempt w a s made t o correct the data f o r possible zero s h i f t even though they may have recorded as much as 4 Btu/f't /sec prior t o i n i t i a l entry time. While the s c a t t e r of the data prevents precise comparisons, the measurements appear t o be i n reasonable agreement with the estimates. The apex and t h e conical-toroid tangency point f o r 0 = 1 3 9 and 2 2 9 (figs. 6.2-3(e), 0.2-3( f ) , and 6.2-3( j ) ) are unexplainably lower than would be predicted with wind-tunnel measurements. Examination of figure 6.2-3 shows a s l i g h t t i m e l a g between the measured peak h e a t b g and the estimated laminar peak heating. The lag, however, never exceeds LO seconds. This m y be p a r t l y due t o turbulent effects which would introduce delays of tbe peaks on the order of 5 seconds. A sketch of the command module i s shown i n figure 6.2-4 with the measured peak heating r a t e noted above each sensor location. Cnly 6 of t h e 13 high-range calorimeters were operative. These 6 calorimeters produced usable data only between ~+1560 and ~+1622seconds.

2

These sensors measured terqperature with tungsten-rhenium thermo-

couples imbedded i n each thin graphite wafer. Figure 6.2-5 shows t h e rapid temperature r i s e of 4 of these sensors t o values as high as 1.400" F. Heating rates can be calculated i n principle from the temperature t i m e history and knowledge of the sensor material properties. Because of anomalous experimental r e s u l t s of ground t e s t data from prototypes of the high-range sensor, further study w i l l be required before heating r a t e s can be determined from the f l i g h t data.

unalysis of the spacecraft 009 f l i g h t data w i l l continue. The pressure and calorimeter measurements presented herein are i n reasonable agreement with wind tunnel and theoretical estimates. Since the r e s u l t s from the f l i g h t data a r e substantially based on the measured heating rates f o r the crew and forward heat shield and the interpretation of pressure data f o r the a f t heat shield as expected, the environment f o r o r b i t a l entry conditions may be regarded as well established.

6-10
9
rl

0 9

0
9

VI

rl
r(

0
(u

0
9
rl

v)

a

m

0

9

r 0
5
Y-

.

rl

aJ

O

0 N

9 rl
e
In
0

a I
m 0
L

9
rl

\

VI I0

0
rl

aJ

N

v)
L

9 d

.I -

z

. .

5
C
0
v)

aJ

L 3

aI

a' rl

VI
v)

0 0 9
rl

5 d

5
A

v

m

0 cp.

VI

rl

.2
I 0 co m
I+

0 9

6u 0

9

2
0

9
d

VI

0

rr\ 9
PI

0 N

9
d

0
d

9,

.I -

d; E
N

d
I

'.

2

9

N.

U
PI

s

0 0

L'

m

2
0

OI

VI

co
d

0

In

0
PI

rVI

0

9

6 -12

0

e!sd Wnssard pamseaa

6-13

0 '
N

(2 ul
c

r(

.

I -

.- t E" > i
f
v1

I -

6 -14

0

s
c

.L

6-15

E a

m

6 -16

Q.

rr\

N

d
E .I -

u

t

r(

5
Y

cn

0

9 9
rl

0 9
r(

I n

0
9
rl

T r

0
(r\

9,

0 OI
r(

I n

co

0

In

6-18
0

d

u !
a
\ t n

6
N
A
I

'.

'u.

9

a z

e!sd 'arnssard panseayy

6-19

0 vl W

I

rl

I -

E .-

9

cu.

I

N
rl

0
rl

9

cv

M
0
N-4

e!sd ‘amssald painseayy

6-20

OI

b

i=

.d E
X

d 0

.

m m
(u

4

0
CI Y

a
m

622

0

U

s .e
S

0

4 0

aJ v) *

u
9

d X

I

c

.-

u

(r;
9

'u.

h

e

9

t

a

5

6-23

0

3
0

m

d 9
d

N

0

o*
o*
l-4

3
0 d

9
rl

0 0

.I -

.

9,
0

e

I n

0

co m rl

0 f I n
l-4

0

9,

6-24
0 I n

0-

0 br
z

2

6-25

0

m -

2

c

. .E"

I

9

'u.

3

9

626

a

I -

E .-

u

c

>

a
H

. .

? 9 ?
?

s a
z

6-27

rl
5

co

b

2

c;
0 X
N

4

m

2

a

m

6-29

0
rl

9

In

0

4

d

0
( u

rl

.

9

rl

N

L

0

0
rl

03
rl

In
m
5

9
rl

d !

v)

0 0 9
rl

ir:

. E

d
rl

E -

b N

9

0

9,

6-30
0

0

9 9
rl

0
i>

3
rl

0

9
rl

m

rl

0
(v

9
rl

E \
v) c
0

j
c .Y

b,
0

. .

8
0

0
rl

U I

aJ

9
rl

I -

E .-

aJ

.

(v

u
I

d-

X

o 3 'v.

9

0

9
0;)
(v

0

9
rl

rl

LL

4
h

Y,

0

c n

l n
rl

6-32

9

6-33

8

.I-

.

N

b
L

b 9

x

0'

m

N

9 a l L.
J

3 'v.

'.

m 2 L.L a

u

v

E

6-34
0

z

r-

b
m

N

I -

E .-

0)

.

* .
S

c .c
Y

0

'v.
cu
d
r(

0
I

'i,
X

3 "! 9

rr\

0

lu

?

a z

6-35

0

9
r(

M

0
rl

d 9

0

6-36

0

5

0

I-

0

.

I-

E .-

d ! m 2

N
c

v! rc
N

x

0
L

b

?

UNCLASSIFIED
NASA-S-66-6206 MAY 6

637

Operative Inoperative - Max heating rate 2 measured, Btu/ft /sec

0

I

I

I

rlso"

\ \
-.o
225"

I -I
I

I

I
I

2 . 5

7 2 -

0
2.5

.x

-Y- 180"

;i I
+Z
I

00 f Y

270"

270" -Z
I I 1
I

- 80

J

1

I

100
X

12 0

14 0

C

station, it).

Figure 6.2-4.Instrumentation locations on the conical surface of the CM, sliowitig actual n i a x i n m heating rates, Mission AS-201.

UNCLASSIFIED

6-38
NASA-S-66-6207
MAY 6

0
Time, sec (a) C A 1 2 2 8 R and C A 1 2 3 4 R .

Figure 6.2-5

.- Time histories of Ahigh2 0range calorimeter temperatures, Mission S - 1 .

6-39
NASA-S-66-6208 MAY 6

14.00

12 00

1000

LL
0

800

600

400

2 00

0 -

1560

1570

1580

1590
Time, sec

1600

1610

1620

(b) CA1213R and CA1382R.

Figure 6.2-5.-

Concluded,

7-1
70 .
SPACECRAFT SUBSYSTEMS

7.1 Structural Loads
Mssion AS-201was the first f l i g h t t e s t of the ApoIJ.0 Block I spacecraft structure under the Saturn I launch environment, service B conditions. C r i t i propulsion subsystem operation, and reentry 1 c a l loading conditions f o r the mission are s.lmrmrxrized i n table 7.1-1 and were checked by two methods. Body loads a t the commsnd and service m o d u l e (CSM) interface were determined and c o w e d with design allowable loads (ref. 11) Internal loads i n the comnnd module (CM) service module (SM), and spacecraft LlEM adapter (SLA) structure were determined from s t r a i n gage readhgs, and compared with the allowable s t r u c t u r a l lOadS.

.

-

,

.Description.- The spacecraft 009 structure included Block 1 type launch-escape subsystem (IIES), CM, SM, and SLA. Launch-escape subsystem: The Block I type LES tower used on MISsion AS-201 was a titanium ( U o y -4V) tubuLar truss structure, covered with Bum-N nibber f o r t h e d protection. The tower wa6 bolted t o a s t r u c t u r a l s k i r t at the aft end of the launch-escape motor and t o the CM by four single-mode explosive bolts. The Block I type launchescape subsystem had been previously flown on Missions A-002, A-003, PA-2, a d A-004 (refs. 6 t o 9 ) Commmd module:
The Block I type CM structure was similar t o that

of spacecraft 002 (ref. 9 ) but included the complete ablator for the launch and reentry heating conditions planned f o r t h i s mission. The
ablator thickness varied along the three-piece heat shield (forward, crew, and a f t compartment heat shield) according t o the heat load expected from a lunar return trajectory. (See figs. 7.1-1 and 7.4-3.)
Boost protective c m r : The Block I type boost protective cover, .which was jettisoned with the LES, was i n two portions. (See fig. 7.3-2.) .Above Xc81, the cover ("hard cover") consisted of fiberglass honeycomb

sandwich mterial covered with cork ablator, and below

xc81 the cover

("soft cover") consisted of teflon-impregnated glass cloth covered with (cork ablator. The s o f t cover was constructed in eight gores which were attached t o each other and t o the hard cover by mechanicsl fasteners.

of spacecraft 002 (ref. g ) , but included the i n s t a l l a t i o n of the service
propulsian subsystem (SPS) and the service module reaction control sub;system (SM RCS) (fig. 7.1-3). The four main service propulsion subsystem propellant tanks were mounted on the a f t bulkhead and supported against

Servlce m o d u l e :

The Block I type S structure was similar t o t h a t M

7-2

lateral movement by the f o m d bulkhead. Blankets of insulation were i n s t a l l e d between the CM and S t o maintain the temperature of the RCS M propellants within operating limits. A heat shield was i n s t a l l e d below the aft bullshead t o protect the S i n t e r i o r from heat generated by the M SPS engine. Nonfunctional radiator panels for the e l e c t r i c a l parer subsystem and e n v i r o m n t a l control subsystem were included in the s e d c e module outer s h e l l structure.
M The CM was attached t o the S by three tension ties and rested on t h r e e compression and three shear compression pads. Each of the six S bearing pa& was mounted on the forward end of a SM r a d i a l beam truss. M Each tension t i e was bolted t o a truss and extended through the CM aft heat shield t o the inner structure of the CM (fig. 7.4-2). A f a i r i n g 26 inches in length enclosed the CM/SM interface.

-

Spacecraft I.rFM adapter: The Block I type SLA structure was a truncated cone of monocoque construction (fig. 7.1-4). It was fabricated from aluminum honeycoxib sandwich mterial 1.7 inches thick, with the
face sheet thiclmess varying along the length of the adapter i n propor-

-

t i o n t o the expected load variations. The forwasd portion of the adapter osed of four panels with interfacing splice p l a t e s . A t the time was S M SLA se-tion, for the panels and the splice plates were separated by pyrotechnics, and the four panels, each of which was strap-hinged a t the aft end, w e r e forced open by gas generator thrusters. The a f t port i o n of the SLA structure remined in one piece, attached t o t h e S-IVB instrument unit. Since no LEMwas included in Mtssion AS-201, a s t i f f e n ing member was installed in the SLA a t the point for n d I;EM attachment.
Body loads.. Loads were derived a t the CM/SM structural interface f o r several c r i t i c a l loading conditions. These conditions were: liftoff, mid-boost, s D end boost (rugximum axial acceleration), s-IB/S-IVB - 3

separation, and S-IVB end boost. Applied loads derived from f l i g h t data w e r e compared t o Saturn IJ3 design loads far each c r i t i c a l condition. By k k h g these comparisons, an evaluation of the design adequacy as well as increased confidence in the a b i l i t y t o predict loads is accomplished.

Lift-off:
winds, defined

The spacecraft and launch vehicle w e r e exposed t o ground in figure 7.1-3, p r i o r t o S-IB engine i g n i t i m . Very low

values of vehicle response and loads were recorded during t h i s time. l&,ximum lateral accelerations measured by the tower accelerometers before engine ignition w e r e O.l3g peak-to-peak, w e l l below the design level. N spscecraft lofid.8 of any s i p i f i c a n o e were expected from the winds exo perienced (12.7 knots, maxhum) since allowable ground w i n d s f o r a freestanding Block I s p c e c r a f t on the Saturn I are 99.9 percent of those B winds occurring i the worst ground wind month, which i s 32.9 b o t s at n the &foot level.

7-3
To f i n d the worst loads condition a t l i f t - o f f , loads were examined from the t i m e of engine ignition u n t i l a l l significant s t r u c t u r a l response had decayed after the l i f t - o f f . Prior t o l i f t - o f f large Lateral accelerations were caused by the S-IB ignition sequence (see sections 7.2 and 7.20) These accelerations are Larger than anticipated and were not included i n the Saturn I B launch release design loads. (See fig. 7.1-6. ) Immediately af-ter l i f t - o f f , the lateral e l a s t i c response of a flexi b l e vehicle results from a transfer of e l a s t i c s t r a i n energy i n t o kin e t i c energy. The s t r a i n energy is a result of t h e ground winds, unsymmetric t h r u s t buildup, and thrust misalignments, and i s transferred i n t o kinetic energy as the hold-down arms are released. As seen i n figure 7.1-6 spacecraft l a t e r a l transient accelerations were lower than those measured before l i f t - o f f and were damped out approximately 4 seconds after l i f t - o f f . A compmison of the maximum applied loads and accelerations w i t h design values i s shown i n table 7.1-1(b) f o r t h i s condition. The maximum loads could not be accurately measured because strain-gage r e a d h g s a t the CM interface were commutated a t 0.1-second S intervals.and the s t r u c t u r a l response was a t approximately 10 cps. As a result, there i s an apparent poor correlation shown i n table 7.1-1(b) f o r t h i s condition.

0

Saturn IB f i r s t - s t a g e boost: To evaluate the spacecraft loads during the maximum dynamic pressure region of f l i g h t , body loads a t the C / M interface were derived by the following three methods: (1)preM S launch f l i g h t sirm\lation using T-0 winds which were measured by t r a c k i n g an aluminized spherical balloon (jimsphere) w i t h the FPS-16 radar (fig. 7.1-.7), (2) MSC e l a s t i c body loads program using measured angles of attack and ginibal angles, and (3) reduction of measured s t r a i n readi n g s . Values obtained by each of t h e three m e t h o d s are compared with the design loads i n t a b l e 7.l-I(c) t o evaluate t h e design condition, t h e severity of the a c t a launch envlronment, and the loads prediction capability. The loads show good agreement, although the times of maximum load vary because of slight differences i n the t r a j e c t o r i e s used in the calculations. The measured angle of attack a t m.x q was 3.34" which i s less than half the Block I design value of 8" f o r a Saturn IB t r a j e c tory.
S-IB/S-IVB staging: The loading conditions considered i n t h i s section are S-SB end of boost, S-IB engine t h r u s t decay, and S-IB/S-IVB separation.

kxirmrm axial accelerations and maximum compressive loads are experienced by the spacecraft; s t r u c t u r e near the end of S-IB boost. Shown i n t a b l e T.l-I(d) i s a comparison of predicted, measured, and design loads a t the CM interface f o r this condition. The predicted and measS ured values are lower than the design values. The l a t e r a l loads a t t h i s time were very low.

7-4
The X - a x i s acceleration shown i n figure 7.1-8 very clearly indicates the inboard and outboard cutoff and thrust decay of the S-IB engines. N significant spacecraft vibrations o r loads occurred during o the t i m e of S-IB thrust decay or S-IB/S-IVB separation.
A comparison of design and measured CM/SM interface loads during the time between OECO (~+146.9 sec) and S-IVB ignition (T+149.3 sec) i s shown in table T.l-I(e). The magnitude of the loads during this portion of the launch are not significant when compared with the maxim c r i t i c a l design loads.

S-IVB operation: The i n i t i a l acceleration buildup during S-NB operation i s shown in figure 7.1-8(b). The buildup from e s s e n t i a l l y O a t Ti-151 seconds t o 0.65g a t Ti-133.5 seconds i s shown. From g T+153 seconds t o T602.9 seconds, a slow buildup of axial acceleratlon was o b s e m d . The peak acceleration of 2.733 and the S-IVB thrust decay are shown i n figure 7.1-9.

shows a comparison of design and measured loads f o r The accelerations w e r e as expected and show no significant load conditions f o r S-IVB operation when compared w i t h the m i m u m c r i t i c a l design loads. Table T . l -I(f)
t h e S-IVB operation phase.

SPS burn and from S-IVB engine power malfunction The data recorded reliable.

reentry: Cormaand module accelerometer data recorded cutoff t o t o u c h d m were affected by a spacecraft which lasted from T+1649 seconds t o W23.21 seconds. after the malfunction occurred were not considered

A evaluation of loads data between the S-IVB cutoff and t h e power n d f u n c t i o n indicated very low loading conditions which was as expected and no detailed s t r u c t u r a l analysis w s made. a
Internal loads.- Internal loads w e r e determined from strain-gage instrumentation mounted on various s t r u c t u r a l components within the CM, SM, and SLCI. See reference 1f o r actual strain-gage locations and ranges.
Command module i n t e r n a l loads:

Two s t r a i n gages on the a f t heat

shield were inoperative p r i o r t o the mission, and all of t h e gages on the forward longeron inner surfaces w e r e either inoperative or produced invalid data during the mission. A voltage drop i n the instrumentation

system during the reentry blackout period resulted i n invalid data f o rm the remaining gages during the continued descent phase of the mission. Table 7.1-11 shows t h e calculated stresses from the usable strain-gage measurements on the forward longerons and a f t heat shield f o r the boost phase of the mission. These stresses indicate that during the boost the cormnand module structure was l i g h t l y loaded, as expected.

7-5
Service module internal loads: Since all of the radial beam truss s t r a i n gages were reset t o zero readings before lift;-off according t o xm loading these members carried durthe checkout procedures, the m i ing the mission was determined by making an analysis of the structure asslrming that it w s subjected t o a l load prior t o l i f t - o f f . a g Adjusting the flight-data s t r a i n values with those calculated p r i o r t o liftoff resulted i n the actual s t r u c t u r a l loading during the mission. Comparison of these adjusted loads and those calculated by other means a t the CM/SM interface resulted in a f a i r correlation which indicated that the assumptions made were very nearly correct. The adJusted strain values f o r each radial beam truss member were convertedto a x i a l stresses and are shown i n table 7.1-111. Also the calculated stresses for each member subjected t o the l g loading assumpt i o n are shown f o r comparison, as well as the maximum stresses experienced during the mission and the times a t which they occur.
The a x i a l strain on the radial beam caps and tension t i e loads were a l s o converted t o axial stresses and are shown in table 7.l-rV along with maximum stresses experienced by these members during the mission.

The times a t which they occurred are shown f o r comparison.

In both tables, the maximum stresses were f m d t o be l e s s than the member design stress.

@

SLA Spscecraft m~adapter internal l a : ~ l l strain gages were balanced t o zero before stacking the various spacecraft, components with the exception of those on the stabilizing cable load-links. These cables w e r e pretensioned after the stacking operation.

-

Table 7.1-V shows the stresses f’romthe strain-gage measurements on the SLA s h e l l skins and s t a b i l i z i n g structure. It should be noted that
the maximum stresses do not necessarily occur during one of the significant phases show i n the table. Table 7.1-VI shows the load13 measured on the SLA/LEM s t a b i l i z i n g cable loadliriks, including the measured values

of pretension i n the cables j u s t p r i o r t o the S-m ignition, the maxirmrm measured loads i n the cables during the mission, and the times a t .which they occurred.

In both tables, the maximum stresses and loads were found t o be less than those f o r the component design, indicating that the structrrre was l i g h t l y loaded during the mission. T h i s was expected f o r this mission because of the off-loading of consumables and omission of some of *the equipment n o m d l y included i n the Block I configuration.
Table 7.l-VII shows the structural load comparison (xuaximum measured load versw the s t r u c t u r a l allowable load) f o r the various strucIt m y be noted h r a l components listed in tables 7 1 1 t o 7.l-VI. .-1

from this table that the largest load I any member was only 4 . pern 32 cent of its allowable load, indicating that the structure was lightly loaded. Conclusions.- Since the spacecraft;structural design criteria for lif%-off did not in&ude loads due to unsymnaetric thrust buildup, the ground winds go-no-go procedure must be & e sd to include these effects. The present go-no-go procedure includes consemtive estimates of vortex sheddjng and cantilevered vehicle aynamic loads.

The procedure is presently being revised Inan effort to determine the actual on-pad loads due to winds. The modified procedure is expected to increase launch capability enough to offset a reduction due to unsymmetric thrust buildup. The new procedure is planned to be implemented on Mission AS-202 and subsequent missions. Unsymmetric thrust buildup w i U a l s o be considered in a l l future spacecraft design load calcuhtions.
Other than at lift-off, Mission AS-201 was nominal from the structural loads viewpoint. The body lortds and internal loads were as predicted I a l l of the critical loading cases and were well within the n structural capability of the vehicle. Postflight inspections have revealed no inflight structuml damage to the c m m n d module.

7- 7

TABLE 7 1 1 -EVENTS AND CONDITIONS SIGNIFICA.NT TO STRUCTURAL AIWLYSIS .-.

a.
Condition Saturn IF3 engine i g n i t i o n

Event Times Elapsed t i m e , s e c

-2.45
0- 37

Lift-off
Mach 1

65.7
77.7
11. 115

Maximum dynamic pressure region (qu)
Maximurn axizl a c c e l e r a t i o n
S - I B / S - ~ separation

147.7

S-IVB i g n i t i o n
S-IVB end boost

1113.3
L12.

?

T u n l a u n c h Release M i m u m Bending Moment Conditions

t

7
-13 000
-2.4 x 106

Condition

Predicted

Measured

Bending moment a t CM/SM i n t e r face, i n - l b

.........

-13 ooo
I

-43

000

Axid force a t CM/SMinterface a t t i m e of mim bending moment, lb

.........
-0.876

CM lateral a c c e l e r a t i o n a t t i m e of m a x i m bending moment, g..............

1

-0.71

-1.48

7- 8

TPBLF: 7.1-1. FVENTS AND CONDITIONS SIGNIFICAHF TO STRUCPURAL ANALYSIS

-

-

Continued

I
-~
Time, s e c . .

c.

C M I n t e r f a c e Conditions During W i S xm

qa

I
Measured

Condition

............. Dynamic p r e s s u r e , lb/sq f t . . . . . .
Axial a c c e l e r a t i o n , g

I

Predicted (8)

Calculated (b)

Design

84.8 584
2.14

81.9 617
a

77.7
605

69.7 6 53
1.84

......... Bending moment a t x,lOlO, in-lb . . . . Axial f o r c e a t X,lOlO, lb . . . . . . . Angle of a t t a c k , deg . . . . . . . . .
Mach number'. Gimbal angle,

2.07

1.97
0.616 x lo6
-6k 900 3.54 1.42

0.66

X

lo6
2.0

0.657 x i o6
-59 400
2.

1.97

X

10

6

-61 500

-80 800

a4

............. deg . . . . . . . . . . .

1a .

a

16 .

81

.a5

2.04

I

d.

CSM I n t e r f a c e Conditions During S-IB End of Boost

Maximum values
Condition Predicted masured Design (a)

.......... Bending moment a t XAIOIO, i n - l b . . . . . . . Axial f o r c e a t XAIOIO, l b . . . . . . . . . .
CM X - a x i s a c c e l e r a t i o n , g
~~

4.04

4.1
242 OOO

4.4

-80 000

286 500
-84 500

-79 280

%sed

on measured launch wind conditions.

7- 9

TABU2 7 1 1 EVENTS .-.

-

AND CONDITIONS SIGNIFICANT TO

STRKTURAL ANALYSIS

-

Concluded

I I
-ding

e .

CSM Interface Conditions During
Condition

s-m/s-m

Staging

1

Design

....... Axial force at XAIOIO, lb . . . . . . . . . .
moment at ~ ~ 1 0 1 0 , in-lb f.

526 000
-26 800

237 500

-73 600

Conditions During S-IVB Operation Condition Design Measured
2.

........ Lateral acceleration, g . . . . . . . . . . . Bending moment, i n - l b . . . . . . . . . . . . Axial force, lb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Longitudinal acceleration, g

3.35

n

39

1 8 000 8
-30
000

217 ooo
-23 800

-.

k
Q

I

f

.

a
k b)o

bon

d 3

r l -

a

d

kd

lid

gB

7- 1 1

7 -12
l o w W

o

m m

"

13

7 -13

( u

f

v )

P

9 a ,

R
a, P

9
P

d a, d l-i a, a, c, c, c, EI 0 d d rc

8
Io

8
m
d

L 3

t!

m

E+

s

E+

a J

7-14

4

4

rl

rl
. d

c.
.rl

o
U

r: z

$2

x
.ri

5

a 7
0

-4 .Q

M

M

d

aJ
0

d

0

M

Sd
A

-N

s
t-

rfs
. d G

-7
N

m l n

x ln L ?

aJ oxu
0

kt-

tktH

9

w xu r:

7-13

7-16

I -

ll

X

a

.Y

I

1

0 0

7-17

0

I El

. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ., . . . . . . . . . .
d l i

. . . .

. . . .

d

rn

r n

PI8
h

2
P

PI

:

W

*
GI.;(

v)

3
rl

k c,

al

h

rn

d Y

2
'rl 7I 74 74 ;d d 0 d

P

f i uf i

k a ,

k rl a, 4 rl k

k

d 0
c,
d * I

al

u

k

3) c3n m E 3 3 o u

7-18

\
a
l n l n

W

>
v)

2 ! 3
l n

E
0

-P

5
h
W S

r
S .3

0

f

E Q

c-

e -

I

9
9

m
I

I

7-19

U

. U

aJ

m

m aJ

C

rl

.

0

N

m

I

a
S

z
L

0 .m m .%

aJ
V

0

>

4

m

a

0 0

s I

a z

m

4

m

7-20

NIASA-S-66-6374 MAY 6

Pressure subsystem

Service propulsion subsystem engine

+X

Between Sector beams

0-0 m 0-0
m
P
@-@

I II

@-@

a-0

Figure

7.1-3.- Service module structure, Mission AS-201.

7-21

rl

.

cv
I

0

v)

a

7-22

0

0
(v

N

W

il -

7-23

NASA-S-66-6377 MAY 6

I I I I

I

I

I

.

I

Y-axis

I I I I I I

I I I I Lift-off 11: 12: I I

I I I

O b
I

I
I

-2 L
37 a. m. e. s t. .

i
1!
1I
CK0005A Y-axis CM 1.56

1 '
I

-5

t
-

I

!

1

I

I
C K W

1.56

I

1

Z-axis

-1.56-

Elapsed time, set Figure 7.1-6.

- Tower and CM lift-off accelerations, Mission AS-201.

7-24
NASA-S-66-6378 MAY 6

Wind speed, ft/sec
(a) Launch wind magnitude.

Figure 7.1-7.-

Launch winds, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

7-25
NASA-S-66-6379 MAY 6 61

103-

5!

5(

4 5

4c

35
e
aJ
73
4

a

3 .- 30

25

20

15

10

5

0

180

240

3 00
Wind direction, deg

360
North

300

South

(b) Launch wind direction.
Figure 7.1-7.Concluded.

7-26

c .In
0

c * 0

5

5

U 5

m

N

0

7-27

9 0

9

0

I n

9

U 0

.9

..z
0
I n I n

K

m

0

9

S .m

a
K

a l

N

0

ci,

0

9

3
4

.2
d

2

.d
Y

0

P

I n

4

F n
m W
I n

0
9

0
0

9

9

L

aJ

z

U I

a OI m

lL

a t .-

3

co m

h

? 9 ? W J

I -

m

t WJ
U

z

7-28

7.2 Structural Dynamics
Sutnmary.- The spacecraft vibration data indicate that the spacecraft structure performed as required in the launch environment.

During lift-off, the cormnand module (CM) longitudinal vibration reached a maximum of 1 . l g peak-to-peak. The predominant frequency of 0 oscillation was 1 cps. This oscillation damped out within 2 seconds and is considered to be of no consequence structurally. (See section 7.20.) During S-IB ignition and lift-off, the tower lateral vibration reached a maximum of 2.5g peak-to-peak at a frequency of 1 cps. These 0 oscillations were caused by the unsymmetric S-IB engine thrust buildup characteristics. This frequency is well above the natural frequencies of the four lowest cantilever and free-free lateral modes of the vehicle. During this period, the CMlateral vibration in the Y-Z plane reached a maximum of 1.4g peak-to-peak which, when coupled with the axial response, is within the design limits for lift-off. M a x i m vibration of the CM inner structure occurred between " 8 8 seconds and ~ + 9 6seconds. Vibration levels were lower than the established Apollo vibration criteria. During the launch and service propulsion subsystem (SPS) burn periods, the service module (SM) interior structure vibration data showed very small response. The SPS engine dome vibration was between 6g and 8g (rms) during steady-state SPS burn, which is considered normal. During lift-off, the spacecraft LEM adapter (SLA) s k i n panel vibration levels exceeded the expected levels (vibration criteria, level A) but were more than adequately represented by the level B vibration criteria. During supersonic flight, the maximum vibration levels were as expectea. Low-frequency accelerations.

-

,

-

X-axis accelerations: The CM was instrumented with accelerometer
CKOOO4A to measure law-frequency accelerations in the X axis of the vehicle. This measurement was ranged from -2g to +log with the data re-

0 corded at a rate of 1 0 samples per second.

kasurement CKOOObA showed maximum oscillatory accelerations occurring at l i f t - o f f , with a maximum -peak-to-peak amplitude of Llg. The predominant frequency of vibration was approximately 1 cps, which cor0 responds closely to the experimentally determined test vehicle first longitudinal frequency of 9.7 cps. This oscillation is believed to have been excited by the S-IB engine t t buildup characteristics.

7-29
The oscillation damped out completely within 2 seconds and is considered t o be of no consequence structurally. An oscillograph record of this acceleration during the lift-off period is shown in figure 7.1-6. (Also see section 7 2 . .0) Y-axis and Z-axis accelerations: Spacecraft 0 9 was instrumented 0 with four accelerometers which measured low-frequency accelerations in the Y axis and Z axis of the vehicle. Two measurements, LA00UA and LAOOUA, were provided in the forward extremity of the launch escape subsystem (US), and two measurements, CKOOO5A and CKOOO6A, were in the CM. The tower accelerometers were ranged 42g with a frequency response of 30 cps, while the CM accelerometers were ranged 42.56g. Data from the CM accelerometers were recorded at a rate of 1 0 samples per second. 0 This sampling rate was adequate to define the low frequency body bending moment up to 15 cps. The Z-axis tower accelerometer showed maximum low-frequency accelerations occurring from T-2 seconds to T+3 seconds, with a maximum peakto-peak amplitude of 2.339 at T-1.6 seconds. The acceleration had a predominant frequency of approximately 1 cps, as shown by the acceler0 ation spectral distribution of figure 7 2 1 The Y-axis tower acceler.-. ometer exhibited maximum acceleration during the same time period and at approximately the same frequency. The maximum peak-to-peak Y-axis acceleration was 1.56g at T-1.3 seconds. Vector summation of the Y-axis and Z-axis vibrations indicates that a m a x i m acceleration of 2.3g peak-to-peak was incurred by the tower during the lift-off period. The 10-cps oscillation was excited by the S-IB engine unsymmetric thrust buildup characteristics (fig. 7 2 2 . The mode of vibration associated .-) with the 10-cps oscillation is unknown; however, this frequency is well above the natural frequencies of both the four lowest cantilever and
the free-free lateral modes of the
t e s t vehicle.

The CM Y-axis and

Z-axis accelerometers measured mx a i accelerations during the lift-off m period of 0.80g and 1.2g peak-to-peak, respectively, as illustrated in .-. figure 7 1 6 "he magnitude of the CM acceleration, when coupled with the axial response, is within the design limit for the lift-off period, as specified in reference 15. Response at the experimentally determined test vehicle second free25 free bending frequency ( . cps) was noted from T+83 seconds through WlO6 seconds. Response at the calculated second free-free bending frequency ( . cps) of the S-IVB/Apollo vehicle was noticed from T+149 sec78 onds to T+l72 seconds. These vibrations were of insignificant magaitudes.
Command module vibrations.- The CM was instrumented with four accelerometers, as shown in figure 7.2-3, to measure vibrations of the inner structure. Accelerometers CKOOLCOD, CKOOkID, CK0042D, and CK0043D measured vibrations of the f o m d bulkhead in the X direction, the inner aft sidewall in the Z direction, the aft bulkhead in the X

7-30
direction, and a cable tray, mounted on secondary structures within the lower equipment bay aft section, in the Z direction, respectively. Each measurement was ranged +ng with a frequency response of 0 to 2500 cps. Acceleration time histories in figure 7.2-4 show that maxim vibrations occurred between T6 seconds and r+g6 seconds. This time -8 . Maximum reperiod corresponds to a Mach number range of 1 9 to 2.4. sponse of the four measurements was indicated by the aft sidewall accelerometer and was shown to be 33g peak-to-peak at T+gO seconds. Spectral distributions of vibratory energy during the period of maximum response are given in figures 7.2-5 to 7.2-8. Figure 7.2-9 gives the acceleration spectral distribution for the inner aft sidewall, measurement CK0041D, during the transonic flight regime. Comparison of figures 7.2-6 and 7.2-9 shows that the increase in inner aft sidewall vibration between T+60 seconds and WgO seconds is primarily a result of the large increase in energy in the frequency range of 1 0 cps to 00 1700 cps. Acceleration spectral densities for the forward bulkhead, aft sidewall, and aft bulkhead during the period of maximum vibration (M = 2.1) are compared in figure 7.2-10 with the vibration criteria for atmospheric flight. In this figure the spacecraft 009 data have been scaled to the dynamic pressure of the vibration criteria (790 lb/sq ft), thereby enabling a direct comparison. These criteria are representative of average vibration levels developed during the spacecraft 007 CM acoustic tests. A s shown in figure 7.2-10, the spacecraft 009 vibration levels lie within the criteria for these structural zones, with the exception of the aft sidewall vibration, which exceeds the criteria in the frequency range from 1 0 cps to 2 0 cps. This single high frequency 00 00 spike would not be detrimental to the structure. Service module vibration.- The SM was instrumented with nine accelerometers to measure vibrations of the aft helium tank mount in the X and radial directions, the aft bulkhead at the base of Sector I1 oxiLizer tank in the X, Y, and Z directions, the helium pressurization panel in the radial and tangential directions, and the SM engine dome in the longitudinal and radial directions. Accelerometer locations are shown in figure 7.2-ll and details of instrument location, range, and frequency response are given in table 7.2-1. Data from five of the nine measurements were not usable. Measurements Sx33240D, SKO241D, Sm42A, SKO243A, and SKO244A recorded such small response during the launch phase that data were within 6 d (a facB tor of 2 of the telemetry channel noise, causing a degradation of the ) data. The low frequency response of the telemetry channels (table 7.2-1) was a major cause of the small response measured, since the majority of vibratory energy was expected to occur at frequencies much higher than the available channel cutoff frequency.

7-31
The two most active vibration measurements in the SM were SK0245D and SK0246D, located on the SM helium pressurization panel in the radial and tangential directions, respectively. These measurements indicated maximum response during the transonic period from T+59 seconds to T+64 seconds. The acceleration spectral distribution of figure 7.2-12 indicates that the majority of vibratory energy in the radial direction w s in the frequency range of 600 cps to 8 0 cps. Figure 7.2-13 india 0 cates that the tangential vibration occurs at a predominant frequency of approximately 30 cps. The vibration levels for the transonic and supersonic maximum response periods fall considerably below the vibration criteria established during spacecraft 007 acoustic tests; however, this was to be expected since the spacecraft 007 measurement was mounted in the center of the panel, a region more susceptible to vibration than that of the spacecraft 009 measurement, which was mounted adjacent to a stiffener of radial beam 4. The SPS engine dome was instmunented with two accelerometers,
SKOWOD and SP1023D, to monitor the rough combustion of the SPS engine.

These data are used herein to evaluate the vibration induced into the SM and CM structure during SPS ignition and burn. Measurements SKOWOD and SP1023D, which measured vibration in the longitudinal and radial directions on the SPS engine dome, indicated maximum levels between T+gO seconds and T-t-92 seconds during atmospheric flight. Oscillograph records indicate peak-to-peak accelerations of 37.5g and 25g at this time period, respectively. These mgnitudes were also indicated during stable burn of the SPS engine. During transient SPS burn conditions, ignition acceleration values were 1&g and 200g peak-to-peak for the longitudinal and radial directions, respectively, with engine shutdown acceleratim d u e s of 50g and 62.5g peak-to-peak, 'Thevibration levels on the SPS engine are approximately the same as those experienced during ground tests and are considered normal. Analysis of the vibration data for the CM and SM during the SPS burn period showed no sisificant acceleration. Figure 7.2-14 presents the acceleration density of SP1023D for a maximum response during S-IB boost. These data indicate the vibration energy to be within a f'requency band of 175 cps to 275 cps, peaking at a frequency of appraxately 225 cps. In the time period from T+1323 seccmds to T+1325 seconds, during SPS burn, the vibration energy shifted to a higher frequency band of 750 cps to 2500 cps (fig. 7.2-15). Figures 7.2-14 and 7.2-15 show that the boost .6 period radial r m s acceleration on the SPS engine was 1 6 times that encountered during a stable burn of the SPS engine. Figure 7.2-16 illustrates the acceleration spectral density of SPS engine dome maximum longitudinal vibration during supersonic flight. These data indicate the vibratory energy in a frequency band of 150 cps to 350 cps, having an rms value of 4.6g. This value is approximately 1 6 times that of the . radial vibration durlng this period.

0

7-32

In general, t h e magnitude of a l l vibration data i n the S M i s low during the transonic, supersonic, and SPS burn periods. N s t r u c t u r a l o problems a r e anticipated from these low levels.
SLA vibrations.- Three accelerometers were located on the SLA t o measure r a d i a l vibration of t h e skin panels. Measurement locations are These accelerometers, AKW5OD, AK025U), and shown i n figure 7.2-17. AK0252D, were ranged rtlOOg with frequency responses of 160 cps, 220 cps, and 330 cps, respectively.

Time h i s t o r i e s ( r m s ) of s h e l l panel accelerations a r e given i n reference 1 These p l o t s show vibration trends s i m i l a r t o those of the . SM s h e l l panels of e a r l i e r f l i g h t s . hximum vibration l e v e l s occurred during the l i f t - o f f , transonic, and supersonic periods of the launch phase. Acceleration s p e c t r a l densities f o r the SLcl s h e l l panel vibrations a r e compared with panel vibration c r i t e r i a i n figures 7.2-18(a) t o 7 . 2 - 1 8 ( ~ ) f o r periods of l i f t - o f f , transonic, and supersonic f l i g h t , respectively. The SLA s h e l l panel vibration c r i t e r i a were based on res u l t s from t h e spacecraft 007 S acoustic tests and a r e representative M of average vibration l e v e l s expected on the SLA. The peak s p e c t r a l density l e v e l s a t l i f t - o f f exceeded the expected level A c r i t e r i a by a f a c t o r of 4.0. However, comparison of t h e l i f t - o f f l e v e l s with the l e v e l B c r i t e r i a of figure 7.2-18(b) shows t h a t the l e v e l B c r i t e r i a , although developed f o r the transonic condition, adequately encompasses the short duration l i f t - o f f levels. For the transonic period, t h e spacecraft 009 vibration l e v e l s were considerably lower than the l e v e l B c r i t e r i a and, i n f a c t , could be better represented by t h e l e v e l A c r i t e r i a w i t h t h e exception of t h e frequency range below 70 cps. For the supersonic period, t h e f l i g h t data were scaled t o a dynamic pressure of 790 lb/sq f t t o enable a d i r e c t comparison with the c r i t e r i a . Figure 7.2-18(~) shows spacecraft 009 peak s p e c t r a l density l e v e l s of 2 t o 2.5 times t h e level A c r i t e r i a ; however, agreement between the measured l e v e l s and t h e l e v e l A c r i t e r i a i s considered t o be reasonably good, since (1)EL very narrow f i l t e r band width was used i n the spacec r a f t 009 supersonic data reduction (a l a r g e r band width lowers t h e m peak values considerably), and (2) spacecraft 009 supersonic r s accelerations w e r e 50 t o 60 percent of the c r i t e r i a r s values over t h e f r e m quency range of t h e spacecraft 009 data. Based on spacecraft 009 data, updated environmental vibration c r i teria have been developed f o r the SLA s h e l l panels.

7-33

k

3
0

I
s

Q)

c,

B

I

I

e
.d

I

4
.A

P

k

+
l-3

rl
L d d

a
k
rl

.

c
G4
TI

a

.%

rn

7-35

NASA-S-66-62 09 MAY 6

SENSOR TIME SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER BW FILTER

LAO0 I 2A

.sso To 3.010
81.
CPS

SEC.

2.5000 C P S

SLICE R M S VALUE

. 0 a

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7.2-1.- Acceleration spectral density of Z-axis tower acceleration at lift-off, Mission AS-201.

7- 36

rl

0

cv
I

m

a

c

.= I

I )

I

hl

7- 37
NASA-S-66-62 11 MAY 6

'I
'I

/

t
I
I

- Forward bulkhead

Inner forward
s idewal I

222

CK0041D X c 3 0.832

-I

I

I 'Xc30.832
I Y0.5

CK0043D

I I I I
I

Y1.25

I

239.5

I

Figure 7.2-3.-

Command module inner structure accelerometer locations, Mission AS-201.

7- 38

cn

F

f N

.

E
m .Y

I

I 1

'

I \ I I /

,

7- 39

7-40
NASA-S-66-62 14 M A Y 6

SENSOR TIME SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER BW S L I C E R M S VALUE FILTER

C K0040D 90.500
2100. 5.0000
.957

TO CPS CPS

92.500 S E C

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7.2-5.Acceleration spectral density of CM inner structure forward maximum vi bration, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

NASA-S-66-62 15 M A Y 6

SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER BW S L I C E R M S VALUE FILTER

CK0041D 90.500 TO CPS

92.500 SEC

2100.
5.0000

CPS

3.808

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7 2-6. Accelerat i on s pectral density of CM inner structure of sidewall maximum vibration, Mission AS-201.

. -

7- 42
NASA-S-66-62 16 M A Y 6

SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER BW S L I C E R M S VALUE FILTER

CK0042D
90.510 T O 92.510 S E C . 2100.
5.0000

CPS

CPS

2.013

c.012

1500

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7.2-7.- Acceleration spectral density of CM inner structure aft bulkhead maximum vibration, Mission AS-201.

7-43

NASA-S-66-62 17 MAY 6

Figure 7.2-8.- Acceleration spectral density of lower equipment bay cable tray maximum vibration, Mission AS-201.

7-44 NASA-S-66-62 18 MAY 6

SENSOR T I M E SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER BW SLICE R M S VALUE FILTER

C KO04 I D
60.010

TO

62.010 SEC

2100.
5.0000
.956

CPS CPS

ul

a

3
(3

>
W

t u)
0

z

4 U
W

J

Iu
( 1

ul

0
W

z

I4 a W J

u
4

0

0 FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7.2-9.- Acceleration spectral density of CM inner structure aft sidewall vibration during transonic flight, Mission AS-201.

7-45
NASA-S-66-62 19 MAY 6

.10

l n

P

V

N

\

.Ol

m

.U

Y

>
Q)

.

l n

8

e
Y

V

l n

.f
0
Q)

c

L1

8

V

,001

,0001

Figure 7.2-10.- Comparison of CM inner structure maximum vibration with criteria, Mission AS-201.

7-46

9

> a

5
0
c\1 N

9

46
I

I

9

v ,

4 v ,
a z

7-47
NASA-S-66-622 1 MAY 6

SENSOR TIME SLICE LOW-PASS FILTER B W
S L I C E R M S VALUE

SK0245D

59.520

T O 62.519

SEC.

FILTER

790. C P S
5.0000 3.092

CPS

n u J
b

u)

> t
u)

W 0
J

z

U k

<

W L

u

m

U W

0

3

n

F R E Q U E N C Y , C PS

Figure 7.2-12.- Acceleration spectral density of SM helium pressurization panel radial vibration during transonic flight, Mission AS-2 01.

7-48 NASA-S-66-6222 MAY 6

SENSOR
TIME S L I C E
LOW-PASS

SK0246D 59.520 T O 62.519 S E C . 600. C P S
5.0000 C P S

FILTER

F I L T E R BW SLICE R M S VALUE

3.612

m

x
b

a

L
W

t

-

m z

0
J

4 U

I -

0

z

W
J W

FREQUENCY, CPS

Figure 7.2-13.-

Acceleration spectral density of SM helium pressurization panel tangential vi bration during transonic flight, Mission AS-201.

7-49 NASA-S-66-6223

MAY 6

SENSOR
T I M E SLICE

SPI 023D
90.510

TO

92.500 S E C

LOW*PASS
FILTER BW

FILTER

2100. C P S 5.0221 C P S 2.976

S L I C E R M S VALUE

Figure 7.2-14.- Acceleration spectral density of maximum SPS engine dome, radial vibration, during supersonic flight, Mission AS-201.

7-50

NASA-S-66-6224 MAY 6

SENSOR
TIME SLICE LOW-PASS

9 P 10230

1323
2100.

TO

1325 S E C

FILTER

'cps
CPS

F l L T E R BW
S L I C E R M S VALUE

5.0000 1.796

FREQUENCY. C P S

Figure 7.2-15.- Acceleration spectral density of SPS engine dome radial vibration during SPS burn, Mission AS-201.

7-51
NASA-S-66-6225 MAY 6

SENSOR

SK0020D
9 0 . 5 0 0 TO 92.500 S E C .

T I M E SLICE
LOW-PASS FILTER BW S L I C E R M S VALUE FILTER

2100.

CPS

5.0000 C P S

4.577

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7.2-16.- Acceleration spectral density of maximum SPS engine dome longitudinal vi bration during supersonic flight, Mission AS-201.

7-52

8

'

W
.n
v)

&

L

u o o u
m u

c .Y VI

E
I

4 w l
d h

I

N h '

a
W l

4

z

7-53
NASA-S-66-6227 MAY 6

10

.o

-0 1

0;

100
Frequency, cps
(a) Lift-off.

1000

5 000

Figwe 7.2-18.- Comparison of SLA shell panel vibration with criteria, Mission AS-201.

7-54
NASA-S-66-6228 MAY 6

Frequency, cps

(b) Transonic flight.
Figure 7.2-18.-

Continued.

7-55
NASA-S-66-6229 MAY 6

1. 00

2 0
\

1.0

N*

2 .In
Y
C
-0

e
Y

aJ

0

aJ

n

u)

e aJ aJ

.-

C 0

Y

9

0

.10

.OL

10
I

I

I

100
Frequency, cps

1000

5000

(c) Supersonic flight.
Figure 7.2-18.-

Concluded.

7-56

7 3 Heat Transfer .
The thermal environment of the Mission AS-201launch trajectory
has been evaluated as pertains to the service module (SM) and the spacecraft - L E M adapter (SLA) The heating parameters were close to

those predicted for the nominal mission trajectory. The thermal environment was measured by temperature sensors located on the SM and SLA in areas which would best show longitudinal and circumferential temperature variations. This instrumentation measured both the inner and outer skin temperatures, and internal temperatures from lift-off through S-IVB/CSM separation at T 8 . +&9 seconds, and to CM/SM separation at T+1455 seconds. In the following evaluation of temperatures, the discussion is limited to a representative number of significant temperature locations through the launch phase to about W O seconds, which is the only phase significant for launch heating. 3 O However, data beyond the launch phase are currently being evaluated. Service module temperatures. Figure 7.3-1 shows the distribution of peak temperatures measured on the S outer skin during launch. TherM mocouple locations were chosen to present a circumferential temperature distribution and a longitudinal temperature distribution as indicated. The maximum launch temperature of 200" F was measured at longitudinal station Xs350 at 253" from the +X axis at T+l3O seconds. This high temperature is believed to be the result of shock impingement from nearby reaction control subsystem (RCS) quad A . flow past the The low temperatures of 100" to 110" F measured for sensors SA7904T, SA7906T, SA7907T, SA791V, and SA7918T located close to RCS quad A were the result of the protection afforded by the cork insulation on the SM surface around the quad and also due to the fact that the quad A engines did not function on this flight. (See section 7.9.) The cork protection covered the SM surface around each RCS quad for protection against plume impingement during RCS engine firing. Since quad A did not fire during the mission, there are no thermocouple data to indicate the effectiveness of the cork insulation. Figure 7.3-2 shows peak launch temperatures measured on the SM as a function of longitudinal distance along the SM surface in two rehtively smooth surface areas. The data indicate little longitudinal temperature variation in either area, although the peak temperatures for the area between -Y and -Z appear to be generally higher than the peak temperatures between -Z and +Y. Figure 7.3-3 shows peak launch temperatures measured on the SM as a function of circumferential location. Because of the programed pitch

.

-

7-57
of the launch vehicle, the area of highest boost heating (assuming a smooth body) was expected along the -Z axis. The data in figure 7.3-3 indicate little circumferential variation, with somewhat higher temperatures near the -Y axis.
A s predicted, the internal. temperatures in the SM aft bulkhead,

SA7931T and SA7914T, did not exceed 80" F. Sensors SA791CYI' and SA7972T on the inner surface of the SM skin did not exceed 150°.F,as shown in figure 7.3-4.
Preflight temperature predictions for sensors SA79llT and SA79m (Xs230 and 236"), outer and inner, respectively, were performed based

on the maximum aerodynamic heating launch trajectory and were found to be slightly higher than the measured flight data. Postflight temperature predictions for sensors SA79LLT and SA7912T, based on the actual launch trajectory and launch pressures which were obtained from windtunnel tests, are shown in figure 7.3-4 as the solid symbols and are compared to the measured values. The sensors, since they were in smooth areas away from major protuberances, were believed to be typical of the ) average SM outer skin temperature (160" F . A s can be seen, good agreement exists between the measured and predicted values.
Spacecraft - LEM adagter temperatures.- Figure 7.3-5 shows the distribution of peak temperatures measured on the SLA outer skin during launch. The maxirmun temperature of 280" F was measured by sensor AA7937T (XA775 and 304") at Wl5O seconds. Outer skin temperatures were as low as 80" F for sensor AA7934T located at XA597.2 and 5". All outer skin measurements aft of xA610 show maximum temperatures below U.0" F .
These lower temperatures were the result of the protection afforded by

the cork insulation on the surface of the SLA in this area and which covered these temperature sensors. The lower peak temperatures measured at xA820 were possibly the result of the sensors being located in the potting compound on the pyrotechnic mild detonating m e .

AA7936T, and AA7938T, did not exceed 130" F .

Temperatures on the inner surface of the SL4 skin, sensors AA7932T,

Figure 7.3-6 shows measured time histories for typical SLA sensors AA7931T and AA7932T. Temperature predictions were prepared, utilizing the actua3 spacecraft OOg launch trajectory and pressures obtained from wind-tunnel data. These predictions are shown as the solid symbols of figure 7.3-6 for outer skin temperature AA7931T and inner skin temperature AA7932T. As can be seen, good agreement exists between the predictions and actual for about the first 150 seconds from lift-off, but not during the cool-darn portion of the curve which assumes radiation

7-58
t o space. It has been determined that as the spacecraft pitched over t o a f l i g h t - p t h angle of 24.52' a t S-IB cutoff, and later t o a f l i g h t path angle of 4.13' at CSM/S-IVB separation, the SM +Z axis (90') was pointed up. A t launch t i m e , about 1 :12 a.m. e. s. t., the sun was al1 most overhead and was radiating t o the +Z axis. Since sensor AA7932.T was located a t U ' 4 , further analysis of the cool-down portion of the a n a l y t i c s l investigation w i l l now include the e f f e c t s of s o l a r heating based on the programed launch azimuth, flight-path angle, and longitude of the spacecraft.

Prediction of inner skin temperature was correct t o within 20" F and conservative. The conservatism i n the predicted inner skin temperature is believed t o be l a r g e l y due t o the omission of consideration of heat exchange with the i n t e r i o r environment.
The S and SLA temperatures measured on spacecraft 009 were w e n M within t h e i r design values and thermally qualify these structures f o r future Saturn IB missions.

7- 59
In In

m
S

-“P7

a
m
cu
9
I

3

I

5
0

? 9
v)

J t n
I
0

4 v,
a z

In

0 0

0

In

0

0

-

p

7-60

NASA-S-66-623 1 MAY 6

240

200

160

12 0

80

a
- Y I i J - + V

40

0 2 00

240

280

320

360

4(

Longitudinal location Xs, in.

Figure 7.3-2 Longitudinal variation of peak temperatures measured on the service module surface during launch on Mission AS-201.

.-

7-61
NASA-S-66-6232 M A Y 6

Y

f

.

E c

! i

0

90

iao

270

Circumferent i a 1 locat ion, deg Figure 7.3-3.- Circumferential variation of peak temperatures measured on service module surface during launch on Mission AS-201.

7-62

0

m

N

a J
N

0

T m

0 U

N

s
ln

K

a J

I n

0
0
N
0

%
a
0

-3
W

E .Y
ln m

.

m 0 N
r(

0

a 3

I.

P m
b

9
0

m m

N

?
0 U

0

7-63

9

m
N
I

U

9 9

Y l n
I

v ,

Q

2

7-64

o*

M

N
h

c’

a a

E m

I

.ri
9
rn .LI
S

1 ’ I C
2

M

In

N

9
v)

? ?

0
Q)

0
0

3

cu

0 9
r(

0 N
rl

0
a )

N

s

j ‘arnieradual ,

7-65
7.4 Heat Protection
Descri tion.- The thermal protection subsystem protects the command m o d u l h r structure from the heat associated with reentry into the earth's atmosphere. This protection is accomplished by a planned degradation of the ablative heat shield in addition to insulation between the inner and outer structure. On spacecraft 009 the ablative heat shield consisted of epoxy novalac, phenolic microballoons, glass fiber, and hardeners mixed into a mastic and injected into a 3/8-inch phenolic honeycomb which was bonded to a brazed stainless steel honeycomb substructure. The conical section of the CM heat shield was attached to the inner structure by a floating stringer mechanism which allowed the outer structure to expand and contract with temperature changes, independent of inner structure expansion. Insation type Q-felt was used between the inner and outer structure under the crew compartment heat shield on spacecraft 009 in place of the TGl5OOO insulation which will be used on subsequent spacecraft. Figure 7.4-1 shows the configuration of the CM, including a typical section of the thermal protection system in the crew compartment heat shield area. A . typical section of the thermal protection system in the aft heat shield .-. area is indicated in figure 7 4 2 Except for the windows and vents, t h CM outer structure was completely covered with ablative material. ie Ibe ablator varied in thickness over the CMto satisfy design heating distribution. A typical ablator thickness distribution is shown in .'gr 7 4 3 fiue . - . The spacecraft 009 heat shield was originally designed for the :Lunar return using design trajectories HSE-3 and HSE-6 and the capsule oriented at an angle of attack of 33". Because of the changes in the design angle of attack, the thicknesses for the operational. Block I heat shield ablator had to be increased in several areas. The updated heat shield configuration will be flown on spacecraft 011, Spacecraft 012, and spacecraft 0 4 Changes from the spacecraft 009 configuration to 1. the updated heat shield configuration w i l l include the following: (a) Increased ablator thicknesses on the leeward side of the crew compartment (b) Increased ablator thicknesses around the aft heat shield rihear compression and compression pads

-

(c) Increased abbtor thicknesses on the aft heat shield, upstream of the umbilical.
T

Performance.- A first-order objective of the spacecraft 009 mission to evaluate the performance of the heat shield ablator during a high S heating rate atmospheric reentry. The mission was to s e m a double ]?urpose:
~

7-66
( a ) To evaluate and verify the heat shield design methods, which i n connection w i t h f u t u r e heat shield evaluation f l i g h t s ( S C - O n , SC-017, SC-020) w i l l be used t o qualify the Block I1 heat shield f o r manned lunar return f l i g h t s .
(b) To quality the Block I thermal protection subsystem f o r high heating rate type manned e a r t h o r b i t a l reentries.

The evaluation of the heat shield performance i s defined as the determination of t h e response of the ablator and i t s components t o t h e reentry environment. It requires the definition of both the a c t u a l reentry environment and t h e a b l a t o r performance as a function of reentry t i m e , and comparison of t h e t e s t r e s u l t s w i t h predictions f o r the a c t u a l ree n t r y trajectory. It w i l l allow v e r i f i c a t i o n of the design methods o r may require t h e i r modification. Based on the calculated reentry t r a j e c t o r y conditions (see sections 5 and 6) the a c t a maximum heating rate
w a s approximately 164 Btu/f% /sec as compared w i t h t h e minimum require2

ment of 160 Btu/ft2/sec

(188 Btu/ft2/sec, nominal).

Complete evaluation of the heat shield was not possible since t e m peratures and heating data were l o s t during the time of predicted peak heating and before.the a b l a t o r could show a s i g n i f i c a n t response t o the heating environment. Detailed evaluation of t h e heat protection subsyst e m was therefore confined t o the short t i m e period a t the s t a r t of ree n t r y and the last 100 seconds before landing. However, a measure of the overall performance of the heat shield has been obtained by using t h e o r e t i c a l heating rates f o r the calculated reentry trajectory, and comparing the char penetration predicted t o that measured from core Samples taken from the heat s h i e l d . Figures 7.4-4 and 7.4-5 indicate the location of temperature measurements, and table 7.4-1 shows the location of t h e a f t heat shield cores measured.
A f t compartment heat shield: The a f t heat shield ablator was Around t h e umbilical, the charred a l l over, as predicted ( f i g . 7.4-6). compression pads, t h e shear - compression pads, and t h e 59 plugs on the b o l t c i r c l e , there was l i t t l e evidence of erosion although protuberance heating patterns around the umbilical, shear compression, and compression pads were c l e a r l y visible.

-

The three tension t i e rods were melted flush w i t h the pad surface, and, i n the area where the three t i e rods penetrated t h e a f t heat shield, scorching o r burning appeared t o extend through t o the substructure. Postflight examination of the rod area and heat shield i n s t a l l a t i o n procedures indicated that t h e room t e m p e r a t u r e vulcanizing sealant (RTV) between the marinite insulation sleeves and the heat shield had been omitted, presenting channels open t o the f l a w of hot gases ( f i g . 7.4-2).

7-67
A comparison of predicted a b l a t o r temperature response i n in-depth a b l a t o r temperatures i s shown i n f i g u r e 7.4-7. A l l recorded temperature data a r e p r e s e n t e d . A s can be seen from t h e f i g u r e , t h e a b l a t o r tempera t u r e response during r e e n t r y was recorded i n some cases f o r times l e s s t h a n 60 seconds and i n no case f o r longer t h a n 82 seconds. A comparison of p r e d i c t e d and measured char depth and d i s c o l o r a t i o n (600"F i s o t h e r m ) a t s e l e c t e d l o c a t i o n s i s shown i n t a b l e 7.4-1. ( A l s o s e e f i g . 7.4-8. ) A reasonable c o r r e l a t i o n i s shown f o r t h e char and d i s c o l o r a t i o n depth p r e d i c t i o n s . I n general, t h e f i n a l p o s i t i o n o f t h e isotherms which correspond t o char and d i s c o l o r a t i o n have been p r e d i c t e d with a s l i g h t degree of conservatism; it i s t h e r e f o r e considered t h a t no g r o s s d e f i c i e n c y e x i s t s i n t h e o v e r a l l a b i l i t y t o a s s e s s t h e adequacy of t h e thermal p r o t e c t i o n system f o r a given e n t r y . A comparison of p r e d i c t e d and measured s u r f a c e r e c e s s i o n i s a l s o given i n t a b l e 7.4-1. The s u r f a c e r e c e s s i o n measurements which were made on t h e core samples should be considered a c c u r a t e only t o +O.l5 inches and -0.05 i n inches because t h e o r i g i n a l t h i c k n e s s was a p p l i e d t o an accuracy o f +0.1 inch and -0.0 inch, and t h e p o s t f l i g h t measurements were made t o an accuracy of ~ 0 . 0 5inch. Measured and p r e d i c t e d d a t a f o r t h e c o r e s a r e shown i n f i g u r e 7.4-9, as a c o r r e l a t i o n with t o t a l h e a t a t each l o c a t i o n .

depth

A t 271, t h e measured temperatures (during i n i t i a l h e a t up), measured c'har depths, and d i s c o l a r a t i o n depths a l l exceed p r e d i c t e d v a l u e s . This c m l d i n d i c a t e t h a t t h i s l o c a t i o n (near t h e s t a g n a t i o n h e a t i n g a r e a ) r e ceived more h e a t t h a n p r e d i c t e d based on wind-tunnel h e a t i n g r a t e d i s t , r i b u t i o n s . Other l o c a t i o n s a t Z 7 l , Y39, and Y71 i n d i c a t e a uniform c m s e r v a t i s m i n p r e d i c t i o n f o r temperature, char depth, and d i s c o l o r a t i o n dc2pth.

The remaining high temperature thermocouples a t o t h e r l o c a t i o n s on
the a f t h e a t s h i e l d (see r e f . 1) d i d not respond for t h e following reasons:

( a ) The high range (2000" F t o 5000" F ) thermocouples d i d n o t res:?ond because of l o s i n g emf bias.
( b ) The high range (-looo F t o 3000" F ) thermocouples l o s t t h e i r i:nsulative q u a l i t i e s t o t h e h i g h temperature and were i n a c c u r a t e a f t e r reaching 1400" F because of o x i d a t i o n .

The remainder of t h e thermocouples experienced no temperature r i s e p:rior t o l o s i n g t h e emf b i a s .

7-68
Crew compartment heat shield: As a result of having to burn off the propellants for both the A and B systems of the CM reaction control subsystem (RCS) through the A system engines for the propellant depletion burn, the crew compartment heat-shield ablator adjacent to the A system r o l l engines experienced greater than normal charring and erosion. This effect is attributable to the plume impingement of the r o l l engines and the accompanying turbulence, along with the extended b u m time. The maximum char depth occurred i the ablator material immedin ately below the intersection of the A system r o l l engine extensions. The maximum depth measured w s 0.75 inch, which exposed the stainless steel a honeycomb substructure of the crew compartment heat shield. This stainless steel structure was discolored but there was no evidence of subsequent degradation of either the cabin aluminum honeycomb structure or of the heat shield stainless steel honeycomb structure (see fig. 7.4-10). Figure 7.4-11 shows surface char on the windward side, and only scorched paint around the conical section protuberances on the leeward side. The umbilical wires that extended approximately 1 inch in front of the umbilical after besevered were melted flush with the face. Thermocouples located in depth in the crew compartment heat shield had not responded at 'the time of loss of recorded data. Results of the evaluation of the limited amount of ablator performance data indicated that fair to good agreement was obtained. The heat shield performed well during the mission and, since the reentry heating rates exceeded those predicted for mvlned earth orbital reentries, the Block I heat shield is now qualified for high heating rate (non-decay) type reentries from low earth orbits.

a

7-69

7-70

9

t

a
5

9

m

N

? 9
9
I

-

I
o_
-c
W
W .-

l

v)
v)

4

VI

a z

4 m

I

7-71
NASA-S-66-6237 MAY 6

substructure 1 Figure 7.4-2.-

CM/SM shear compression pad and tension t i e
Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

- Block I type,

7- 72

NASA-S-66-6238 MAY 6

+z

2.0

+X

Wi

. 7

Ablative material

Note: All dimensions are in inches

Figure 7.4-3.-

CM ablator thickness distribution, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

7- 73
NASA-S-66-6239 MAY 6

CA 09 6 OT CA0961T CA0962T CA0963T CA0964T CA0965T

CA0978T - C A 0 9 8 1T CA0982T CA1020T CA1026T CA1027T CAlOOlT CA1002T CA1003T .CA 1004T

CA1381T

+Y

-

CA 1015T CA 10 16T

rCA1032T I

0"

27 0"
Figure 7.4-4.- Aft heat shield ablator measurement locations, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

7- 74

a I
0

7-75

K .O

in
VI

z i

. I

7-76

UNCLASSIFI€D

UNCLASS1Ft ED

7- 77
3600

-- - 3200
TC depth -Z
inches

Actual -Predicted

Remarks
No data No' data As shown As shown As shown No change No change

2800

2400

0.05 0.15 0.35 0.60 1.10 1.60 Bond line

2000

5.
? !
c1 3

1600

6 i 1200

800

400

0

100

2 00

300

400

5 00

600

700

Time from reentry (400k f t ) 8 sec

(a) Station 271, YO.
Figure 7.4-7.-

Aft heat shield measurements8 Mission AS-201.

7- 78
NASA-S-66-6244 MAY 6

3600

3200

I I I I I
I I I
I

I

I I

+Z

Actual -----Predicted

-Z

TC depth
inches

Remarks

2800

0.05

As shown
As shown

0.20 0.40
Bondline

As shown

2400

I I I

I

No change

I
2000
L I
0

Ii

3 r - 0 5

E 3
-I .

h
9.

1600

I -

6
12 00

800

4 00

I

I

I

I

I

I

1

0

100

2 00

300

400

500

600

700

Time from reentry (400k ft), sec

(b) Station

ZO, YO.
Continued.

Figure 7.4-7.-

7-79
NASA-S-66-6245 MAY 6

I

I

I I I I I I I I

- - --Z
TC depth
inches

Actual Predicted

Remarks As shown As shown As shown No change

I I
I I I I I

0.05 0.20 0.40
Bondline

I

I

I

I ?05

I I I I I I
I I
400
I

J 1 1 I
1
1

\
' \

\

1
\
\
\

IJ*2Q\\

t 1

.40

I

1

1

0

100

200

300

400

5 00

600

700

Time from reentry (400k ft), sec (c) Station 2-71, YO. Figure 7.4-7.Continued.

7- 80
3600

I

I I
3200

- --+Y

Actual Predicted

I

I
I I I I
-Z
T C depth
inches Remarks

2800

I

I I
2400

0.05 0.20 0.40
Bondline

I I

As shown As shown As shown No change

2000

I

I

I,

5
L
4A

W 3

2

8

1600

E l 1200

800

400

I
I,

I

I

I

I

I

I

I

0

100

2 00

300

400

500

600

700

Time frorn reentry (400k ft), sec
(d) Station Zo, Y 3 9 . Figure 7.4-7.Continued.

7- 81
NASA-S-66-6247 MAY 6 360(

+Z

I
320C

--TC depth
inches

Actua I Predicted

I I I I I I I I

I

I
-Z

I

Remarks

2800

0.05 0.20
0.40 Bondline

As shown As shown As shown
No change

2400

I ;\.05

2000

1600

I \

12 00

800

I

\

400

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

Time from reentry ( 4 0 0 k ft), sec (e) Station ZO, Y71. Figure 7.4-7.Concluded.

7- 82

I !
t
ut
cl
(It

.-

01

m

h

%

e

E 1 01 i i

a

7- 83
NASA-S-66-6249 MAY 6

.6

600°F core depth U 1000°F core depth

A
2 7 1 2-71 ZO

Core surface recession Predicted

I -

. 5

Y39 Y71

.4

S .-

g
Q

.3

n

aJ

.2

.1

0
5

6

7

8

9

Total heat, btu/ft Figure 7.4-9.-

Aft heat shield core measurements, Mission AS-201.

7- 85

1-86

7-88
7.5
Mechanical Subsystems

Summary.- Components of the mechanical subsystems flown on Mission AS-201 included the canard subsystem, the uprighting subsystem, the deployment mechanisms for the recovery aids, the latching mechanisms for the side ablative, side pressure, and forward pressure hatches, a modified latching mechanism for the astro-sextant door, and an interim design latching mechanism for the boost protective cover ( B E ) hatch. A l l components performed satisfactorily. The following paragraphs describe each component and its performance.

Subsystems description and performance.Canard subsystem: Mission AS-201was the fifth mission to use the canard subsystem. This subsystem consisted of two deployable aerodynamic surfaces located between the forward end of the tower-jettison motor and the Q,-ballassembly. A detailed description of the system is . presented in references 6 a d 7 Since the launch-escape subsystem was not utilized in an abort mode during this mission, the canard subsystem w s not required t o function. a Uprighting subsystem: Mission AS-201was the first mission to have an uprighting subsystem. The subsystem insures a proper flotation attin tude of the command module (CM) after Landing. A Apollo spacecraft is subject to floating in either of two trim attitudes: apex up (stable I) The stable I1 or apex down (stable 11) as shown in figure 7.5-l(a). attitude is unsatisfactory from the standpoint of recovery-aids performance, sea pickup; and for manned missions, crew safety, crew tasks, and postlanding ventilation. The uprighting subsystem is required to upright the command module to the stable I'attitude if the command module should overturn because of i m p a c t dynamics or sea dynamics. The subsystem is not activated for spacecraft 009 unless the stable I1 position is sensed by an attitude switch in the postlanding sequence controller (PISC)

.

The uprighting subsystem consists of three inflatable air bags stared in two rigid metal canisters on the upper deck of the command module (figs. 7.5-l(b), 7.5-2, and 7.5-3). The design criterion requires that any two of the three bags when inflated must upright the command module. The bags are inflated by a motor-driven compressor located between the inner and outer structure in the aft compartment. Spacecraft 009 had only one compressor (near the +Y axis) as sham in figure 7.5-4. All subsequent spacecraft w i l l have a second compressor also located in the aft compartment near the -Y axis. Also, the compressor case on spacecraft OOg was water-sealed externally with RTV; subsequent compressors will have internal. seals.

7-89
On EI.ssion AS-201, the command module maintained the stable I a t t i tude m e r landing, and therefore the uprighting subsystem was not a c t i vated. Postflight inspection revealed no damage from contact w i t h the earth landing subsystem (ELS) during parachute deployment. Also, the canisters remained latched and intact during f l i g h t and a t landing.
Recovery aids deployment mechanisms: The deployment mechanisms f o r the postlanding recwery aids consisted of those used t o deploy the VHF and H antennas, the flashing l i g h t , and t h e sea dye marker/swimmer F umbilical. All the mechanisms operated properly. The deployment mechanisms for the antennas and flashing l i g h t were identical. Each w a s activated by a pyrotechnic cutter (section 7.10) actuated by means of a Lanyard attached t o the parachute riser. When the main p a c h u t e s were deployed, the lanyard pull caused the activation of the 8-second time-delay cutter device, which released the springU operated deployment mechanisms. The deployment springs used on M sion AS-201were of current Block I configuration which are stronger than the interim springs used on Mission A-004. The antennas and flashing l i g h t were located i n t h e forward compartment as indicated i n figure 7.5-2. Postflight inspection of the antennas and flashing l i g h t confirmed that a l l hsd erected as planned, and examination of the mechanisms revealed no indication of damage during the flight o r a t landing. Signals were received From both VHF antennas a f t e r deployment on spacecraft 009. "he flashing l i g h t as observed by the recovery forces was operating satisfactorily. Analysis of photographic coverage during recovery operations revealed that the l i g h t had a gross average flash rate of 12 flashes per minute, 2 t o 3 hours a f t e r landing.
The sea dye marker/swimmer mbilicaJ. deployment mechanism consisted of a rectangular canister which was spring loaded on a deployment platform located i n the -Z bay of the CM upper deck (fig. 7.5-5). The seadye cake, contained in the canister, was not the present Block I cake. "he Block I cake is required t o last 12 hours after deployment, whereas the interim design cake used on spacecraft 009 would have lasted approxiroately 7 hours. The interim cake consisted of fluorescein dye with binder which was molded w i t h i n a nylon mesh and then wrapped w i t h water-

@

'

soluble polyvinyl alcohol. I n order t o obtain a ?-hour l i f e f o r the cake on spacecraft 009, many of the water-exposure holes in the canister were blocked by a shroud. The deployment mechanism latch w s triggered by a lanyard that was a pulled when the HF antenna was erected a f t e r landing. The canister was deployed overboard by redundant springs but remained attached t o the CM by a cable which included the swimmer telephone unibilical. Photographs taken from a i r c r a f t during recovery indicated that the size and color of

7-90
t h e s l i c k formed by t h e sea dye marker were a s planned. of t h e dye marker was not determined. Side a b l a t i v e hatch-latching mechanism:
The l i f e t i m e

The s i d e a b l a t i v e hatch

is located on t h e -Z si6e of the outer s t r u c t u r e of t h e CM conical surface. The hatch l a t c h e s must retaj.n the hrtch i n place t o maintain t h e i n t e g r i t y of t h e s t r u c t u r e and heet; s h i e l d ablator. A d e t a i l e d descript i o n i s presented i n section 5.5 of reference 9. The hzrdware w s of a a Block I design and was similar t o t h a t used on Mission A-004.
"he s i d e a b l a t i v e hatch-latching mechanism performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y on t h i s f l i g i i t i n t h a t t h e mechaisn r e t a i r e d the hatch in place during f l i g h t and w s operable a f t e r landing. P r e f l i g h t torque required t o a l a t c h t h e mechanism was not recorded, but d i f f i c u l t y w a s encountered during i n s t a l l a t i o n . The hatch edges had t o be physically pushed in as t h e
mechanism was latched. Postlanding torque required t o unlatch t h e mecha n i s m was 400 in-lb. The maximum operating torque should be 260 i n - l b t o e i t h e r l a t c h o r unlatch t h e mechaism.
Side pressure hatch-latching mechanism: The s i d e pressure hatch is located on t h e -Z s i d e of t h e CM and r e l i e s on t h e inside cabin pressure for t h e ffhard" seal against t h e CM inner s t r u c t u r e . The hatch is held in place by machined edge members on t h r e e s i d e s and a l a t c h / r e l e a s e mechanism on t h e remaining side. A d e t a i l e d description i s presented i n s e c t i o n 5.5 of reference 9. The hardware w a s a Block I design and was similar t o t h a t used on Nissioii A 4 0 4 except for the pinion gear as discussed i n the following paragraphs. The s i d e p r e s s w e hatch-latching mechanism performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y f o r t h i s mission i n t h a t the hatch remained latched during f l i g h t and released s a t i s f a c t o r i l y using t h e ground handling unit.

Before f l i g h t , lead tape had been applied ta a l l the hatch edges to eliminate gaps between the hatch-seal s:srface and frame-seal surface s o that an acceptable leak r a t e could be maintained around t h e hatch. Several of t h e pinion gear tee;.-i;h t h e hatch-latching mechanism 02 i n i t i a l l y i n s t a l l e d on t h e hstch were broken o f f during p r e f l i g h t ground handling ( f i g . 7.5-6). Because a n s l y s i s indicated t h a t a replacement pinion of t h e same material could present a. s i m i l a r problem during t h e f i n a l hatch i n s t a l l e t i o n of t h e launch countdown, t h e drive unit/pinion gear was replaced with the more ruggedly designea ground-handling drive unit. A new desi@ w i l l be incorporated on spacecraft O and subsequent n spacecraft. P r e f l i g h t torque required t o l z t c h t h e mechanism was not recorded; but t h e mechanism required a t o r q w g r e a t e r than 600 in-lb t o unlatch a t recovery. The exact torque 1-init 3f t h e mechanism with t h e groundhandling u n i t was not known, but vzs considered t o be g r e a t e r than

7-91
1000 in-lb. The hatch was reinstalled and then r e m m d a second time; both operations required 300 in-lb of torque.

Forward pressure hatch-latching mechanism: The forward pressure hatch was located at the top of the tunnel on the upper deck of the CM. The hatch-latching mechanism locked the hatch in position to maintain the structural and pressure-seal integrity of the pressure vessel throughout the mission. The hatch provided a pressure seal seated by means of a breech lock configuration. A bolt-type looking mechanism retained the hatch against rotation and disengagement during the flight. Astro-sexlxnt door mechanism: The astro-sextant door mechanism of the comand module was designed to Latch and deploy the doors during manned missions. However, for Mission A - 0 , only the latches were S21 used, and these were not &quirea to be ,operableat any time during the flight. The two Latches satisfactorily held the doors in place during the flight.
'BPC hatch-latching mechanism: The B E hatch-latching mechanism hardware flown on Mission AS-201was an interim design not intended for use on future spacecraft. No amrent problems occurred during flight with this configuration although during the preflight installation of the hatch, two of the multiple fasteners (of a quarter-turn, quick operating design) at the .hatch top broke loose and caused a small (1/8 inch) protrusion of the upper hatch edge for a length of approximately 6 inches. For flight, this protrusion was cwered with three strips of tape.

7- 92
NASA-S-66-6254 M A Y 6
Stable

I

Stable

II

(a) CM stable flotation attitudes.

,A
Upper deck

-Z
Single canister (1 bag) Double canister

( 2 bags)
+Z

(b) Location of air bags, stowed and deployed. Figure 7.5-1.-

CM

uprighting subsystem, Block I, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

7-93

2 0
f 0

v)

.

E

n

0
0

E

7-94

E
U

a ,

e
2

m A m

VI
S
0-l

I

9

E
9
N

Q

>

rn

9 9
v,
I

?

z

a

v,

4

7-93

NASA-S-66-6258 MAY 6

Figure 7.5-5,-

Sea dye marker canister and mechanism, Mission AS-201.

7- 97

7-98
7.6
Earth Landing and Impact Attenuation Subsystems

7.6.1 Earth landing subsystem.Description: The earth landing subsystem ( E M ) used on this mission was of the same configuration as that flown on Mission A-004 and is described in the Mission A-004 Postlaunch Report (ref. 9 ) . The exceptions to a Block I configuration are tabulated below: Item Drogue reefing line cutter lanyard knot Pilot parachute mortar lid Pilot parachute deployment bag
Main parachute riser

Kission AS-201

Block I Chinese finger Expended Dacron felt sleeve over nylon bag Dacron felt boot High temperature
nylon (Nomex) flaps

Two half-hitches
Retained Nylon None Nylon

loop end boot W i n parachute retention flaps

with dacron felt liner

Operation of the E S for Mission AS-201 was based on earth landing I sequence controller (ELSC) baroswitch and logic functions. ELS functions are sequenced through two redundant ELSC's with crossover provided for all events except main parachute harness disconnect. Performance: As planned for Mission AS-201 normal reentry recovery mode, closure of the high altitude baroswitches initiated logic power to the mission sequencer for initiation of forward-heat-shield jettison, and to the E I S C system A, starting the ELSC 2-second time-delay relay. Forward-heat-shield jettison occurred at ~1853.65seconds, and drogue mortar fire was initiated after the ELSC 2-second time delay at T+1855.4 seconds. Drogue disconnect and pilot mortar fire were simultaneously initiated by closure of the low-altitude baroswitches at Iulg08.4 seconds. 'Ianding occurred at ' l 2 3 . seconds. lt297 PkLn parachute hamess leg no. I disconnect was initiated at touch! down by the EL8 impact inertia switch through ELSC system A Hamess .

7-99
leg no. 2 was not disconnected because no logic parer had been received by ELSC system B (see section 7.12). Crossover circuitry for main parachute harness disconnect is not provided in order to preclude inadvertent disconnect of both harness legs prior to landing.
EIS event times were obtained from bilevel event data. No v i s u a l , optical, or rad&r reference data were available to evaluate ELS performance prior to landing.

A qualitative judgment was made of the spacecraft ELS dynamic performR.nce by analyzing the amount of contact between components of the ELS and the spacecraft upper deck structure. Absence of marks from drogue cable risers on the tunnel lip hdicated that the spacecraft was in the favorable attitude of aft heat-shield-forward at the time of drogue parachute deployment. Minimal contact of the main parachute harness legs with the drogue mortar cans and absence of evidence of undue abrasion on the main parachute deployment bags, uprighting system canisters, longerons, or tunnel a l s o indicated a favorable attitude of a % heat-shield-forward at the time of main parachute deployment. f

All EIS components appear to have functioned properly and the EIS succes8fWJ.y landed the spacecraft. The drogue and main parachutes were not recovered (see section 9.3).
7.6.2
~mpa attenuation subsystemct

Description: The Block I type impact attenuation subsystem used in Mssion AS-201was of the same configuration as reported in referexcept for the deletion of the lockout devices ence 9 for Missiau A & on the four X-X struts. Lockout devlces are provided on manned flights to prevent strut stroking under inflight loads and vibrations and to a l l o w stroking to occur at lawer accelerations on lasding. Lockout devices were used on the unmanned ab& Hission A-004 becauee the high pallet weight, when combined with expected high tumbling and landing accelerations, could result in loads that would stroke the unrmnned st&.,lFor Mission AS-201, spacecraft 009 had a p a l l e t weighing 540 pounds and was qualified for a 20g reentry and landing load. The strut stroking load for the unmmned X-X and Z-Z struts on spacecraft OOg was developed through the crushing of aluminum honeycomb and a fkiction device as illustrated in figure 7.6-1 and could operate in either tension or compression. The Y-Y strut load on spacecraft 009 was developed by the crushing of aluminum honeycomb alone, and operated only in compression.

7-100

me operation and attenuation capacity of the struts i s indicated by the load stroke curves (fig. 7.6-2) as follows: The initial stroking load, f o r e i t h e r the X-X o r Z-Z struts, i s developed by core crushi n g and f r i c t i o n . A s long as a sufficient load is present t h e ' s t r o k i n g in the applicable direction continues. If t h e vehicle were overturned, putting t h e load on t h e struts i n t h e opposite direction, t h e r e t u r n load would be provided only by the f r i c t i o n device u n t i l honeycomb was encountered a t the i n i t i a l position of the strut piston. If t h e vehicle were t o overturn again s o t h a t the load would be in the o r i g i n a l direction, the f r i c t i o n device would again supply the load u n t i l t h e remaini n g core material was encountered, a t which time the load would return t o t h e i n i t i a l stroking load. This cycle can continue u n t i l a l l core i s crushed.
It i s planned that t h e unmanned struts are t o be used i n spacec r a f t OU, (same as f o r spacecraft O W ) , and manned s t r u t s , w i t h lockouts, a r e t o be used on a l l manned f l i g h t s , including spacecraft 012. The basic components are identical. i n the manned and unmanned struts with o n l y t h e addition of lockout devices and a s l i g h t l y lower stroking load being used i n the manned s t r u t s .

Acceleration data a t t h e time of landing f o r Mission AS-201 were l o s t . However, as no stroking of t h e struts occurred during t h e m i s sion, landing accelerations must have been below 20g i n t h e X axis, 14g i n t h e Z axis, and 4g i n the Y axis.

7- 101

L
t!
V 0

rl

0
(v

m

I

a
S

VI .I

0 .VI

S .B VI

m

U

VI
S .-

m

VI

&

m Q E .-

0

4
U L-

0 .-

S

9

>-

I ; :

I

a

"
8
n
W
0

5 V
W

>r E

I

0

1

\d
s
3
Q
Q

L

v)
I

rl
I

9

VI

I-

P

e

m

E

LL

7-102
NASA-S-66-6261 MAY 6 5457
8

Direction of stroking Nekral posit ion

I I
I
I

Core and friction

0 .VI
S

a I-

Friction only

137 O f !
m
0

li
I

_-_----Friction only

'

-1370
c
I n

0 .-n I

I

0

-5594

I

-6500 -5

I

, I -1

I

J
16

5

Stroke, in. (a) X-X foot strut.
I

Core and friction

4180
0 .I n
S

c

a
I-

Friction only

d
-u

1045
0

m

--

_-----Core and friction

0

. J
0 .8

- 1045
I
1
-4285 -5000 -5

h
u

I n v)

Li
-1

I

Note: A l l load values are nominal

5
Stroke, in.

16.5

(b) X-X head strut.
Figure 7.6-2.lnipact attenuation strut design load for unmanned mission, Mission AS-201.

- stroke curves

0

-

7 Neutral position
i

i
Note: All load values are nominal

2

;s

!= 0 .m
h-4180
V

2s

*

Core

I
-7524 -8000
&mi
I

I
Strut, in. (c) Y-Y strut.

I

1

6241 5495
0 .V I
S

Core and friction

c

a l

S

i
I
2250

1

c
Friction ' I only

-

Friction only

.

1

-

Friction only

-52 15

-6000

I I

Core and

I 1

I

h'""""
0

i

I

I

I
18.5

-10

-5

2
Strut, in.

10

(d) Z-Z strut.
Figure 7.6-2.Concluded.

7-104

7 7 Service Propulsion Subsystem .
Summary.- b I s i n AS-201 was the first flight test of the service f.so propulsion subsystem (SPS): One of the primary objectives of the mission was to verify SPS operation for a minimum of 20 seconds after at least 2 minutes in a space environment and verify restart capability.

The first burn of the SPS was initiated at T + U l l . 2 seconds. Although +X translations by the service module reaction control subsystem (SM RCS) produced 25 to 4 percent of the ullage thrust expected 5 (section 7 9 l , first burn ignition transients and perforrmance of the ..) SPS for the first 80 seconds of the burn were nearly nominal (fig. 7 7 1 . .-) The chamber pressure and oxidizer interface pressures were 2 psia and 3 psia below the m i n i m specification limits, respectively, after the transition from ignition transient to steady-state operation. The duration of the first burn was approximately 184 seconds. However, SPS chamber pressure had decayed (from nominal. at 80 seconds) to approximately

70 percent

of nominal at the time of engine shutdown.

Engine

shutdown was initiated by the control programer timed backup commaad rather than by the normal AV counter because the desired AV had not been achieved within the allotted time (table 7.7-1and section 7.13).

An erratic restart and second SPS burn of approximately 1 seconds 0 .-) in duration followed (fig. 7 7 2 . The first 5 seconds showed chamber pressure osciUations to a low of 12 psia ( 0 psia nominal). The engine 12 shoved tendencies to recover for about 4 seconds, but then chamber pres0 sure agah decayed to about 7 percent of nominal at the time of engine shutdown.
The abnormal performance was primarily due to helium ingestion into the engine oxidizer feed line. The helium ingestion was made possible by the existence of a leak in the standpipe to the zero g propellant retention reservoir from which the engine oxidizer feed line was supplied. The leak had been observed previously i n preflight tests. Preflight test procedures and action guidelines are being studied for revision to insure the preflight integrity of the system for future missions.

An oxidizer storage tank pressure drop after each SPS firing termination was shown by the flight measurements, and no oxidizer crossover from storage to sump tank was evidenced during the first firing. These two observations indicated that a storage to sump tank pressure drop mechanism was present. The cause of this pressure drop is hypothesized t o be two-phase, two-component fluw between the storage and sump tanks.
Other than the abnormal conditions ind!.cated, performance of the No rough combustion was rscorded by the engine vibration monitors.
SFS was nanlinal.

Description.- The Apollo spacecraft service propulsion subsystem (SPS) provides the thrust required for large changes in spacecraft velocity after spacecraft separation from the Saturn S-IVB. The SPS for Mission AS-201 included the engine and nozzle assembly, p r o p e l t storage and transfer components, and the pressurization equipment (fig. 7.7-3). The propellant gaging equipment and p o e t rputilization control valves were omitted for this mission.

The SPS engine was a non-throttleable, restartable, liquid bipropellant, pressure-fed rocket engine designed to produce 21 500 pounds of thrust in a vacuum. The engine and nozzle asserdbly included an ablative combustion chamber, a radiation-cooled expansion nozzle, an aluminum injector, a thrust and gimbal mount, gimbal actuators, fuel and oxidizer propellant feedlines and pneumatic-operated valves.
The hypergolic propelts for the SPS were a 50:50 blend of UDMH and hydrazine for fuel, and nitrogen tetroxide <N204) for the oxidizer. Two oxidizer and two fuel tanks (upstream tanks being storage tanks, the downstream being sump tanks) are utilized for propellant storage. For Mission AS-201, the propellant load, being only 2 percent of capacity, 8 was loaded in the sump tanks.

The high pressure helium supply required to pressurize the propellant tanks was contained in two spherical pressure velrsels, each with a volume of 1 . cubic feet. Each vessel was filled to a pressure of 94 4000 psia & 50 psi, and both vessels were connected to a common helium distribution line. Two solenoid-operated valves, installed in parallel downstream of the helium storage vessels, isolated the helium supply when the propulsim system was inoperative. Helium pressure was regulated by pel.allel pressure regulator assemblies, which reduced the helium pressure to 183 psis f 4 p s i , Downstream of the helium pressure regulators, parallel check-valve assemblies were installed to prevent the backflow of propellants or vapors into the pressurization lines. Gaseous nitrogen (GN2) for the engine pneumatically operated valves was contained in two spherical storage tanks, m e for the primary valves and one for the secondary valves. Tank pressure for the GN2 was 800 25 psia.

*

A l l SPS components were certified for the short duration mission. Critical problems encountered during the buildup static firing, and subsystem checkouts at Kennedy Space Center (KSCJ are sham in .-1. table 7 7 1 .

7-106
Propellaat and gas servicing, accomplished from T-10 day8 to
T-4 days, is indicated in table 7.7-111, and the results of the analyses

of the materials loaded are presented in table 7.7-IV.

During the preparation for flight readiness firing on T-99 days, it was discwered that oxidizer from the loaded sump tank had leaked into the storage tank by way of the helium standpipe and crossover line. Oxidizer interface pressure indicated that a fluid crossover occurred during the flight readiness test. (See table 7.7-V. ) A l l other measurements of the subsystem showed normal conditions, including pneumatic and solenoid v a l v e positions. The expanded life status of time/cycle sensitive compbnents at the time of launch is shown in table 7.7-VI. Performance. Figures 7.7-4(a), (b), and ( c ) show the behavior characteristics of the SPS critical measurements through the S-IB and
S-IVB boost phases.

-

Figure 7.7-4(c) shows the effects upon the propellant pressures by the various g fields experienced through the S-IB and S-IVB phases. Comparison of the oxidizer interface pressure and the oxidizer tank pressure, under the several g fields with those same parameters for the fuel side, indicates the movement of oxidizer into the storage tank from the sump tank during boost. Figure 7.7-5 shows the arrangement of the oxidizer retention reservoir. (Also see fig. 7.7-3.) At each of the zero g conditions a certain amount of the storage tank propellant was transferred back to the sump tank by way of the crossover line and standpipe (daka quality prevents exact calculations). However, a positive amount of oxidizer was indicated as being transferred and retained in the storage tank after the boost phase. Between S-nrS separation and SPS ignition, no unexpected changes in any of the SPS measurements occurred. Table 7.7-VII lists the SPS temperature and pressure measurements at approximately 11 seconds before the first burn. Steady-state first SPS operation: The first SPS burn can be broken into two distinct periods. From ignition at W l 2 l l . 2 seconds to approximately WE291 seconds, the performance was about as expected with indicated chamber pressure and oxidizer tank and inlet pressure slightly low. The 20-psi pressure drop between oxidizer storage tank and oxidizer inlet pressure was similar to the normal pressure drop in the flight support 0. firing tests at the White Sands Test Facility with spacecraft 0 1 These n values are summarized i table 7.7-VIII.

During the remainder of the burn a definite degradation of oxidizer and fuel inlet pressures, chamber pressure, and oxidizer feed line temperature (see fig. 7.7-6) occurred together with a marked increase in pressure oscillations.

The faired plot of the chamber pressure during the first burn, indicated slightly low values (98 psia compared to expected 102 f 2 psia) .-) during the first 8 seconds (fig. 7 7 1 . At W E 9 0 seconds, the cham0 4 ber pressure began to drop rapidly, reaching 8 psia at T+U* seconds, gradually climbed t o 88 psia at m 3 8 seconds, then began a downward i1 trend to an indicated 69 psia for the last 15 seconds prior to shutdown. Increasing chamber pressure oscillations were experienced from ~+1318 seconds to shutdown. The maximum oscillation reached just prior to shutdown was approximately psia. Oxidizer tank pressure, oxidizer interface pressure, fuel tank pressure, and fuel interface pressure during the .-. first burn are presented in figure 7 7 7 Heliumtank pressure, divided by absolute helium tank temperature 7 7 8 maintained a steady decline until approximately WE91 sec.-) onds (the time of chamber pressure drop), when the decrease deviated from the n o d straight line function and became increasingly steeper, indicating increased helium consumption.
(fig.
S O g to

An accelerometer mounted on the injector indicated a vibration of fl5g throughout the first burn except for two spikes (possibly

l18. pops) of d o g at T+1385.3 seconds and ? e 3 5 8 seconds. Ignition v i bration levels were 365g maximum, which was within the igOg specification value, and in agreement with results of spacecraft 001 firings at White Sands Test Facility.
Two modes of shutdown were provided in spacecraft 009: AV cutoff 20 when the desired 4 7 ft/sec velocity change had been obtained, and a backup command shutdown based on total burn time. Because of the abn o m performance of the SPS'thedesired velocity was not achieved aad engine shutdown was initiated by the control programmer backup command (see section 7 . U ) with a AV of approximately 863 ft/sec yet to be gained.

When the helium isohtion valve was closed at engine shutdown, the oxidizer tank pressure measurement, located just downstream of the helium 7 check valve, showed an immediate drop f r o m 1 4 psia (during helium flow) to 1 psia, representing the oxidizer ullage pressure. A very small % drop was expected. However, a drop of this Insgnitude under the existing conditions w o u l d be the result of helium loss from the oxidizer tanks during the burn. In addition, there were s m a l l Y-axis and Z-axis accelerations which could result in sloshing or vortexing of the propellants. There was no indication that a clean crossover ever occurred during the burn. This was probably due to sloshing or vortexing such thak a s a

7-108
intermittent inflow of oxidizer from the storage tank into the crossover line existed during both firings. This could cause a two-phase, two6. component flow pressure drop (ref. 1 ) At engine shutdown at zero g ccmditions, the tank pressures would equalize when fluid flow stopped; however, the tank pressure drop occurred when the helium isolation valves were closed rather than at 300 msec later, as would be expected, when the propellant valves closed. Coast period: During the coast conditions between first and second SPS burns (W1395.2 sec to T+1410.7 sec), all parameters were about as predicted except for the oxidizer tank and the oxidizer interface pressures (table 7.7-IX) mentioned previously. Second SPS steady-state operation: The second SPS burn was very .-) erratic. Chamber pressure (fig. 7 7 2 oscillated radically during the second burn, reachlng a low of l.2 psia, then recovered slowly to about 95 psia, only to fall again to 73 psia by the time shutdown was initiated. Oxidizer interface pressure fluctuated between approxhmtely 148 psia and 1 3 psia for 2 seconds after ignition (fig. 7.7-9) ; re0 covered to 145 psia for approximtely 3 seconds then began decaying erratically, reaching a minimum of 106 psia at W1416 seconds (5 sec into the second burn). Then the interface pressure started to recover and reached a meximum of 148 psia at about T 1 1 2seconds. After shutdown, -.40 the interface pressure stabilized at 156 psia. At ignition, the oxidizer tank pressure fncreased approximately

8 psi from 1 8 psia, then climbed erratically to 1 7 psia (fig. 7 7 7 . 5 ’5 .-)
At the second SPS shutdown, the pressure again dropped, this time to approximately 157 psia. The helium regubtor performed normally under the existing flight conditions. Fuel tank pressure decreased from 1 2 psia to 1 8 psia during the 7 6 first 5 seconds of operation, rising again to 173 psia after about 6 seconds from ignition (fig. 7 7 1 ) .-0. Fuel interface pressure reacted in a manner similar to oxidizer interface pressure, although at much less amplitude (fig. 7 7 1 ) A .-0. low of 137 psia was measured at ’ l t k 5 I - l lseconds (4 sec into the second +48 burn). At T 1 1 seconds, it had recovered to 150 psia and held steady for 2 seconds before starting to decay prior to shutdown.

The changes, or fluctuations, in fuel tank and fuel interface pressures resulted from the chamber pressure fluctuations. The fuel flow increased with the decreased chamber pressure and the f’uel interface pressure reacted inversely to the fuel flow rate.

Temperature measurements were taken in both the oxidizer and fuel feed lines. Fuel temperature remained constant throughout both SPS operations. The oxidizer experienced an unanticipated drop in temperature bring the first burn (fig. 7.7-6) and rapid fluctuations in temperature throughout the second burn. During the second burn, two temperature cycles occurred with maximum and minimum readings of 64"F and 55" F for m e cycle, and 65" F and 59" F for the other. The dip to 55" F occurred slightly before the low points on both chamber pressure and oxidizer interface pressure. It is thought that the dips in oxidizer temperature neasurements occurred because helium b-dbbles, which were 10" F to 20" F cooler than the oxidizer, were present in the oxidizer feed line. During the second burn, the accelerometer mounted on the injector recorded nominal vibration levels during ignition, a 6 5 g peak, damping to &Log through the first 5 seconds. At 5 2 seconds after ignition, a . r 2 g peak occurred which damped to &Log and remained there until shuttO
dm.

.-2 Ignition and shutdown transients: Figures 7.7-11and 7 7 1 show chamber pressure start transients for the,firstand second SPS firings in Mission A - 0 . S21
The first firexhibited exceUent s t a r t transients for all affected parameters. AU. transient characteristics were typical and norm a l with the exception of slightly low chamber and oxidizer interface pressures. Analysis of flight data has indicated low effective longitudinal thrust (25 to 45 percent) by the SM RCS during the propellant settling ( w e ) manemr prior to SPS ignition. The nomina SPS first ignition transients indicated a satisfactory demonstration of the f'unctioning of the prop,llant retention reservoir (zero g can) under these conditions. The first ignition impulse resolved into a starting impulse of 235 lb-sec, a value well within the specification tolerances. The second engine ignition was erratic and stabilized burning was :not reached. No valid starting impulse value could be determined. Figu r e 7.7-12 shows an initial chamber pressure drop almost immediately after the pressure rise had started. The erratic second ignition was not due to poor prupellant valve -timing. Figures 7.7-l3(a) and (b) show that the propellant valves opened normally except for valve 4 which opened in appraxiroately 450 mec. , Since the minimum feed line opening time is 250 msec, this fast value was not a problem.

Figures 7.7-14and 7 7 1 show the chamber pressure shutdown tran.-5 sients for both SPS firings. Both shutdarns were determined t o be good considerbg that both were initiated from an oscillating engine chamber

7-110
pressure condition and were i n i t i a t e d from a low level of chamber pressure. The pnemmtically operating propellant valves shutdown sequence operated w i t h i n specifications ( f i g s . 7.7-16( a) and (b)) .
No shutdown impulses were calculated since the shutdown i n i t i a t i o n conditions were so far o f f nominal as t o make comparison of fli@t o s t a t i c test shutdown impulses meanin@;less.
Thrust characteristics: An empirical best estirnate of propulsion parameters audysis was canducted w i t h the SPS data t o determine the actual f l i g h t thrust and specific impulse d u e s (ref. 17). This approach used the vehicle thrust-acceleration as the controlling parameter t o determine propulsion performance.

was the only parameter The AV remaining t o be gained (Cm184) available t o determine the thrust acceleration of the spacecraft. T h i s particular measurement had a resolution of 55 ft/sec, and exhibited considerable scatter when differentiated t o arrive a t acceleration. The SPS thrust determined by t h i s analysis was 2 668 pounds thrust a t a 1 2.02 oxidizer t o fuel mixture r a t i o during the first 80 seconds of burn. This was within specification limits ( 2 500 lb & 400 lb). 1
The resolution of specific impulse (I ) from the data was f1O.3 6ecSP onds, which is greater than the specification tolerance. The analytical engine model used i n the analysis was i n d i d f o r times after the first 80 seconds of burn, because a f t e r t h i s ti= chamber pressure was governed by factors other than the normal mechanisms of tank pressures, inlet pressures, and 1ine.resistances (fig. 7.7-17). As a result, accurate values f o r SPS thrust, I mlxture ratio, and flow rate are not availSP' able beyond the first 80 seconds of operation. Phlf'unction analysis: Twenty-eight probable malfunction modes were investigated. I n i t i a l analyses determined that the probable malfunction modes wodd be confined t o the oxidizer feed side of the system, since the f u e l engine interface pressure was governed by the chamber pressure 7, while the oxidizer interface pressure was not (ref. l ) and tbat f u e l tank pressures w e r e nominal throughout the mission. The malfunction mode was required t o f i t within the following boundary conditions:

.

(a) The engine fuel interface pressures, measured i n flight, w e r e the result of the reduced chamber pressure.
(b)

Fuel flow was in an "aXl liquid" state.

would be caused by

(c)

Oxidizer engine interface pressure was a t a lower value than l o w chsmber pressure.

(a) No engine damage or excessive throat erosion occurred since the engine performance recovered to ne- nominal values during the last few seconds of the last firing.
(e) A large pressure loss in the oxidizer storage and sump tanks occurred during firing as shown by the flight measurements of oxidizer tank and interface pressures after each engine shutdown.
( f ) Helium consumption increased when the engine performance began to decay during firing.
(g) No oxidizer crossover was shown by the flight measurements. Failure modes that could not satis* the foregoing features and those that could not withstand qwsntitative and logical investigations were eltm4.nated. Table 7.7-X contains brief remarks on the more probable SPS malfunction modes that were evaluated.

Of the malfunctions considered, the mechanism which explalns the burn characteristics observed during flight was primarily helium ingestion together with some possible effect of two-phase flow between the storage tank and the sump tank.
Equations were derived which would determine the approximate location of the helium leak point. When flight values were inserted into the equations, the results indicated the leak point to be located someplace along the standpipe length within the zero g propeUant retention Suspect locations along the pipe within the reservoir (fig. 7.7-5). reservoir included each weld location. Testing with a l/!j-scale model of the SPS oxidizer tankage and resemir at the Mmned Spacecraft Center Thermochemical Test Area demonstrated that a helium leak would occur with the propellant level above the reservoir, and that gas flow would increase considerably, even through a very s m l l hole, as propellant outflow occurred. The leak hole positions and sizes were investigated during testing by replscing the portion of standpipe within the reservoir with similar lengths having either a 0.055-inch or O.Ol3-inch diameter hole drilled at one of three positions: at the center, approxinrttely 0.5 inch from the top, and the bottom of the reservoir. Analysis of the results of these tests is not yet complete. Additional tests of a simila,r nature were conducted by the contractor at 0 Damey, and ground test firings with spacecraft 0 1 configured with a leak condition are being scheduled for the White Sands Test Facility.

7-112

TABU3

7.7-1.-

SPS PERFORMANCE FOR MISSION AS-201

~~

Elapsed time, sec Event Planned Beginning +X translation
1170.7

Space-fixed

,

velocity, f t / s e c
Planned 21 21

Actual
1 181.2

Actual
21

853.19

850.77

First SPS thrust on
End of 80 seconds of burn
AV ending shutdown

1200.7
1 280.7

12ll.2
1 291.2
NA

864.59

21

855.55

23 889.59 26 423.19
NA

23 896.75
NA

1380.4
1 384.7

Timed engine shutdown

1395.2

25 557.77

: :

.do

Ecg

* f Z

7- 114

i

d i

8 ..
m

-3

n s .. ..
n r l
0

d i

d Ei

cr
u1 W

d

i
-3

t -

Q

% .
rl

N

N

E
.,I

d

f

E
f

?AI
d

4;

i ? a
8

.

. .

. . . .

or) OQl
rl

i l

0

rl

o g
*

d

0

rl

m

m

0;

zii
orl

m

o

n

P - n

d n-n l i I

7-118

TABLE 7.7-VI.

-

CRITICAL LIFE COMPONENIS, MISSION AS-201

Part number

Serial number

Nomenclature

Allowable operat ion
(lifetime)

Expended time

001890000026

Engine, SPS, l i f e t i m e , sec cycles
W e t . .

..........
.......

470

63.6

Ball valve, propellant,
250 50

26

D r y . . . . . . . . .

%all valve, oxidizer, cycles
Wet Dry

......... .........
........
........

250 50
960

26

P i l o t valve, oxidizer, cycles P i l o t valve, f u e l , cycles

33
33

960

0013g000000g

Gimbal actuator motor, pitch, hr

P1
P2

......... .........
......... .........

5 5

. kr

17 min 56 sec

hr

18 min 49 sec

OOlj9000000g

Gimbal actuator assembly,
Yaw, hr

Y1 Y2

5 5

i
P

hr 38 min 46 sec
hr

51 min 37 sec

7-119
TABIE 7.7-vr1.

.PRE-IGNITION

SPS

MEAS-s.

~ S S I O N AS-201

[ t W U O O seconds A

1
3 978 67

I

Measurement

no

.

Measurement
~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~

SPOoolP

sPooo2T
SPOoo3P SPooOy! SPOOOGP
SPOOrn

SPOOogP SPOOlOP SPo02rn
SPOOrCCrr

............. He tank temperature. ....... ..... Oxidizer tank pressure. psia . . . . . . . . Oxidizer line temperature. ....... Fuel tank pressure. psia . . . . . . . . . . . . Fuel l b e temperature. ........... Oxidizer interface pressure. psia . . . . . . . Fuel interface pressure. psia . ...... Thrust chamber outer skin temperature. ... ....... Fuel at interface temperature.
He tank pressure. psia
O F

1
~

174
66 179 65

OF

OF

(

175
181

O F

60 67

O F

SpO041T
SPOO~OT

Oxidizer at interface temperature.
Nozzle outer skin temperature

..... .........
O F

65
lost

SPOO6OT

Injector manifold temperature. OF
GN2 tank (primary) pressure. psia

SPoo6OP
sp0601p

....... .......

64

813
lost
0

GN2 tank (secondary) pressure. psia

spo661p

Thrust chamber pressure. psia

...... .........
.

NO'IIE:

A l l propellant valves were closed

7-120

TABLF: 7.7-VIII.

- FIRST

SPS BURN, MISSION AS-201

a.

0 Steady state (first 8 seconds)
~~

I

wasurement
-

Parameter Oxidizer tank pressure, psia

Indicated value

SPOOO3

........
OF

175 67 175
67

SP0005
SPOoo6
SPOOo8

spooog
SPOolO

spo661

... Fuel tank pressure, psia . . . . . . . . . . Fuel temperature in feed line, OF . . . . . Oxidizer inlet pressure, psia . . . . . . . Fuel inlet pressure, psia . . . . . . . . . Chamber pressure, psia . . . . . . . . . . .
Oxidizer temperature in feed line,

I

1

Parameter First 8 seconds 0 Oxidizer inlet pressure Fuel inlet pressure Chamber pressure Next 1 0 seconds 0

*o. 8
3. 0 3.
32.0

T

W 7.7-IX.

- COAST CONDITIONS (W1395.2 to T+l3lO. 7 SECONDS),
M I S S I O N AS-201

Measurement no. SPOOOlP
SPOOO~P

Identification

I

Indicated value, txia

He tank pressure Oxidizer tank pressure Fuel tank pressure Oxidizer inlet pressure
Fuel inlet pressure

SPOOO~P SPO009P
SPOOlOP

~~06612

Chaniber pressure

7- 122

Y

I

'

x

X

>

r

X

x

x

c:

!
I

Y

X

C I n, c

>a

X

I
X X

lx
I

I

x

K

I
X

Y

x

7- 124
0
rl

2
0

0 '

mI . -

0
b

2
0

2
0
rr\

l n

2
0 a ,
VI

0

m

rl

.E
Y

.

rl

-0 0 , VI P

m -

w
0

e
(v

d

0
b N
rl

0

ul
(v
I+

9

>.

a

0

z
m
9
(v

m

(v

rl

? 9

s l n
A
a * z

0
rl

w 3
d

0

0
(v

0
r-l

7-125

NASA-S-66-6264 MAY 6

160

12 0
CTI

Predicted chamber pressure from flight readiness firing

'3;
L
P)

n

.

100

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

3

u l
v ,

L
L

80

a , I I

2

E

0

60

40

20

4 8 12 Time from second burn ignition, sec

0

Figure 7.7-2.Second SPS burn, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

7- 126

c; 0
N
ci, U c 0

..5
111

Ft:

5 8

8

7-120

d

Q
Ec .

7-129

%
1 -

3
U

Ti
c 0

3 .n
m
W

c

i

m
u l
0 53
L

V

- s

?! I I' -

a .U

a;:
o l

NASA-S-66-6269 MAY 6 A l l dimensions are
it1

inches

7

Stand pi pe-to-top of retention reservoir weld Retention reservoir inner can
.~

-Gaging system housing

Retention reservoir screen Propellant retention reservoir outer can

From oxidizer storage tank via crossover line

diam Standpipe wall thickness detail (nominal dimensions 1 Figure

I-

i

k3.000"

7.7-5.- Oxidizer retention reservoir (zero g can),
Mission AS-201.

NASA-S-66-6270 MAY 6

---

(a) Oxidizer tank pressure.

200

160

.%

120
Ib) Oxidizer engine interface pressure.

E a 200

160

120
(c) Fuel tank pressure.

200

160

e-1

1200

1220

1240

1260

1280

l300
Elapsed time, sec

1320

1340

1360

1380

1400

(d) Fuel engine interface pressure.

Figure 7.7-6.

-

Propellant tank and interface pressures during first burn, Mission AS-201.

7- 132
NASA-S-66-6271W 6 Y

7.6

1.4

5 7.0
2 6.8 5
e L E

Y

5 6.2

5. a

210

1230

1250

1270

1290

U10
Time, sec

U30

U50

U70

U90

1410

Figure 7.7-7.

- SPS helium consumption during first burn, Misston AS-201.

7-133

n

.

3 1 3

f

v,
Ln
-D

a
c
u
0

v

ln

a ,

.
rl
I

.-

4 4

S .m

l n

m
V

m

m
Y

W W

-u

v)

I-

4

z

U
W

I tO

3 .-0
0
Q

aJ

N

a , L
3
l n

v,

p! 0
X

a
4
J
W

W ln

a

l n

0

m

w
U

m

CL

m 2
a ,

0 2 .Q I n a ., m u

S

a

.s .

S .7 3

U

%
0 0

S

m

0

Y

L

S

m

U

m

2
X
I

z .-

N

0

b

b
0

. op .
m .-

N

IC

I n

,
I

E 3

LL
V l S d ‘3MnSS3kld

7-134

E
J
W

3
LL

0
u)

Y

W

z

z
4 k
J

w

3
LL
u) u)

4
f
m
W

> J > z
m

W

U

a

U

n

a
0 0
(0

a
0

n
u)

0

a

cn

I

9 9

In
N

m m

I

0 0

N

Lo

P

0
Y)

-

N

-

In

0
N

r .

Lo

-

N

-

4

a z

V l S d ‘3HflSS3Ud

7- 135

c* 0

e

6

7-136

c

Y

E

V

;
U

W
W

ul

-

I

U

Y
Y

k

-

I
13 W
ul

3

a
Y n

a
W

4

a
. d

9

f

>.

a

r
L n

b N

9 I 9
9
v,
I

a v,
Q

I

~

l

'

l

l

'

l

l

l

l

l

l

'

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

l

I

I

l

l

l

l

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

f

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

n n N

n
N N

N

n n

n
) . LI

n n . d

n
N
LI

0

C

n

n

n

n
N

z

V l S d '3klnSS3tld

7-137

.

9
I

v ,

4 v ,
a
z

d

d d
(v

N d

r .0

N
d

5

.-

v)

v)

.

E

cn

d
d

N d

N
d

N
d

d
r(

N d

VI

0
0
rl

VI
I-

N

l n

0

l n
(v

CI d

m
VI
r(

2
0 rl

b,

.
I

2
rrI

.

0 0
d

r-

VI

0

m

VI

cu

C

-

0 . p

0

2

m

2

u

K

I

m

u
W

rl

.

u u z

4 J

W

ul

0
N
I
v)

m m

u
W

I I -

W

Q

z
m
b
Ul

.n
2

S

0

v)
v)

u) u)

a

W K

m
LL

W 0

W

0

I
W U l

a

2

3
I

u)

b

l -

.

u l

2

m

m .Lr,

5

Q)

9

m
0 m

N

u l N

0
N

-

r 10 .

0 m

-

N m

0 0

m

r-

0

m

YI

N

0 2

VlSd ‘ 3 H t l S S 3 Y d

?

-

N m
P

N m

I !

Lo N

I !

U
W

0

E” a
u
W

m

I

-

N N 9

W

z ! W

z 0
W

O

z
m m
N 9

m a

W

U

-

-

?

4
W

J

a

n
m

0 (D 0

-

-

N

a

I !

9
0 N

9

0

N

I n

In
OI

51

rl

0
N

. a
I n OI

2
.cn
.S

I

0

m

v)

d

5

.

9 OI

'?

m l-l

I n

VI

.

h
I.

m
I+

OI

9
d
I

rrL
Q)

.

9

5

> a

am

LL

m .-

3

co

d

N

? 9
0 0
d

In
I n fi

0
I n

N

Ln

0 'm
rl

I n OI

7-143

.
I

9
rl
I

b b

. .

9

G H
N

L I
N

co

N 0

0

N

.e 9
? v ,

a

N
d

m

0 0
d

b

m

0

m

N

m

0

9

s

I

e
.t F
W

s.

44

3

7-145

7 8 Launch-Escape Subsystem .
was a Block

Description. The launch-escape subsystem (LES) for Mission AS-201 I type configuration; however, provisions for abort initiation by ground radio command and initiation of tower jettison by a bunch vehicle instrument unit signal or a ground radio command were added for this unmanned mission. The Block I type U S has been flight tested successfully on previous Apollo missions. The IlES consisted of a nose cone with &-ball, canard assembly, ballast enclosure, pitch-control motor, tower-jettison motor, launch-escape motor, and the launch-escape-tower .-. structure. (See fig. 7 8 1 ) The boost protective cover was attached to the LES tower legs. Performance.- Analysis of tracking camera film indicated that performance was satisfactory and that the tower-jettiscm motor fired as programmed (20 seconds after S-TVB igniticm), removing the LES and boost protective cover from the command module as planned.

-

7- 146

rl

0
( u

I

v,

a

Y

0 -

u

m

L

W

S

o= o m

m LL

.-

a, 3

Z d

7-147

7.9

Reaction Control Subsystems

. S The service m o d u l e reaction control subsystem ( M RCS) S successfully performed the pitch maneuver required before S / M M C separation and maintained proper attitude control even though quad A was completely inoperative and one of the negatiw y a w (-Y) engines was either inoperative o r producing only p a r t i a l thrust. H a r e v e r , as a result of the quad A and -Y engine problems, the +X translation maneuvers produced somewhat less than nominal velocity change when spacecraft a t t i tudes and rates were maintained. Performance compared favorably w i t h that predicted (considering the effects of the disabled engines), indicating that nominal engine thrusts *re produced by the operating engines.

The command module reaction control subsystem ( M RCS) successfully C performed all required maneuvers and maintained proper spacecraft cont r o l mtil electrical problems disabled the B system a t W1641 seconds and the A system at Iu1649 seconds, maintaining CM control through the max. q region. Both CM RCS systems performed nominally up t o the time of the electrical failure.

*

M Failures incurred during the mission were: (1)failure of the S quad A t o operate because of a &unction in the oxidizer supply system, (2) partial, or possibly complete, loss of thrust from one of the -Y engines when the automatic coils were used (the engine involved and the cause of t h i s failure could not be definitely determined from the available data, (3) loss of both CM RCS systems a f t e r blackout because of the transfer of the RCS control motor switches from the C M t o the SM position, (4) loss of the use of CM RCS system B f o r the propellant depletion burn as a result of the B system logic power failure, (5) loss of the use of the A and B system helium interconnect v a l v e s , and the A system f u e l tank and the B system oxidizer tank helium bypass pyrotechnic valves as a result of the B s y s t e m logic power failure, and (6) failure of the CM RCS oxidizer isolation valves t o close during the postflight deactivation due t o incompatibility between the v a l v e s and the oxidizer. The sequence of RCS events i s given i n table 7.9-1.

7.9.1 Service module reaction control subsystem. Description: The Block I type SMRCS on spacecraft 009 consisted of f o u r identical RCS quads equally spaced a t 9@ intervals around the service module. (See fig. 7.9-1. ) Each of the four RCS quads was mounted on a hinged panel of the SM. Each quad included four 95-pound thrust radiative-cooled rocket engines, an oxidizer tank, a fuel tank, t~ helium tank, and associated components such as valws and regulators. (See fig. 7.9-2.) High pressure helium, used t o pressurize the propellants, was routed :from a storage tank through parallel isolation (shutoff) valves, parallel

7-148
regulators, and check valves into the propellant tanks. The check valves were used t o prevent contamination of the helium by propellant vapors. The hypergolic propellants, nitrogen tetroxide (oxidizer) and a 50:50 m i x t u r e of N2H4 and UDMH (f’uel), w e r e stored in positive expulsion teflon bladders mounted inside the propellant tanks. The propellants were forced from the bladders through isolation valves t o the S RCS M engines. Each engine included electrically operated fuel and oxidizer valves w i t h an automatic c o i l operated by signals from the stabilization and control subsystem (SCS) and a direct c o i l operated by signals from automatic sequencers.

All SMBCS components on spacecraft Oog w e r e certified f o r the short duration miseion. No components were known t o be malfunctioning or M failed on the S RCS prior t o l i f t - o f f except the propellant-quantitygaging system, which was deleted because of problem encountered during checkout, and some primary-stage helium check valves. A l l secondarystage check valves were functioning n o .
The S M RCS propellant servicing was accomplished on T-ll t o T-9 days. (See table 7.9-II.) The results of the chemical analysis performed on the propellants p r i o r t o servicing are shown i n table 7.9-111. The S M RCS helium servicing was accomplished on 11-4 days. (See table 7.9-IV.)

Performance: Analysis of data shared that no thrust was obtained f r o m the engines on quad A and t h a t one -Y engine was inoperative. This caused the quad C positive and negative pitch (+P and -P) engines t o alternately fire and the quad D positive and negatiGe yaw (+Y and -Y) eng-lnes t o alternately f i r e t o maintain proper attitudes and rates. As a result of this duty cycle, the net +X AV produced during the ulJage maneuvers was 25 t o 45 percent of that expected. (See section 7.11 and figs. 7.11-4 and 7.11-5.) With the pitch engines on quad A disabled, control authority f o r the CSM pitch-down maneuver w a s reduced; however, the maneuver was satisfactorily completed.
The first evidence of a failure in the S quad A was noted when tk, M SM RCS was i n i t i a l l y operated a t -3.7 seconds f o r a 3-second, direct coil, +X translation maneuver that provided thrust f o r the CSM/S-IVEI physical separation. A pitch-up disturbance torque was generated during the maneuver (see section 7.31 and fig. 7.U-2) which required a pitchdown correction. This pitch-down correction m r s h o t and requlred a pitch-up correction t o return the spacecraft t o the desired attitude. Analysis of the spacecraft data revealed that, during the i n i t i a l maneuver, quads B, C, and D f i r e d normally using the direct coils, but no thrust was generated by the +X/-P engine on quad A, resulting in the pitch-up error. The pitch-down correction r a t e and the pitch-up

correction rate f o r the overshoot were one-half t h a t anticipated indicating that the positive and negative pitch engines on quad A were both inoperative (see section 7.11). The second maneuver programmed was a,n 18-second +X translation w i t h SCS automatic attitude and rate control. Data showed that the -P and +P engines on quad C were alternately firing during t h i s manewer with a duty cycle of approximately 50 percent on and 30 percent o f f , again indicating that no t h r u s t was being produced by the +X trazlslation engine on quad A (see section 7.11 and fig. 7.11-2). The t h i r d and fourth maneuvers were autoroatic c o i l +X translation mneuvers used t o settle the SPS propellant prior t o SPS firing. The t h i r d maneuver was initiated from nominal spacecraft attitudes. Data again shared alternate firing of opposing quad C pitch engines. (See fig. 7.11-4. ) The fourth mneuver was started w i t h substantial pitch and yaw attitude errors introduced by the SPS during tailoff. (See fig. 7. U-5. ) Pitch corrections were made a t half rate and the same alternate firing of opposing engines was experienced, verifying the earlier indication that quad A was inoperative.

e

The last lnanetrvler performed by the S RCS was the 90" pitch-darn M The pitch-rate data again indicated the pre-entry attitude chasge. .1 quad A failure. (See section 7 1 and fig. 7.11-7.)

The quad A failure was further evidenced by decreases i n temperatures where temperature should have increased i f the quad was firing. Temperature decreases were noted on the quad A package, the quad A minus pitch engine injector head, t h e quad A CCW r o l l engine injector and the quad A head, the quad A minus pitch engine f u e l solenoid -vet These CCW r o l l engine fuel solenoid valve (see figs. 7.9-3 and 7.9-4). temperature drops indicated that one propellant was flowing and pruvidi n g evaporative cooling, but no engine was firing. The -P and CCW roll fuel solenoid temperatures decreased t o the same temperature as the fuel sup&jr and stabilized there, indicating that fuel, rather than oxidizer, was flowing. I n addition, indications are that the quad A helium supply task pressure drop corresponded t o a calculated "fuel f l o w only" value (baeed on flow into a vacuum without canibustion chamber back pressure) which was appraximtely 62 percent of a normal firing pressure drop.

,

e

four engines siT e cuify'logi6i w y t o stop oxidizer flow t o h a d t a n e o u s l y i e t o close the oxidizer p r o p e l t isolation valve. During postflight decontamination of the CM RCS, it was determined that the oxidizer isolation valves had seized i n the open position after ll h y s exposure t o nitrogen tetroxide (N20h) These CM valves are identical t o d m s used on the SM. As presented i n the senrlcing section, the S RCS propellant isolation valves were exposed t o :propellants on the M Launch pad for 10 h y s prior t o being opened. This evidence indicates

that the quad A oxidizer isolation valve seized in the closed position prior to launch, disablbg the system, This compatibility problem of the wlve with oxidizer has been recognized for some tine and previously experienced in tests. Consequently, a completely new valve has been designed, qualified, and is being used on spacecraft Oll and all subsequent spacecraft. The first evidence of a failure of an SM yaw engine was noted during the first automatic mode +X translation by an alternate firing duty cycle of the quad D engines. This duty cycle ranged from approximately 50 per0 cent on, 50 percent off to 90 percent on, 1 percent off, indicating a control problem in the yaw engines (see section 7 U) . .
A similar duty cycle was noted during the third and fourth +X translations. During the fourth +X translation (ullage maneuver prior to second SPS firing) the SPS tailoff from the previous SPS firing introduced a +Y rate error requiring -Y engines of the RCS to fire for correction. This correction rate was one-half that anticipated. A similar yaw rate disturbance was introduced at the completion of the second SPS burn with similar RCS correction rates (see section 7.11 a,nd fig. 7 . ~ - 5 ) ,indicating that one ~ r s wengine was inoperative. Data again shared the same alternate firing of opposing engines as in the two preceding +X translation maneuvers. Analysis of the yaw rate data and realized duty cycles showed that these’conditionscould have been produced by malfunctions in either or both -Y engines. Even though these conditions could possibly have been produced by partial thrust degradation in both -Y engines, the more probable failure mode would be failure of only one engine. Analyses showed that, assuming nominal performance of the -Y/-X quad D engine, the -Y quad B engine would have had to perform at approximately 70 percent thrust early in the mission and constantly degrade to approximately 2 percent thrust at the end of the mission. Conversely, assuming nomi0 nal performance of the -Y/+X quad B engine, the -Y quad D engine would have had to produce essentially no thrust to produce the realized conditions. The most probable of these assumptions is the complete failure of the quad D engine. Also, yaw engine duty cycles produced during the +X translation burns indicated that the torque required to displace the spacecraft through the rate deadband zone to the positive limit was an order of magnitude of that produced by the center-of-gravity offset in the Y axis with +X engines of both quads B and D firing. Similarly, the torque required to displace the spacecraft from the +Y limit to the -P limit, when holding the f . deg/sec limit cycle, was an order of o2 magnitude of the torque produced by only one -Y engine firing. These considerations again indicate that the -Y/+X quad D engine was inoperative. The conclusion is further substantiated by analysis of the quad engine package temperature (see fig. 7.9-3). From CSM/S-IVB separation to CM/SM separation, quad D shared a temperature increase that was 200 F less than that in quad B and 7@ F less than that in quad C. In light of the duty cycles, this again indicates that the -Y quad D engine was not firing when commanded.

In conclusion, t h e analysis of available data indicates t h a t the -Y/-X quad D engine was inoperative or malfunctioning, but the f a i l u r e
mode could not be determined due t o lack of information. It can be deduced, however, that since b i l e v e l indications of f i r i n g were recorded, e l e c t r i c a l continuity existed i n a t l e a s t one of the automatic c o i l s i n ,the engine t h a t was malfunctioning. Also, i f both propellants would 'have been flowing but not producingthrust, as i n the case of a combust i o n chamber failure, the overall quad pressure drop would have been approximately twice t h a t of t h e normal pressure drop of t h e other quads, xhich w a s not the case. Since no other data were available f o r further mxLlysis, it can only be concluded that f o r some unlcnown reason, when the SCS signaled t h e -Y engines t o f i r e using the automatic coils, e i t h e r the fuel or oxidizer valve of one of the -Y engines, most probably the -Y/-X quad D engine, f a i l e d t o respond, thus disabling the engine. Postf l i g h t analysis of t h e data has l e d t o no remedial action.
A t t i t u d e control was s a t i s f a c t o r i l y maintained during the mission, and a t t i t u d e hold limit cycle control was nominal. (See section 7. l l and fig. 7.n-3.) Attitude corrections resulting from major a t t i t u d e disturbances were accomplished with somewhat reduced authority (section 7. l l and fig. 7.11-3) ; however, a l l corrections were s a t i s f a c t o r i l y accomplished.

The S R S pressurization subsystem, including all v a l v e s and reguM C l a t o r s , was activated on the ground p r i o r t o launch. Data shown i n table 7.9-V indicate that regulated pressures a t i n i t i a t i o n of the f i r s t S R S burn were i n i t i a l l y 15 p s i above operating values of 181 f 4 psia M C because activation reference pressure was sea l e v e l r a t h e r than space. During the burn, pressures dropped t o normal and, after the burn, returned t o regulator lockup values, which were approximately 3 t o 4 p s i above the regulated pressures. The pressures were considered nominal throughout
the mission.

All helium source pressures dropped a t f i r s t S M firing. Huwever, f o r quad A, the drop corresponded t o that expected f o r fuel flow only. The source pressures measured during the ullage maneuvers and the CSM pitch-down maneuver support t h e first burn data. (See fig. 7.9-5.)

With t h e exception of quad A where indications are t h a t the oxidizer i s o l a t i o n valve seized i n the closed position, all propellant supply systems functioned nonoally. The S R S quad temperature rise due t o boost heating was near the M C predicted v a l u e s (see fig. 7.9-3) and verified those established on Mission A-102 (ref. 5 ) . Quad temperatures due t o soakback a f t e r engine f i r i n g s were a l s o near anticipated values. Temperature profiles of d w s and i n j e c t o r s on both the r o l l and pitch engines on shared d e f i n i t e cooling e f f e c t s a f t e r the first burn a t

separation in contrast to the expected temperature rises due to soakback (See fig. 7 9 4 ) Propellant tank .-. temperatures and propellant manifold temperatures were nearly invariant at 7’ + 5” F throughout the mission, as was expected. Quad B valve and 0 injector head temperatures measured were nominal for the realized duty cycles. Boost heating, as expected, was most pronounced in the forwardfiring engines, reaching a maximum of 2000 F on the injector head. (See fig. 7.9-6.)
as experienced in the other quads.

Comand module reaction control subsystem.Description: The Block I type CM RCS consisted of two identical redundant systems, A and B, which operated simultaneously. Each system of the CM RCS consisted of six 93-pound thrust ablative-cooled rocket engines, an oxidizer tank, a fuel tank, a helium tank, and associated components such as filters, valves, and regulators. (See figs. 7.9-7 to 7.9-9. The propellants used were nitrogen tetroxide (oxidizer) and ) monornethylhydrazine (fuel). The only purpose of t h e CM RCS was t o cont r o l CM attitide after CM/SM separation.
The CM RCS components and operating principles were similar to those in the SM S C except f o r the engines. The CM RCS engines were ablatively IS cooled, whereas the SM RCS engines were radiatively cooled. The CM RCS engines included both autacatic and direct coils in the electrically operated propellant valves. The automatic coils were operated by signals from the SCS and the direct coils were operated by signals from the pro0 pellant dump sequencer installed in spacecraft 0 9 to control the disposd (dump) of propellants before the CM landed; on manned missions the crew will perform this function.

AU. CM RCS components were certified for the sXort duration mission. The only CM component known to be failed prior to l i f t - o f f was the CM B system relief valve burst diaphragm on the fuel side. This was found to be ruptured during checkout testing and was not replaced for the mission. (The burst diaphragm provides redundant sealing not required for this short duration mission.) A s in the SM, some primary helium check valves were sgain leaking out of tolerance, but were not replaced slnce the secondary valves were functioning normally.
ly The CM HCS propellant servicing was accomplished on T - l l d a to T-9 day; however, the system B helium relief valve vent port on the fuel side was not sealing properly and the system required pressurizing to approximately lo7 psia to effect proper sealing. (See table 7.9-VI.)

TI-1454. seconds the CM RCS system was activated. (See table 7.9-VI.) 7 5

On T-4 day the CM RCS helium servicing w s accomplished, and at a

7-153
Performance: Control by the CM RCS was initiated following SM/CM sepexation at W1435 seconds, and operation was nominal until Ti-1649 seconds and W1641 seconds when electrical malfunctions disabled automatic operation of,systems- and B, respectively. A Failure of the B system logic p m r caused the B system engine direct coils to be inoperative at the time of propellant depletion burn ( i 1 1 to T+2050 seconds). Therefore, both A and B system propellants T-95 were burned off through the A system engines (with the exception of the +P engine which is normally disabled) resulting in greater than nominal charring of the A system engines, particularly the roll engines. Satisfactory p r o p e l t jettison was accomplished, however, with nominal propellest residuals. During the purge operation, data indicated that the A system fuel and B system oxidizer tank pressures did not decay. (See fig. 7.9-10. ) Postflight inspection of the A and B system helium interconnect squibs, the A ~ystemfuel tank helium bypass squib, and the B system oxidizer tank helium bypss squib, shared that these squibs had not fired, thus preventing depressurization. These valves were a l s o disabled by the B system logic power anomaly. (See section 7.12. )

All component temperature measurements, including the propellant tank, the heliumtanks, engine valves, and the engine outer w a l l , remined constant at launch temperatures of 6@ to 65’ F, as expected, from launch to system activation. Helium and propellant tank pressures remained constant, within telemetry accuracies, at loaded conditions from launch to system activation with no indication of helium lealcsge. (See table 7 +VI. ) .
Decay in helium source pressures due to system act’ivationwas nominal, agreeing with theoretically calculated values. (See table 7 9 V . .-I) Following system activation, s m a l l propellant usage resulted in no noticeable change in source pressure prior to the depletion burn at
Ti-1915 seconds. figure 7.9-U.

Pressure decay due to the depletion burn is shown in

Within expected instrumentation accuracies, propellant tank pressures reached nominal values of 294 f 5 psia following system activation. These pressures remained stable during a l l CM RCS activity, indicating nominal system operation through the propellant depletion burn. Based on measured propellant residuals and nominal propellant flow rates during burnoff, propelhat usage was estimated to be nominal (approximately 12to 15 pounds). The fouowing amounts.of propelhats were removed during deactivation: 5 pounds of fuel were removed from the helium side and purge lines of the CM systems A and B; 2 pounds of fuel were remaved from the propellant side of both systems; 1 pound of oxidizer

was removed from the helium side and purge l i n e s of both systems; and

1 1 pounds of oxidizer were remwed f r o m t h e propellant side of both sys-

F

tem. The p r o p e l t s removed from the helium side of the systems were not unexpected since the B system f u e l and A system oxidizer tank bypass l i n e s were opened during purging.
A l l measured temperatures showed nominal and, in some cases, less than expected effects of reentry heating and depletion burn on the CM R S C components. The propellant tank temperatures remained nearly constant a t about 600 t o 650 F.

The data are questionable from T+16@ seconds u n t i l G23.25 seconds because of the l o w voltage on the spacecraft main buses. The dashed l i n e s on figures 7.9-10 and 7.9-11 represent estimated nominal traces a t correct spacecraft bus voltage.
During recovery of the spacecraft a f t e r landing, no problems w e r e reported with the CM RCS or with propellants o r propellant fumes. During deactimtion, which began 5 days l a t e r a t Norfolk, Virginia, the B system +Y oxidizer valve failed t o open when the direct c o i l was commanded. A short t o ground was found on both sides of the coil. During decontamination operations, the e l e c t r i c a l leads t o the c o i l were inadvertently reversed on the spacecraft side of a terminal s t r i p such that both sides of the c o i l w e r e connected t o ground. The automatic c o i l was found t o be i n proper working order.

When the A and B system oxidizer isolation valves were cycled t o the closed position during the deactivation procedures, the valve indicators showed the valves t o be closed but a gas f l o w through the valves did not decrease, indicating that both valves were seized i n the open position. Since they w e r e normally open during the f l i g h t and had no i n f l i g h t function, this f a i l u r e had no effect on the flight. Similar problems during development and qualification of t h i s valve indicated incompatibility between the oxidizer and the d v e . 5 s valve has been replaced on spacecraft Oll and all subsequent spacecraft. There was no problem with the f u e l isolation valves. Postflight inspection also revealed that the fuel b p s s valves on both the A and B systems were incorrectly wired in that the system A valve was wired t o the B pyro battery instead of the A battery, and the system B valve was wired t o the A pyro battery instead of the B battery. As a result of this condition the helium pressure i n both A and B syst e m was able t o bleed down during purging. In the normal configuration the high pressure h e l i u m would have been trapped in the B system. Requested postflight testing of the CM RCS consisted of propellant bladder leak checks, electrical. i n t e g r i t y checks of the CM B system +Y

7-155
engine direct oxidizer coil, oxidizer isolation valve failure analysis, :functional checks of the engine valves, char analysis of the A system CCW and -Y engines, and relief valve leakage tests.
The only tests completed t o date were those concerning coil short. These t e s t s remeled that the electrical leads were incorrectly w i r e d t o the spacecraft side of a terminal that both sides of the c o i l were connected t o ground. When vas corrected, the c o i l performed normally.

the direct t o the c o i l s t r i p such the wiring

Results of all other postflight tests were not available f o r t h i s report but w i l l be documented i n a supplemental report.

TABU3

7.9-1.- RCS

EVENT TIMELINE, MISSION AS-201

~~

Event
1 SM 3-second direct coil +X translation .

Time, sec on Off

843.7 846.7

846.7 864.6

2 SM 18-second automatic coil+X translation with . attitude control

3. SM attitude control only as required

864.6 1181.2 1181.2 1212.2
1212.2

4.

SM 30-second automatic coil +X translation with attitude control (SFS U a g e no. 1)
only during SPS burn

5 SM roll control .

13952
1395' 7

6. SM attitude control only as required

1-395-2

7 SM15-second automatic coil +X translation with .
attitude control (SFS uUage no. 2)

1395.7 14U.7
14U. 7

8 SM roll control only during SPS .
9.
10.

burn

1420.7

SM attitude control only as required

1420.7 1424.2 1424.2 1442.1 1442.1 1454.7 1454.7
NA

SM preentry 9 " pitch maneuver with roll and 0 yaw attitude control
SM attitude control only as required
SM jettison controller) and CM activation

1. 1

E CM-SM separation ( SK control transferred to .

13.
14.

CM attitude control as required CM pitch manewer with roll and yaw attitude control as required

1456.0 1462.6 1462.6 1479.1 1479.1 1479.2 1479.2 1515.1
1515.1

15. CM attitude control as required

16. CM roll maneuver with pitch and yaw attitude control as required

17- CM attitude control as required

1580.7

7-157
TABU?, 7.9-1.RCS EVENT TIMELINE, MISSION AS-201

- Concluded
Time on sec Off

Event

18.

CM roll attitude control and pitch and yaw

rate damping

1580.7
14 69 11 95

14 69
NA NA

1. 9

LOSS

of effective CM RCS control'

b 2 . CM RCS pyro interconnect valve firing 0

2 . CM RCS propellant depletion burnC 1 b 2 . CM RCS pyro bypass valve firing 2 d 23. CM RCS helium purge

1915 2175 2175

25 00
NA

25 20

RCS control motor switches switched from CM to S position M disabling the CM RCS.

a

bAll pyrotechnic valves operated from the A pyro bus were fired including the fuel and oxidizer interconnect valves and the B system fuel and A system oxidizer tank bypass valves. All pyro valves operated from the B pyro bus were disabled by the B system logic power anomaly. C The propellant depletion burn was completed using only the CM RCS A system engines. The B system engine direct coils were disabled by the B system logic.power anomaly. % e helium purge was completed using the B system fuel and A system oxidizer tank bypass lines.

m o o c u n n

0 m

r
I

-t
F9

rl

cd

d

a
E !

u

FI

u

cd

7-159
TABIE

7.9-111. RCS PROELMT
Specif icai

-

ANALYSIS, MISSION
)n requirement
CM MMI

AS-201

Propellant

Servicing

SM
Fuel

SM
N2H4 50.6 percent
LD! Tb H

..............
equivalent,

V2H4 - UDMH

4

47.6

percent

P u r i t y , percent
%O

Density, g m / d

....... percent . . . . . .........
.....
. .
,

MMH/
92

98 min.
2 max.

98 min.
2 max.

98.2

98.7
1.3
0.8707

1.8

-

).872@.oa2 m.
90 min.

Transmittancy, p e r c e n t

1.0 m.

Filterable solids, mg/l t e r Sample e x t r a c t date Sample kidizer

1.0 max.

....... analysis date . . . . . . .............

N2°4
99.5 min.
0.1 max.

Feb. 16, 1966

eb. 16, 1966 eb. 16, 1966

N2°4 99.5 min.
0 . 1 max.

Feb. 16, 1966

1

I

N O

24

N° 24
99.9 0.1

Furity, percent

H 0 equivalent,
2

......... percent . . . . .

99.2
0.1

............ F i l t e r a b l e s o l i d s , mg/liter . . , Nitrogen oxide, p e r c e n t . . . . . Sample e x t r a c t d a t e . . . . . . .
Sample analysis date

Chloride, as n i t r o s y l c h l o r i d e , percent

0.08 m.

0.08 max.
1.0 max.

0.05
0

0.04

1.0 max. 0.65 m a .

!

0.85 max.

0.8
Feb. 15, 1966 Feb. 15, 1966

.8

-

-

*5
zb. 1 4 , 1966

......

-

-

?b. 14, 1966

I

I

7-16 0

I

6
I

rl f

7-161

f m

al

a

7-162

o E L 3 2
f

0

G
r(

* ,

.r( 0

c

l n n
N r l

9 rn P
I U
0

$ 2 8
f r(

g 2 9

0

I

7-163

2

.-

0 .VI VI

C

0 .d V

C

m

E

9

z

I
r(

a z
ca

>

+

I

Q:
r-

m

N

? 9 ? VI

2 a
z

I

L

0

9

>

U 5

7- 165
NASA-S-66-6287 MAY 6

400

200

n " (a) Engine package quad A

(SR5065T).

400

200

%
2

0

o

-z
I -

L 3 '

(b) Engine package quad B (SR5066T).
400

a l

E

2 00

0

(c)' Engine package quad C (SR5067T).

400
0

2 00

0

200

400

600

800
Elapsed time, sec

1000

1200

1400

1600

(d) Engine package quad Figure 7.9-3.-

D (SR5068T).

SM RCS quad engine package temperatures, Mission AS-201.

7-166
NASA-S-66-6288 MAY 6

200

100

n u-

(a) -Pitch engine injector head temp (SR7 125T).

2 00

100

5 5
P
c

n "
(b) -Pitch enaine fuel valve temp (SR7145T).

g 200

E

100

n "

(c) CCW roll engine injector head temp (SR7134T).

200

100

0

200

400

600

800
Elapsed time, sec

1000

1200

1400

1600

(d) CCW roll engine fuel valve temp (SR7148T).
Figure 7.9-4.-

SM RCS quad A fuel valve and injector head temperatures, Mission AS-201.

@

NASA-S-66-6289 MAY 6 5

4

3
(a) He press quad A (SR5001P).

5

4

t u ..a n
I =

3
(b) He press quad B (SR5002P).

u)

CP

::

!s ._

5

4

3
(c) He press quad C (SR5003P).

800

900

1000

1100 12 00 Elapsed time, sec (d) He press quad D ( S R 5 0 0 4 P ) .

1300

1400

1500

Figure 7.9-5.-

SM

RCS helium source pressures, Mission AS-201.

7-168

a r(

0

0 0

Y

v)

5
0 0
(v

a
I
E ..0
v) v)

.

ri

u
0 0
0

m Q) c
0
Q)
v)

d

4 Q)

0 .E, 04

! 2 .m
E
Q)

W
0

m P m

cc-

cn c ..L

0 9

5 L
cc-

i;

0

0

d

'e

9

> a

0 0
(v

? OI
re

I
0 OI h l

s

cn

9 9
9

c n I

I

0 0

m

0 0

cv

0 0
d

0

9

2

7-169

I4

.

0

0 .VI

S

4

0 .U

S

m

0

.X
m

v)

U

S

a J

>.
h

v

+ 5 m u

S 0

Q

7-170

E
X

N ZJ .-

I

Y

0

7-171

7- 172
a

rl

0

cv 1 rn

a
8

'u

.-

% N

0

7-173
NASA-S-66-6295 MAY'6

4 00

2 00

0

400

200

m .! o i ?

0

d

Z 400

200

0

00
Elapsed time, sec
Figve 7.9-10.-

CM

RCS propellant tank pressures,

Mission AS-201.

7-174

0
0

m

N

0

0

cu

N

4

0
0
d N

0
N
v)

a

.0

K

0

0
0 N

I
c
v)

.? ! x

v) v)

l n

0 0 6
d

? i
Y S
Y

m

0 0

a 3
d
v)

0 0
0 b
rl

5
I

4
I-l

Q:
YZ

I

0
0 9
d

LL

m .-

f

9

> a
9 Q'

0

0

I
N

2
0

? 9 ?
v)

0
9 0 9
U

s

I

U 0 4

9

7 1 Pyrotechnic Devices .0
cluded the addition of the spacecraft - L;EM adapter (SLA) separation subsystem, the type 100 pressure cartridges for the lllc-inch reaction control subsystem (RCS) valves, the type IV pressure cartridges for the 5/8-inch RCS mlves, swimmer mbilical and die marker deployment, and FF antenna deployment release. I The function of the SLA separation s-system was to sever the four SLA panels from each other and from the service module (SM) simultaneously, to initiate the SM/SLA umbilical disconnect, and to initiate the panel thruster pressure cartridge upon separation command. (See figs. 7 1 - and 7 1 - . As the panels are thrust outward, they are protec.01 .02) ted from possible rebound by a spring reel assembly. Af%er 38" deployment, panel attenuators begin to slow down panel movement (fig. 7.10-3). The SLA separation system included the ApoUo standard initiators to initiate the explosive components upon receipt of signal, the explosive train to sever the structural interface splice plates, the charge holders to hold the strands of mild'detonatingfuse (MDF), the M of lead sheathed RDX class G, the cross-over boosters for detonation W across joints (fig. 7.10-4), the confined detanating cord (OC) for SM/ SLA lmibilical disconnect (fig. 7 1 - ) the SM/SLA mibilical disconnect .05, (fig. 7.10-61, splice plate severance debris catchers, panel thrusters, el attenuation and retention devices, and pressure cartridges . 0 7) fig. 7 1 of the same type as those used on Mission A-004 (ref. 9), but also in-

Description.- The pyrotechnic devices used on Mission AS-201were

.

Two other items which were flight tested for the first time on Wssion AS-201were the RCS valve cartridges, type 1 0 and type I . The 0 V type 1 0 pressure cartridge, used i n the l/l.l-inch RCS valves, generates 0 a pressure of goo0 4 1650 psi within 5 milliseconds when fired into a 0.05-cc mu e. The type IV pressure cartridge, used i n the 5/8-inch l m! RCS valves, generates a pressure of 2260 f 478 psi within 8 milliseconds 1 ~ . When fired into 811 8.8-cc ~

Performance.- Pyrotechnic devices functioned satisfactorily on Mission A - 0 for the proper aperation of the appropriate subsystems. Six S21 pressure cartridges, which are n o r m l l y "fired" during a mission, were rendered inoperative d u r i n g Mission AS-201 following a malRznctim in the electrical power subsystem. This malfunction, which caused the pyre bus B to be de-armed, is discussed in detail in sections 7 1 and .2 71. Postflight tests of these device6 indicated that a l l bridgewire .3 re-sistanceswere within tolerance and that they would have functioned properly if they had received the pruper electrical signal. The six pressure cartridges consisted of m e type ' V I ME453-Ooog-0056 in the 0 in the main apex cover jettison system, one type 2 0 &53-ooOg-0232

parachute disconnect aS6emblyy one type 100 ME453-0005-0U In the commmd module (CM) RCS fuel bypass d v e , one type 100 ME453-000~-0u1 in the CM RCS bxidizer bypass valve, and two type 100 ME453-m-0112 in the CM RCS helium interconnect valves. Postflight tests of the two CM RCS oxidizer dump d v e cartridges (type I V Y ME453-Ooog-0024) which were intended to be activated only in the event of a low altitude abort, confirmed these conclusions.

,

7 -177

0 .-

l=

c)

m
m
Q,

2
Q

c)

&

-a

m

P

m

w
I

E
J

7-178
NASA-S-66-6298 MAY 6

- Explosive train (MDF)
Explosive interfaces Initiation points U Umbilical disconnect

0

.2

Figure 7.10-2 .Spacecraft - LEM adapter separation system, explosive train schematic, Mission AS-201.

.-

7-179

rl

0
N

v ,

I

a

m 5 w

u

I

.c)

>. E

a

0 0

3
I

9 1

N
L -

orn

9

Ln

a

7

Q 2

7-180

UNCLASSIFIED

NASA-S-66-6300 MAY 6

Silicone rubber (room temperature vulcan i zing) Lead azide-;,

Ex p los ive

rLead sheath

I

Booster

1 RDX
Crossover booster

I

Figure 7.10-4.-

Charge, explosive train, Mission AS-201.

UNCLASSIFIED

7- 18 1

.. 0
N
v)

U

..z
0 E

Lo

m .8
Y

m

Y

0

U

? !
m

9

r(

0
9

m

7-1 2 8

a

rl

0
I

Y v,
a 0 .S
v)

8 .4

0

Y

E
aJ

0 n

> .v)
aJ

x

L

a ,

u l
v)

3

9

>. a 2
M
0
I

h
I

aJ

T 0

9

M

9 9
I v)

Q

4 v,

z

7.11 S t a b i l i z a t i o n and Control Subsystem and Control Programer
Summary. The s t a b i l i z a t i o n and control subsystem (SCS) demonstrated t h e capability f o r performance of aJ1 mission objectives. Attitude cont r o l was maintained adequately from CSM/S-NB separation until the elect r i c a l parer subsystem (EPS) failure occurred a t T+1649 seconds. The SCS performed adequately during both the CSM/S-IVB and CM/SM separations. Three precise a t t i t u d e maneuvers were perforrqed: one maneuver u t i l i z e d the service module reaction control subsystem (SM RCS) and two manemm?s u t i l i z e d t h e command module reaction control subsystem (CM RCS). Two service propulsion subsystem (SPS) f i r i n g s were properly controlled des p i t e abnormal engine performance. Reentry control was exercised through the peak g region and well i n t o blackout ( u n t i l approximately Ti-1649 sec) , a t which time t h e R S control motor switches were transferred from the C CM t o t h e SM position as a result of EPS problems.

-

,

The control programmer (CP) performed properly throughout t h e m i s s i o n although all events were delayed approxiroately 10 seconds from the nominal timeline because of a l a t e i n i t i a t i o n signal from t h e launch
vehicle. The attitude reference subsystem (ARS) performed as expected w i t h r e l a t i v e l y high gyro drifts appearing under Q loads.

Description.- The s t a b i l i z a t i o n and control subsystem on spacecraft 009 w a s a Block I type configuration, modified t o allow commands normally provided by the guidance and navigation system or the p i l o t t o be i n i t i a t e d by t h e control programmer and master events sequence cont r o l l e r (fig. 7.U-1). Wssion AS-201 was the first f l i g h t test of the Block I hardware.
The spacecraft 009 SCS included: (a) A r a t e gyro package, which contained three miniature rate gyros mounted orthogonally t o sense angular rates about the three spacecraft body axes.
(b) A n a t t i t u d e gyro and accelerometer package, which consisted of three body-mounted gyros mounted orthogonaLly t o sense angular displacements about the three spacecraft body axes, and a hinged pendulum accelerometer mounted t o sense acceleration along t h e spacecraft X axis.

(c) Electronic control assemblies which contained the c i r c u i t elements r e q d r e d f o r resolving, suming, shaping, and switching the signals necessary t o control t h e reaction control thrusters and the propulsion engine t h r u s t vector subsystem. (a) A v e l o c i t y change indicator which provided the capability f o r manually i n s e r t i n g t h e desired v e l o c i t y change required f o r SPS thrusting.

7-18?
(e) An attitude set/gimbal position indicator which pruvides a means of selecting the deskred position of the SPS engine gimbals for the first SPS AV maneuver.
'

"he automated control subsystem on spacecraft 009 included the CP, the radio commasd control (RCC) unit, the ARS, and the backup reentry sensor. d The CP included a n o d and abort timer & the logic networks necessary to providey in the proper sequence, commnds to the spacecraft sdsystem. Backug ground control of selected spacecraft events was provided through the up-data link and the RCC unit. The ARS pruvided, by way of telemetry link, spacecraft pitch, roll, and yaw attitudes for backup information for ground control activities and for postflight duation. The backup reentry sensor pravided backup for the 0.02 switch which commanded the SCS to the reentry configuration. Stabilization and control subsystem performance evaluation.Ascent/S-IVB/CSM separation phase: At S-IB ignition (ap roximately T-2.5 sec) the spacecraft rate gyros indicated s m a l l (& deg sec) oscillations in all axes. These oscillations continued for approximately 5 seconds, then damped to a negligible valu in all axes for the remainder of the ascent hase. The roll rate telemetry signal nulled at a constant 0 4 deg sec. This value, an instrumentation bias noted during .2 preflight testing and throughout the mission, did not affect SCS perfo m c e . The body-mouuted integrating gyros were uncaged simultaneously with (32 -. sec) to establish a spacecraft attitude reference. The separation sequence, 6 & l tbg at this time, is separation wa8 effected by a direct sham in figure 7 1 - . Physical, .12 ulhge command which applied parer to the +X RCS direct coils. At physical separation (Ir$44.9 s c , a positive pitch (+P) disturbance was obe) 08 semd. When attitude control was enabled ( . sec later), the appropriate negative pitch (-P) thruster counteracted the disturbance and . stabilized the rate at 08 deg/sec. Direct uUage was replaced by +X translation at T a 6 . 7 seconds. DLlring +X trasslation, attitude control took priority, and the rate decreased with an acceleration typical of single thruster performance. (See section 7 9 1 ) ... The +P/+X and -P/-X thrusters fired alternately throughout the +X translation to correct for the inoperative thruster.
'

P

P

the S-IVB separation comrmnd

Yaw-axis transients were negligible during direct u l k g e , indieating proper operation of the +Y/+X and -Y/+X thrusters. During +X transbtion, however, the positive yaw (+Y) and negative yaw (-Y) thrusters fired

7-186
alternately t o counteract inoperative or degraded yaw thrusters. (See The inoperative thrusters had no adverse effect on section 7.9.1.) attitude control of the CSM; however, the c a p b i l i t y for t h e +X transb t l o n maneuvers (UUage) was degraded. Commnd and service m o d u l e coast phases: Attitude hold control was excellent throughout the coasting periods. Both body attitudes and rates were controlled within specified limits (*" e deg/sec) and thruster and activitywas minrtnm.l with short duraticm firings in all cases. Representative l i m i t cycles during attitude control are shown in figure 7.11-3. Pitch-axis cycles were both asymmetrical and variable i n period (E t o 57 sec) AmpL&tudeswere approximately 0.4' peak-to-peak. Yaw-axis periods were also variable (13 t o 88 sec) with peak-to-peak amplitudes The asymmetry and varying periods i n these axes of approximately 0.35'. are normal reactions t o variations in thrust levels, center-of-gravity locations, and i n i t i a l conditions. In the r o l l axis, the cycles were relatively symmetrical and stable with an amplitude and period of approximately 0 9 . peak-to-peak and 2.5 seconds, respectively.

,

.

Service propulsion subsystem translations: Spacecraft response during +X translations receding each SPS AV maneuver was similar to that observed at S-IVB$SM septwation. (See figs. 7.11-4 and 7.11-5.) The RCS thrusters identified i n section 7.9.1 remained inoperative and

ullage capability was degraded. Transients were negligible a t ignition f o r the first SF'S translation, indicating proper SCS performance and accurate center-of-gravity location All SPS control axes were stable during the estimates (fig. 7.11-6). The ~~~llleuver. low-frequency transient response which developed was norm& The trim follawer loop performance demonstrated the a b i l i t y t o adjust spacecraft attitude automatically as required by spacecraft center-of-gradty shifts. After engine ignition, the r o l l thruster duty cycle increased significEntly, although the duration of thruster impulses remained a t the minimum level. The SPS thrust l e v e l decreased approximately nition (see section 7.7). N effect was noted i n o tion; huwever, the law acceleration resulted in a off command rather than a thrust-off command from

80 seconds after igcontrol system opera- , timed backup C thrustP the n o d AV counter.

The AV counter performed as expected, based on actual SPS thrust profiles. The i n i t i a l preflight AV setting was 4570 ft/sec. A t SF'S thrust termixmtion, canrmanded by the CP, the remaining AV was 863 ft/sec. A zero reading i s necessary f o r a n o d automtic SFS thrust-off.
The +X translation and gimbal position s e t preceding the second SPS translation were cormnsnded sirmiLtsneausly with first burn cutoff and w e r e performed during the thrust tafl-off period. Because RCS attitude

control was inhibited at this time, pitch and yaw transients occurred. The disturbances caused by the thruster outages noted previously remained in effect. The thrust profile during the second SPS translation was erratic .) (see section 7 7 . The commanded gimbal trim settings were based on preflight estimate of center-of-gravitylocation assuming a nominal first SPS translation, and, therefore, were not correct for the actual ' location. &cause of the improper trim setting, an approximately 3 initial thrust misalignment occurred in the yaw axis and a significant transient developed. Despite these conditions, adequate control was maintained throughout.

An analog computer simulation of the second burn with a l l system parameters nominal was performed and the time histories of pertinent parameters obtained from the simulation were compared with data obtained fromthe flight. The low-frequency response of spacecraft rates, attitude errors, and gimbal positions agreed, indicating that no significant degradation in the performance of the gimbal actuators occurred during 1 the first burn. The rather erratic high-frequency ( to 2 cycles/sec), small-amplitude oscillations noted in the data (particularly in the gimbal position feedback signals) during the first 6 seconds of the burn were not reproduced in.the nominal simulation. These oscillations were most probably a result of the fluctuations in SF'S thrust, particularly in the variation of thrust-vector orientation relative to the engine centerline resulting from unsymmetrical propellant flow in the SPS nozzle. Such a variation would produce an oscillatory torque on the SPS engine which, in turn, would produce a direct force on the gimbal actuator clutches (as opposed to torques on the spacecraft which affect the actuators only through the feedback loops). This effect was demonstrated i n the analog simulation by applying a sinusoidal force of 2 0 pounds 0 peak at a frequency near that observed in the data. Two hundred pounds is estimated to be a "worst case" force which would be expected from thrust-mctor displacement from the engine centerline. This forcing function resulted in oscillations of the gimbals about the trim point comparable in magnitude to those sham by the data (M.2" to G . 4 " ) .
Other attempts were made in the simulation to reproduce the highfrequency oscillations by varying different system parameters such as clutch force gains, and rate and attitude feedback gains; however, these variations in system parameters, in general, caused the low-frequency response to differ significantly from the flight data. This further substantiates the conclusion that the system performed normally, and that the high-frequency oscillations were forced, apparently by the fluctuating thrust-vector orientation relative to the engine centerline, as opposed to inherent oscillations in an underdamped system. As in the first SFS burn, a s m a l l oscillation was noted, particularly in the yaw gimbal position feedback, at approximately slosh frequency during the last 4 seconds of the second burn.

7-188
CSM separation orientation: After the second SPS thrust termination, a 9 8 p i t c h maneuver was accomplished by u t i l i z i n g the SM RCS t o achieve proper CM/SM separation a t t i t u d e . Figure 7.11-7 contains a t i m e h i s t o r y of spacecraft p i t c h rates, a t t i t u d e errors, and thruster f i r i n g commands during t h i s period. R o l l and y a w disturbances were negligible and are not shown. The maneuver commands were i n i t i a t e d by the CP, and the RCS responded w i t h positive and negative angular accelerations s l i g h t l y l e s s than half t h e predicted value f o r dual t h r u s t e r operation, indicating that t h e p i t c h thrusters i n quad A remained inoperative. In addition, t h e r a t e response (fig. 7.U-7) matched t h a t obtained from a p r e f l i g h t simulation with t h i s quad inoperative. The t o t a l angular change achieved was 9.' 14) when calculated by integrating the r a t e curve, and go.?, The maneuver was precisely peras merisured by the ARS (fig. 7.11-8). formed although CM/SM separation was i n i t i a t e d before the spacecraft s t a b i l i z e d within the r a t e and a t t i t u d e deadbands.
CM/SM separation: A t CM/SM separation, a p i t c h rate t r a n s i e n t of -3.5 deg/sec was i m p a r t e d t o t h e CM; r o l l and y a w rate t r a n s i e n t s w e r e negligible. The p i t c h disturbance was controlled, as indicated i n f i g ure 7.11-9. The performance of the SCS a t CM RCS activation was nominal and p i t c h accelerations indicated normal dual system performance.

MS CM reentry orientation: A f t e r C / M separation, an 82.9 p i t c h maneuver w s accomplished u t i l i z i n g the CM RCS t o achieve p r o p r p i t c h a orientation. Figure 7.11-10 contains a t i m e h i s t o r y of spacecraft p i t c h rates, a t t i t u d e errors, and f i r i n g commands during t h i s period. R o l l and yaw disturbances w e r e again negligible and are not shown. A comparison of spacecraft response w i t h the predicted angular accelerations and with p r e f l i g h t simulations indicates dual system performance. The t o t a l angular change achieved was 86" when calculated by integrating the rate curve, and 80' as measured by t h e ARS (fig. 7.11-8)
A f t e r completion of t h e pitch orientation t h e C i n i t i a t e d a nominal P 1800 roll maneuver. Figure 7 . l l - l O contains a t i m e h i s t o r y of spacecraft roll r a t e s , a t t i t u d e errors, a d f i r i n g commands during t h i s period.

Comparison of spacecraft response w i t h the predicted angular accelerations and with p r e f l i g h t simuJations again indicates dual system performance. The t o t a l angular change achieved, calculated by integrating the rate curve, w s 190". The discrepancy i s due to t h e n u l l b i a s i n t h e r a t e a data. The t o t a l maneuver measured by the ARS indicated 176.9' (see fig. 7 . ~ - 1 1 ) .
CM coast phase: Representative pitch, yaw, and r o l l rate and a t t i tude e r r o r time h i s t o r i e s a r e presented in figure 7.11-12. The peak-topeak amplitudes of t h e l i m i t cycles were L T i n pitch, 1 . 6 5 O i n yaw, and 18' i n r o l l . The periods were approximately 1 0 seconds i n pitch, .2 22 seconds i n yaw, and 21 seconds i n roll.

The SCS performed s a t i s f a c t o r i l y during this phase.
CM reentry: Proper spacecraft control was maintained through peak g and w e l l i n t o blackout. A l l SCS 0.05g functions occurred as expected (~1580.72sec) N o m 1 t h r u s t e r f i r i n g s during reentry indicated neartrim a t t i t u d e s and rates which r e f l e c t proper SCS performance and negligible d r i f t i n the body-mounted integrating gyros. Transfer from t h e CM t o the S position of t h e R S system B CSM t r a n s f e r switch occurred a t M C T+1641 seconds, and control of system B CM thrusters was l o s t (see sect i o n 7.12). The CM system A t h u s t e r s properly controlled t h e spacecraft u n t i l '11+1649 seconds when system A CSM transfer switch-also transferred and all spacecraft control was l o s t . The only discrepancy noted i n SCS environmental parameters during the mission occurred a t t h i s time when the combined temperature indication i n the body-mounted integrating gyros decreased below limits. Aerodynamic loading caused the spacecraft t o start r o l l i n g a t T+1649 seconds (see fig. 7.=-13(a) t o ( a ) ) . The r o l l rate increased t o 26 deg/sec a t T-t.1778 seconds a t which time the r a t e signal output saturated and remained saturated u n t i l after drogue parachute deployment when all spacecraft rates were damped.

.

@

Control programmer performance.- The control programmer performed nminallythroughout the mission, providing a series of commands i n the correct sequence and a t the proper times within t h e limits of the timer. The planned and actua3 t i m e s of events c o m d e d by the control programer are shown in t a b l e 7.U-I. An i n i t i a l e r r o r i n s t a r t i n g the timer, due t o a delay i n t h e S-IVB cutoff, caused an approximate 10-second d i f f e r ence between planned and a c t u a l times.
A t t i t u d e reference subsystem performance evaluation.- The a t t i t u d e reference system provided a means of monitoring spacecraft a t t i t u d e throughout t h e mission. The spacecraft pitch and r o l l maneuvers as measured by t h e ARS were: ARS measured rate, deg

Integmted rate
deg

,

~omina~ rate, del3

F i r s t pitch Second p i t c h
RoU.
t

90.7
80. o

91.4
86.0

go. 0
82.5

176.9

179.0

180. o
d

Figures 7.22,-8, 7.U-U, and 7.U-14 are time history p l o t s of ARS gimbal angles, Saturn (ST-Uh) gimbal angles, and nominal p r e f l i g h t simulation. With t h e exception of a pitch transient p r i o r t o S-IVB shutdown, t h e ST-I24 data compare favorably with t h e preflight simul a t ion.
A t S-IVB shutdown, the pitch and yaw gyro indicated a r e l a t i v e l y l a r g e error, -160 i n p i t c h and +60 i n pw. These values remained cons t a n t throughout CSM coast, indicating large g-sensitive d r i f t . Further drifts were noted during SPS translations. Fixed drift f o r this gyro was within specification tolerance throughout the f l i g h t , with e r r o r s i n yaw, compared with the nominal a t e n t r y of lob i n r o l l and trajectory.

TABLF: 7.U.-I.
~

- CONTFiOL PROGRAMMER COMMANDS
Event

SEQUENCE

Number

jc Time from r a ~e zero, c e Planned Actual

1 2

Start normal timer Tape recorders off
S-IVB/SC separation signal on

3 4 5 6 7 8
9
10

&cage SCS gyros S-IVB/SC separation s i g n a l off +X translation on +X translation off +X translation on First gimbal position set Primary SPS gimbal motors on Secondary SPS gimbal motors on Remove primary motors on command Remove secondary motors on command Arm SPS thrust solenoids SPS thrust on "On"
Tape recorders on

u.
12

13

. 14
15 . 16
17 18

+X translation off SPS thrust on "Off" SPS thrust off "on" (AV backup +X translation on SPS thrust off "Off" Second gimbal position t SPS thrust on "On" SPS thrust an "Off" +X transhtion off Pitch rate (-5 deg/sec) on Pitch rate (-5 deg/sec) off

652.7 654.7 832.7 832.7 836.2 836.2 854.2 u70.7 1170.7 1185.7 1186.7 1186.7 U87.7 1200.7 1200.7 1311.2 1384.7 13@+* 7 1385.0 1385.2 1385-2 1385.2 1400.2 1410.2
1410.2

663.1 665.2
( ) 8

8k3.2
(a)

846.7 864.6
1181.2

(a>

1196.1

(4
(a)

(4
1211.2

m.2
13=* 9 1395.2 1395.2
1395.4 1395.7
(b1

1413.7 1431.7

1395.7 1410.7 1420.7 1420.7 1424.1 1442.1

%Io measurement available to determine time.

bCould not be determined from intermittent data.

TAEGE 7.U-I.-

CONTROL PROGRAMMER COMMANDS SEQUENCE

-

Concluded

Number

Event

Time from range zero, sec
Planned

Actual

19
20

CM/SM separation start
SCS entry mode on

1443.7

21
22

(-5 deg/sec) on Pitch r a t e (-5 deg/sec) o f f ROU. rate (+5 deg/sec) on ROU, rate (+5 deg/sec) off
Pitch rate A r m 0.O’jg backup
EL5 activate

1443.7 1452.2
1468.7 1468.7 1504.7

(a) 1454.2
1462.6 1479.1

1504.7 1504.7

1479.2 1515.1 (a>
(b)

measurement available t o determine t i m e . bCould not be determined from intermittent data.
%o

7- 193

rl

0

(? v)
a

E
aJ

.

U

d

m m

0
U L

3

v)

C 0
0

u 8 m
0 .Y

S

..m x
N

m

D

1

rl
I rl d

b

9

a 2
tt

t

LL

.-

2 3
ul

9 9

?

rn

0

7-194
m

.I

r
VI

.-

v)

0 a l

) .

a! -

1

.r,
VI

VI

c

b

7- 195

..5
VI
VI

C 0

e ?

E
.I E E
E

al 0 VI

5.
c VI

?! 5
V

7-196

U

7-197

c e .c

V

N e

c .0
c

H e
c

e
c

8

p

L

I

I

I

N

0

Y

7-198

s ..I
VI

L

a l

>

al 3

E
E

e
L

c u 0

7-1 99

0
9
U
d

9

VI

f

N

VI

U
d

0 2 p a f I.E -

E

d

N

m

: :

rc' 2
m U

.-

9

-3

N
0

f

m

d

? 9 ? 3 s a z

7-200

z
i

E E e t .I -

P

.-

7-201

3,

a

E m
a In l
L I

E

s

Q l

i i

9

2 m
9
I

9
I

? In
z

2

7-202

U L

e az
L

7-203

E:
5 :

>-

$3

33 ?’

7 204.
NASA-S-66-63

go

fi;a %
L

5 c
a

j I
w

5 -1 c .V

P

-2

Time from lift-off, sec

c

W -

E

Time from lift-off, sec
1-

z

w

-0 W

cn

U ' L

P 0-

e
L

PI

=
3
0

-1

-

5 =

-2-

-3
Time from lift-off, sec Figure 7.11-12.

- CM coast phase limit cycles, Mission AS-201.

7-205

NASA-S-66-63 16 MAY 6
LO

10

P u
W
B

B

0

-10

-20

LO

10

0
\ u)

w

L 1 0

n
-10

-20

LO

10

w
W

0 0

\

u1

0
-10

-LO

r bao

15SO

1600

1610

1620

I630
SEC

1640

1650

T I M E F R O M LIFT-OFF,

(a) 1580 to 1650 seconds.

Figure 7.11-13.-

CM reentry rate time histories, Mission AS-201.

7-20 6

NASA-S-66-63 17 M A Y 6

10

0

-10

-20

._

1t5u

1660

I670
TIME

1660

1690
SEC

1700

1710

1 ?PD

F R O M LIFT-OFF,

(b) 1650 to 1720 seconds.
Figure

7.11-13.-

Continued.

NASA-S-66-6318 MAY 6

(c)

1720 to 1790 seconds.

Figure

7.11-13.-

Continued.

e

N 9 S A - S - 6 6 - 6 3 19 MAY G

i

w

\ a

0
d

0

nrr
173b

I l l I 1 I1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I
1dUU

ldlb

1uzu

1630

1d43

1dSU

1 dC.0

T I M E FROM LIFT-OFF,

SEC

(d) 1790 t o 1860 seconds.
Figure

7.11-13.- Concluded.

7-20 9

I

a vl i=

e

7-210 7 1 Electrical Power Subsystem .2
Description. - The electrical power subsystem (EPS) supplied, controlled, and distributed all electrical power in the spacecraft from lift-off through recovery. Three major differences existed between the EPS aboard spacecraft 009 and the Block I configuration: (1)batteries were included rather than fuel cells, (2) a power transfer c o n t r o l unit was included to perform part of the power switching that will be performed by the flight crew on manned missions, and ( 3 ) only two inverters were used. (See fig. 7.12-1.) In addition, the battery charger was not installed on spacecraft 009, and although the EPS radiators were installed, they were not utilized. Main dc power was supplied by three batteries (~~461-0012-003) located in the service module and distributed through two redundant dc buses (A and B . Two 400-cycle inverters which received power f r o m dc ) buses A and B were connected t o the ac buses p r i o r to flight; one inverter supplied power to ac bus 1 and the other supplied power to . ac bus 2 The essential ac loads received power from ac bus 1 The . power-transfer control unit automated the electrical power subsystem controls normally operated manually by the flight crew. If inverter 1 or ac bus 1 had failed during flight, the power transfer control unit would have disconnected the essential loads from ac bus 1 and recon. nected them to ac bus 2 Immediately prior to separation, cormnand module (CM) batteries A,

B, and C were connected to main dc buses A and B and the postlanding
to supply power to CM loads after the service module (SM) was sepa1 rated. Approximately 1 seconds after the CMlanded, batteries A, 23, and C were disconnected from main buses A and B to prevent unnecessary battery drain. Batteries A and B were also disconnected from battery buses'A and B All postlanding loads received power from the postlanding . bus. Pyrotechnic devices were powered by two pyre batteries (ME&-007) in the CM, and two additional batteries (ME461-007) were installed in the SM to power the SM jettison controller after CM/SM separation.
bus

Performance. The electrical power subsystem operated normally until T+1454.7 seconds (CM/SM separation) at which time a short transient . occurred on both main buses, A and B Main bus A voltage dropped to 2 . volts and main bus B dropped to 22.9 volts and total current rose 18 0. to a maximum of 2 9 9 amperes compared with a nominal value of approximately 60 amperes. The total transient occurred in less than 0 7 sec. ond. Figure 7.12-2 shows this transient on battery bus A and main bus A. Analysis indiceted that hot wires existed in the CM umbilical when it was guillotined. Postflight testing verified that SM RCS propellant isolation lines A and B and an obsolete line for SM RCS quad temperature control system were not deadfaced before going through the umbilical.

-

7211
These lines were fed through circuit breakers CB15, CB16, and cB18 located on panels 25 and 2 . The transient was too short to effect an 2 opening of the circuit breakers and therefore the lines remained hot after CM/SM separation. This has been confirmed by postflight testing. Data show the loss of pyro B and logic B bus voltages at T+1635 seconds (see fig. 7.12-3). Analysis indicated that cB18 on panel 22 had opened. Postflight inspection verified this. Data showed an overload on the system which was cleared when CB18 opened. Figures 7.12-4(a) to 7 l - ( ) show the three battery currents during the period of .24c W1631 seconds to ~ 16 36 seconds. A composite of these shows an abnormal seconds ramping to a maximum of 27 amperes current beginning at ~1632.8 at approximately W633.3 seconds and abruptly decreasing at T+1635.1 seconds. The current distribution among the three batteries was what would be expected for the abnormal current through c 1 . Further, the magniS8 tude of abnormal current shown and the time that it lasted, compared with the circuit breaker characteristics, show that c 1 performed exB8 actly to specifications. Figure 7.12-5 shows the effect of the circuit breaker opening. From T+1635 seconds to T+1649 seconds, main buses A and B began to show transient excursions from nominal values. These transient excursions continued until approximately ~ 1 6 5 0 seconds when a major short occurred which dropped the main bus A and main bus B voltages sharply, reaching a low of approximately 1 volts on each bus with a total cur8 rent of approximately 2 6 amperes at ~+1693 6 seconds. Figure 7.12-6 shows the sequence of events associated with this failure.
As individual circuit breakers opened, distinct voltage rises occurred at Ti-1693 seconds, T+1728 seconds, T+1770 seconds, T+2065 seconds, T+2lO3 seconds, T+2U3 seconds, and W l 2 seconds. Each voltage rise 2.1 was accompanied by a distinct decrease in t o t a l current. The last r i s e brought both buses back to nominal voltage and current levels. Fig.27 ures 7 1 - and 7.12-8 show this series of events on main buses A and B voltage and battery A and B current.

7-212

Postflight inspection revealed that the following c i r c u i t breakers which were closed p r i o r t o f l i g h t were open a f t e r f l i g h t : Panel

I

Circuit breaker
~~

Measurement Propellant i s o l a t i o n main B PropeUant i s o l a t i o n main A Yaw main B

CB15

cs16 c~31
c~32

CB33 CB34
CB40

Yaw main A B and D r o l l main B B and D r o l l main A
Pitch main B Pitch main A Master event sequence controller
arm B

(3339

The data analysis and postflight t e s t i n g have led t o the conclusion t h a t t h e s e r i e s of events was caused by the following:

A s t h e spacecraft; entered the high heat period of reentry the two propellant i s o l a t i o n l i n e s , which were not run through any deadfacing f a c i l i t y , applied voltage through the GSE r e s e t l i n e s t o the RCS transf e r switches i n the RCS controllers. This transferred the switches back t o t h e SM position. The r e s e t switches connected additional hot l i n e s t o the umbilical, which fused t o the spacecraft ground, r e s u l t i n g i n a heavy current drain. The t o t a l current flowing through the affected breakers averaged 204 amperes as opposed t o the t o t a l breaker capacity of 205 amperes. The high current drain lasted f o r a s i g n i f i c a n t t i m e period (approximately 472 seconds) before t h e noted breakers opened and terminated the short. A f t e r the l a s t of the l i s t e d c i r c u i t breakers opened, the e l e c t r i c a l power subsystem operated normally with the exception of the permanent l o s s of pyro bus B and l o g i c bus B when c i r c u i t breaker cs18 opened.
A s a result of this analysis, the following changes have been made:

(a)

Corrected wiring on subsequent spacecraft.

(b) Provided ground support equipment t o v e r i f y umbilical deadfacing.

(c)

Isolated A and B buses.

The following actions have been taken on spacecraft O U : (a) A rearrangement of the SCS diode circuits was made in order to prevent a failure i one bus from overloading the other bus. n

n l , (b) I the SCS circuit utilization box Cw contacts for 0, 4, 5, 6, and 7 were jumpered. This bypasses the SCS channel disable relays to eliminate a possible single point failure.

SlgA4 B1 is now transferred by the B RCS motor transfer switch and SlgA2 B3 is now transferred by the A RCS motor transfer switch.
The umbilical f o r spacecraft Oll was reexamined and cleared of all unnecessary non-deadfaced wires that were identified as potential problem areas. Approximately l.l wires remain which are hot but these are current-limited annunciator wires.

(c)

Two S RCS positive yaw (+Y) jets were rewired such that M

(a)

c~18 C23TB1 has revealed that these circuits are clean. and

(e)

A physical examination of spacecraft wiring associated with

7 -a4

0
N

r(

0
N

Q
In .0 In

fn

.s

S

.Y

E 0

.

m n
VI

2

a J

0

In

aJ
c

.2
L

-0

S .5

m

U

m W

2 P

9

> a z

7-216

4

cn D
0
0
S

aJ

v)

u W cn

z
t

0

1 In
W

W

-

3
c

ul

3
U 0

n
4
W

J

L

a"
z
0 0

I

8
9

>. Q E
M
I

4

M

cv

9 9
Z I

a

'SL-IOA

i

c

+

ii
L

P

E
. c

e

2 L

c

a 7

d

7-218

NASA-S-66-6325 MAY 6

1631.66

1632.04

1632.44

1632.84

1633.24

1633.M

1634.M

1634.44

1634.84

1635.24

1635.64

1636.04

1636.44

Elapsed lime, set

(b> Current battery B.
Figure 7.12-4.Continued.

7-219

NASA-S-66-6326 MAY 6

(c) Current post landing battery. Figure

7.12-4.- Concluded.

7 -2 2 0

a

7-2 21

1I .

7-222

0

0)
0

d

m 4

rn
>

v)

D

0

S

.o
0)
v)

0

m
v)

0
rl
U

n

3

9
0

I n

5 .m

E

0

m rl

0

a
v)

. a
S .m

3

n
U

m

3
I

30 ' L l O A

a z

7-223

v)

m

-0
W u)

Q)

u

S 0
V

3
U

<

m
-9

aJ

"

cn

c

0

0

I

<

0

0

z w

<

0 w

W

<
c
J

n
0
U

.

c I

m L
4 J W

0

u

n
>

J

n

U

9
rl

0 W

I I

n
U

0

.

L > 0

N o

U

N 0

U

9

>. a H
0

M M

? 9 ? m 4 m
a z

n

.

0
n

0 N

0
I

0

0

0 n

I

3a ' n o h

7- 224

2

a

7-225

-a
S 0
0

v)

a ,
i n

0

rn
Fi

0

+
I -

v)

'c3

u
w
ul

S 0
0

a ,
i n

0

c

!
P
c

*

"

I I-

W

9
I 4

m

0

z !
Y

4

0

m rl
m

0 0

n
U

Y

0 U

:

I
0

"p
(v

d
0

b

LL

.-

rn

3

2

.
a z
Sd W V

Sd W V

7-226

0 0 0

0
I

n l
U

0

o r ’ .

co I cv

b

a

SdWV

Sd W V

z

7-227

b

E
( .

L

Y 8

e
u
Q .

m cv
U O

Ln

I

03
rl

.

I N

U

0

, " I ; N N 2 3

3
z

. I
U

r
I

a

9 9
I

n,

.
Sd W V
SdWV

4 z

7.13

Sequential Subsystem

Description. The sequential events control subsystem (SECS) aboard s w c e c r a f t 009 consisted of a master events sequence controller (MESC), senrice module j e t t i s o n controller (SMJC) e a r t h Landing sequence cont r o l l e r (ELSC) reaction control subsystem controller (RCSC) postlanding sequence controller (PLSC) pyro continuity v e r i f i c a t i o n box (PCVB) impact switch, and fuel dump box. The PLSC, impact switch, and fuel dump box are not standard Block I equipment. These were added t o spacec r a f t 009 t o perform automatically the following functions which a r e normally controlled manually: main parachute disconnect, RCS f u e l dwrrping and postlanding flmctions. The PCVB on spacecraft 009 differed from standard Block I in that it did not contain the relays t o preclude premature operation of ELSC functions. Service module b a t t e r i e s powered t h e SMJT while aXL other controllers received parer f r o m b a t t e r i e s i n the command module (CM) Only t h e ELSC and PCVB had been previously f l i g h t tested (ELSC and PCVB on SC-002 and ELSC on SC-002 and BP-22, refs. 6 and 7).

-

,

,

-

r

,

,

,

.

The MESC controlled t h e logic power, pyrotechnic power, and timing f’unctions required t o i n i t i a t e and terminate events associated w i t h ascent, abort, and separation. Control of CM R S f u e l and oxidizer dumpC M ing, purging, and t r a n s f e r of the RCS e l e c t r i c a l control from the S t o M S t h e CM during IXS abort or normal C / M separation w a s provided by the M RCSC and t h e fuel dump box. The SMJC programmed the S mazleuvers required t o minimize the probability of recontact of t h e two modules after separation. Events associated with drogue parachute deployment and release, and p i l o t parachute deployment were controlled by t h e ELSC; main parachute disconnect was i n i t i a t e d by t h e impact switch. The PLSC provided f o r automatic control of uprighting t h e spacecraft ( i f in an apexdown attitude i n t h e water) and i n i t i a t e d deployment of the €IF recovery antenna. Figure 7.13-1 shows t h e SECS together with major related spacecraft items.

Performance. The sequential events control subsystem (SECS) functioned s a t i s f a c t o r i l y throughout the f l i g h t except f o r those functions disabled by t h e opening of cB18 on panel 22 a t ~ 1 6 3 5 seconds (see sect i o n 7.12). This removed power from t h e SECS system B and prevented the following events from occurring: (a) CM RCS system B propellant depletion burn (b)
(d)

-

CM RCS f u e l system A and B helium interconnect

CM RCS oxidizer system A and B helium interconnect
CM RCS system A f u e l tank bypass

(a)

7-229
'

(e)
(f)

CM E3S system B oxidizer tank bypass

System B forward heat shield j e t t i s o n t h r u s t e r f i r e System B main parachute disconnect

(g)

For f u r t h e r discussion of these disabled c i r c u i t s , see sections 7.9, 7.10, and 7.11.
A complete l i s t of s i g n i f i c a n t f l i g h t events with plamed and a c t u a l times i s given i n t a b l e 2.0-1.

1

a z

v,

7-231

7.14 Emergency Detection Sasystem
Summa.ry.- A primary objective of Mission AS-201was t o evaluate the performance of the emergency detection subsystem (EDS) i n the open-loop configuration (automatic abort circuit not enabled in the spacecraft). The open-loop EDS prformed nominally in a l l respects, with no abort signals generated by the subsystem.

Description.- The emergency detection subsystem i n the spacecraft
was designed t o receive indications of emergency during the launch phase

from the launch vehicle, from spacecraft Bystems, and f r o m the Q-ball mounted a t the apex of the launch-escape tower. The command module (CM) interfaces w i t h the launch vehicle and the &-ball are sham in f i g ure 7.14-1.
Crew displays of EDS parameters were omitted in Wssion AS-201, w i t h System A bilevel display parameters telemetered f o r f l i g h t evaluation. &-ball output of pitch and yaw angle of attack vector sum was a l s o telemetered. The guidance and navigation sdsystem and the f l i g h t director attitrzde indicator were omitted; therefore spacecraft angular rates and attitude errors were unavailable. Prapisions f o r tuwer jettison and nonautomatic abort, which normally would be pilot f’unctions, was included in the control programer. Tower jettison was commanded t o the control programmer by the launch vehicle sequencer with backup from the spacec r a f t tone command link. Abort could only be commanded t o the control programmer by the spacecraft tone cormnand link.
The automatic abort circuitry installed i n spacecraft 009 was placed in the open-loop configuration by leavlng the automatic abort mode switch In the closed-loop conin the O I T position (figs. 7 1 - and 7.14-3). .42 figuration an automatic abort would have been commanded by the launch vehicle i n the event of loss of t h r u 8 t of two first-stage engines, ex.cessive sngular r a t e i n any control plane, or by loss of a t least t w o of the three hot-wire automatic abort interface signals between the CSM and the instrument unit ( U . I)

Performance.- No automatic abort or display signals were generated The Q-balloutput was smooth, continuous, and within expected limits throughout the period of interest, T+3O seconds through T+100 seconds, a8 sham in figure 7.14-4.
during the mission.

The mission demonstrated proper perfomsnce of the launch vehicle engine status circuits, the &-ball, and launch vehicle l i f t - o f f signals t o the spacecraft.

The excessive noise i n the outputs of the rate gyros during the period of high dynaslic pressure is discussed i n section 8.

7-232
NASA-S-66-6336

MAY 6
% Prior t o lift-off only ?# 31t From S-IJ7B command destruct "arm and ECO" by RDSC ground command

1

Engine status

k

I
Engine status
I

1 Cutoff

1

t

1
Cutoff

'" I
I

1
Hotwire circuits

Number i n parentheses indicate number
of signals for each function

Figure 7.14-1.-

EDS launch vehicle and Q-ball interface, Mission AS-201.

7-233

m

2 .3

L

0

4
.-

= 01
E

m

W

1
9

>-

a
2

? 9
9
..

rcc) m

m

x
aJ
L

1

v)

e

i

a

7-29
NASA-S-66-6338 MAY 6

MESC-A

Abort mode select

Tower jettison (switchover L E S t o SPS)

Abort initiate

tTM I U,, I 7 I I
I

Abort command from MCP (ground RF command) Lift-off enabling

* I
Cutoff relays A

I

I

Auto abort enable

I

:e: : ; is on (d isable auto abort) Auto abort mode switch (off i n SC-009)

I I I

I I

2 / 3 vote logic

I

I I 1 I I
I

I
I

I
I

I

I
I

'

CM
IU

I I I Auto abort logic inputs from EDS distributor

I I I I I Engine cutoff signals t o EDS distributor
e--

Hotwire circuits

Figure 7.14-3

.- Spacecraft automatic abort and LV engine cutoff,
Mission AS-201.

7-235

7.15 Instrumentation
71. . 5 1 Operational and flight qualification instmentation.- The instrumentation subsystem included four separate categories: the measuring systems, the timing equipment, the magnetic tape recorders, and the special telemetry equipment. The interfaces between the instmenn tation and other spacecraft subsystems are sham i figures 7.13-1 and A measurement summary is presented i table 7.15-1. n 7.15-2.
Operational instrumentation: The operational instrumentation consisted of transducers and matching components which were used to measure temperatures, pressures, currents, voltages, frequencies, quantities, flow rates, and events necessary to the management of spacecraft 009. Some operational transducers are an integral part of hardware i n other subsystems. The measurements described in the f o l l a r l n g paragraphs are a part of the spacecraft and therefore are i n the instrumentation subsystem. The temperature measurements system d e use of solid-state sensing elements which changed resistivity with temperature. The sensing element was one leg of a bridge. The associated signal conditioner provlded bridge power and'amplified the signal. The pressure measurements system was similar to the temperature system except that a solid-state stress sensitive element was mounted on a pressure-sensing diaphragm. The CM/SM separation monitor, mounted on the CM, contained a r o l l of glass tape, one end of which was attached to the service module. The tape was coded for separation distances of 5, 1 , and 15 feet with a 0 conductive coating so that as the tape unroUed during sewtion, rate and distance data were generated. Flight qualification instrumentation: The flight qualification instruments were used to measure the physical perfornvnnce of the commnd module, sersice module, spacecraft LEM adapter and included signal conditioners, power supplies, current limiters, power control modules, zone boxes, and a data distribution panel. The measmments were made and canditioned for telemetry and for recording on magnetic tape. masurenments were made of strain, vibration, acceleration, acoustics, char, ablation, pressure, heat flux, and temperature. The instruments are described briefly as follows:

-

Acceleration was measured by a system which employed a mass loaded, zero-length strain gage, power supply, and amplifier.

7-237
The acoustic levels were measured by a system which used a condenser microphone and a signal conditioner. The strain measurements system was composed of a bridge and signal conditioner which supplied 5- or 10-volt parer from a dc-to-dc converter. Vibration was measured by a mass loaded piezo-electric sensor and a charge amplifier. The ablation measurement system consisted of a Geiger counter mounted near the bondline, with radioactive peUets imbedded at seven depths in e t h of three plugs in the ablative heat shield. A signal conditioner Ec was included to convert the Geiger counting rate to a dc voltage such that the voltage would drop approximately 0.7 V for each radioactive pellet lost to ablation. The technique of char measurement was based on the high increase in cmductivity of the ablator when it carbonizes or chars. The probe contained seven leads, each separated by 0.25-inch of ablator material from a common lead. As the char advanced to each lead, conductivity was sensed b;y a voltage increase across a resistor common to all seven stages.

a

Standard asymptotic calorimeters determined law-range heat flux by measuring the temperature difference between the center and periphery of a metal foil. The high-range heat flux was measured by sensors which were composed of a stack of graphite slug type calorimeters. The t r en psrature of each layer was measured by tungsten rhenium thermocouples. Ai; the range of each calorimeter was exceeded, it was autolnatically siJitched out of the circuit, and the next one in the stack switched in so t l t the heat flux could be determined fromthe rate of temperature rise la and radiation balance established. The calorimeters were stacked so as to be approximately flush with the ablator surface. Associated components included the zone boxes, the power supplies, and the sequencer. The ablation temperature measurement system was composed of sheathed thermocouples, zone boxes, power supply, amplifiers, snd temperature gra&lent sensors. The temperature gradient sensor, used for the bondline ttmperature and the temperature gradient measurements in the heat shield, WELS a plug of ablator material with embedded hafniumoxide-coated thermocouples. The data group equipment pruvided the interface between instmmentcttion and communication equipment and included data storage, spacecraft t:ig 'mn, and data signal conditioning functions.

e

Data generated on the spacecraft were either recorded on magnetic tape or transmitted to ground stations, or both. There were two onboard tape recorders: the data storage equipment (DSE) and the flight qualification recorder (FQR).

The data storage equipment, a hybrid recorder, carried P j O feet 14 channels a t 15 in/sec f o r a t o t a l recoraing time of 30 minutes. The five d i g i t a l tracks were used t o record the P M telemetry signal. Four of the nine C analog tracks were used t o record the output of four 90 X 10 c o m t a t o r s . Two tracks were used t o record acoustic data. One track carried a composite timing signal which originated i n the FQ,R and was a mlxture of a 25-kc reference signal and mission elapsed time i n the MSC decinvrl format. The remaining two tracks on the DSE were unused.
of 1-inch tape t o record d i g i t a l and analog data on

The f l i g h t qualification recorder carried 2325 feet of 1-inch tape t o record 14 channels of analog data a t 15 in/sec f o r a possible t o t a l of 31 minutes. Six tracks were used f o r vibration data and two f o r acceleration measurements. Two tracks w e r e used t o record the composite timing signal. This composite s i g n a was a mixture of a 5O-kc reference signal and the same time signal recorded on DSE. Three tracks were used recorded an DSE, and one to record three of the four commu%ator &puts track was unused. Central timing equipment The primary clock on future Apollo spacecraft w i l l be w i t h i n the guidance and navigation (Gm) equipment. On spacecraft OOg the primary time source was the central timing equipment (CTE) because the G&N equipment was amitted f o r t h i s mission. The CTE supplied a 532-kc signal t o the PCM telemetry package, 6.4 kc t o the power inverters, 4 kc t o the SCS AV control circuitry, and 1 pulse/sec t o the controls and displays subsystem. The CTE consisted of a temperature compensated crystal oscillator of high frequency s t a b i l i t y and a series of flip-flop dividers. It derived parer from the 28 V dc buses which it converted and regulated for internal use. The CTE a l s o pravfded a 32-bit d i g i t a l word t o PCMwhich measured missfon elapsed t i m e i n binary coded decimal format. Signal conditioning equipment
(SCE) consisted of a number of plug-in modules containing electronic

-

- The signal conditioning equipment

circuitry which accepted signals from sensors and converted signals into a standardized 0 t o 5 V dc signal suitable f o r telemetry or display. The modules included dc amplifiers, active attenuators, frequency t o dc converters, phase sensitive demodulators, ac-to-dc converters, and a power supply. The SCE derived power from the 400-cps inverters and, i n addition t o i t s rn +20 V dc and -20 V dc requirements, supplied reference voltt ages of +5 V dc and +10 V dc t o instrumentation h~h i s and other subsystems. Performance.- The perforname of the majority of the operational and f l i g h t qualification instrumentation during the mission was satisfactory. One operational measurement was waived because the measuring

7-239 system was inoperative. Two were l o s t in flight. The remaining 240 operational measurements yielded high quality data. Fifteen f l i g h t qualification measurements were inoperative before launch and had been waived. An additional 13 did not operate during the mission. Four more thermocouples in the heat shield failed during reentry. Five measurements indicated errors but not failures. The remaining 258 f l i g h t qualification measurements operated properly.
The acoustic measurement systems recorded properly f o r a limited e t o the microphones could duration. There w a s evidence that the w have occurred before or during the flight.
A large number of structure measurements were ranged so that the maximum excursions were below 10 percent of full scale throughout the mission. Failures occurred i n the heat-shield instrumentation measuring system with thermocouples ranged from 4000" F and above failing a t temperatures of 2700" F or below. The failures were caused by inadequate insulation which allowed shorting of the thermocouples i n the charring ablator. The high range calorimeters failed because the sequencer was triggered by voltage fluctuations during the main bus anomaly.

The data group equipment functioned throughout the mission without exception.

kasurements CTOO12x and CTOOl3X monitor tape motion of DSE and Examiaation of these events indicated that both units were running a t T-9.606 seconds. As plsnned, the DSE stopped motion a t T4665.4 seconds and F&R at ~665.2seconds. Both recorders we= turned on again a t T+132l. 9 seconds and operated u n t i l T+2251 seconds (after CM landing).

F&R, respectively.

"he d a t a storage equipment (DSE) operated satisfactorily throughout

Wow and f l u t t e r were between 2 and 3 percent as determined after recovery *om the reference slpnal recmded on track 14. The data from the four coxnutators were recorded satisfactorily on tracks 6, 8, 10, and 12. However, data f'rom the low-level commutators on tracks 6 and 8 w e r e l o s t while main bus voltsge was darn t o 18 volts. The recorder, which derived a l l but control parer from the 400-cps lines, operated correctlythrough t h i s period. The acoustic measurements on tracks 7 and 9 were recorded properly w i t h i n the systems limitations. E M data recorded on tracks 1through 5 have been recovered and processed. No dropouts of any consequence w e r e shown.
the mission.

An examiaation of Vibration, acceleration, and t i m e measurements recorded on the flight qualification recorder (FQR) wide-band tracks indicated that the FQR aperated normeUy throughout the mission. Several mission events including landing, U S jettism, and main -chute deployment were time verified by reference t o the vibration and acceleration measurements.

The proper operation of E M during the mission proved that the oscillator in the CTE operated propeely. Accurate performance of the countdown circuitry was demonstrated by review of the 400-cps frequency measurements. It has been verified by study of a translated oscillograph record that the time accumulator of mission-elapsed-time was reset at launch and updated correctly thereafter.

No failures of the signal conditioning equipment (SCE) modules were indicated. The +20 V dc and -20 V dc levels were nominal throughout the flight, including the period of reduced voltage, since SCE derives parer from the 400-cps lines. Also, the +lO-volt and +5-volt reference levels . was also were within 2 5 percent of nominal. The SCE package te&rature nominal.

7 1 . Gmrnment furnished instrumentation equipment. Flight .52 0 qualification instrumentation included three 90 X 1 comutators, a cammand module (CM) PAM/FM/FM telemetry package, a service module (SM) PAM/FM/FMtelemetry package, a time code generator, and a fiveTpoint calibrator. All were of a type previously flight tested.
The CM PAM/FM/FM telemetry package interfaced with the communications subsystem.(fig. 7.15-3) and processed 37 measurements from the structural subsystem, the communication and instmentation subsystem, the service propulsion subsystem, and the reaction control subsystem. The pckage consisted of the following standard IRIG components: a 90 X 1 high0 level commutator, a five-point calibrator, a nine-channel modulation package, and a 5-watt, 247.3-mc, FM transmitter. The components were ’ mounted internal to a spacecraft electronic package (SEP) which was installed in the lower equipment bay of the CM. A redundant commutator differentiated pulse duration modulation (DPDM) output was also recorded on the data storage equipment (DSE). The SM PAM/FM/F’M telemetry package interfaced with the communications subsystem (7.15-4)and processed 93 measurements from the structural subsystem. The package consisted of the follaring standard IRIG components: a 90 X 1 low-level corntator, a five-point calibrator, a fifteen-channel 0 modulation package, and a 5-watt, 257.3-mc, FM transmitter. The components were mounted on a plate attached to the bottom side of the shelf between beams 3 and 4 in the SM. This package was added to the original flight qualification subsystem as a modification kit for collecting SM and SLA structural integrity data. The three CM 90 X 1 commutators, two lar-levelmechanicd and one 0 high-level electronic type, were utilized to process 191 heat-shield measurements fromthe structural sribsystem. Each commutator data channel was sampled 1 times per second. The DPDM output of these commtators 0 was recorded on both the data storage equipment (DSE) and flight qualification recoder (m). The commutators ,weremounted in the aft equipment
-Ye

-

7-241
The time code generator and five-point calibrator, installed internal to the FQR, were utilized to provide a timing reference on the FQ,R and DSE flight tapes and to provide preflight calibration to the FQR wideband I record amplifier modules. The time code generator proW vided an output coded to one-tenth of a second and recycles each hour. (See ref. 18 for performance characteristics of both components.) Performance.- All gwernment furnished equipment (GFE) instrumentation components and packages performed satisfactorily except for the period of the electrical parer subsystem (EPS) anomaly (see section 7.12 of this report). The performance of the CM PAM/FM/FM telemetry package was naminal A throughout the flight. Two continuous and 37 P M commutated measurements were trans-dtted over the telemetry l n . The two continuous channels ik monitored Y-axis tower acceleration, measurement LAOOXLA, and Z-axis tower acceleration, measurement LAOO12A), from launch through launch escape stitsystem (m)tower jettison at 172.64 seconds. The P commum tated data were telemetered, received, and decommutated satisfactorily. The DPDM output of this commutator was also recorded on the DSE, track 12. M n g the preflight calibration the telemetry package operated properly, and the package exhibited good characteristics with minimum crosstalk and intermodulation. seconds to T+1695 seconds The reentry RF blackout period of ~+1580 prevented reception of the CM PAM/F'M/FM data, but since the commutator DPDM output f r o m this package was redundantly recorded on the DSE, no data were lost. The SM e performed 'satisfactorily until transmission was terminated, at C SM sepamtion (W1455 seconds). The temperature of the SM telemetry package trans1' mitter, measuremnt ST149OT, averaged 1 0 F from lift-off to CM/SM separation. The calibrator of the telemetry package operated properly to pravide preflight calibration. The performance of the three CM commutators processing heat-shield data were satisfactory. The low-level commutators were mechanical motordriven switches and lost 1 revolutions per second motor speed regulation 0 c when input parer drogped below 22 V d . The drop in speed regulation resulted in a degraded DFDM output. The high-level commutators performed satisfactorLly during the EPS anomaly period. The time code generator aad five-point cdibratar in the FQR performed satisfactorily prior to and during the flight. The five-point callbrator pruvided preflight calibration of the F&R wideband subcarrier

83 PAM commutated measurements. The SM telemetry pac

~ ~ / telemetry package tra,nsmittea 10 continuous ana h m

3

7-242
oscillators. The time code generator read 36 minutes 11.2 seconds (* 0 0 sec) at l i f t - o f f . It was not planned for the time code generator .5 to reset to zero time at l i f t - o f f . The FQR, due to internal pckaging limitations, did not include a reset command capability.

7-243

g o o o o
rl

o

o o r n r 1 0 0

c

u

o

o

o

o

0

O

O

O

P

-

c
( u

o

o

f r l
23

o v 3 o o o

0

rl

n

o

o

o

o

o

f

l

n

cu

0
P

~

0

0

0 0

r

n

O

O

f

v

3 d

0

o

w

I n

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

(ucu

5

o r l c u c o o n

0

~

0

0

0

0

I rl

n?

I n

co

8 * k m

4

m 0 E
IP

QJ 3

If

L

cc

0

U

v)

n
' ,

i n

) r

o

co n

......

7-245

NASA-S-64-6341 MAY 6
Physical stimuli
I

Sensors and transducers

I

'

r
I
Display

7
J
,I I
Distribution pane 1

-1

r
I

---I--

1
I I J

ACE

L I

Pre-mod u lation

I

.

Figure 7.15-2.-

Instrumentation system block diagram for Mission AS-201.

7-246
NASA-S-66-6342 MAY 6 G S E hard I ine

Spacecraft electronics package (SEP)

Unassigned Unassigned Unassigned

- vco
IRlG 9 3.9 kc
IRlG 10 5.4kc
t lRlG 1 . 1 7.35 kc

-

.
Mixer amplifier

transmitter

5 watt output

Acceleration (2)

f
T o VHF multiplexer communi cation subsystem

Temperature (39)

90 X 1 0 high level commutator PAM

GSE control
Strain Calorimeter
T o DSE track 12

(14)

1
Thermocouple (4711 Calorimeter (21)

90

x 10

1

CT 1 4 0 3 V DPDM

*

T o DSE track 6 and FQTR track 2

low level commutator

no.
( 6 8 meas)

T o DSE track 8 ~ ~ 1 4 0 2 FQTR track 4 and ~

Strain Pressure Char Ablation

(38) level commutator (3) (3) (48meas)

CT1401V

T o DSE track 10 and FQTR track 6

Figure 7.15-3.GFE instrumentation C M P A M / F M / F M telemetry package and 90 X 10 commutators, Mission AS-201.

@

7-247
NASA-S-66-6343 M A Y 6

SM telemetry package
ervice module (SM)

1

I
Unassigned Unassigned Acceleration aft bulkhead tank base Z-axis S K 0 2 4 4 A Acceleration aft bulkhead tank base Y-axis S K 0 2 4 3 A Acceleration aft bulkhead tank base X-axis S K 0 2 4 2 A Vibration aft He tank mount radial SK0241D Vibration aft He tank mount X-axis SK0240D

Unassigned

. .73 kc

vco

.96 kc
1.3 kc
IRlG 6 1.7 kc

Acceleration (3)

Vibration (4)

I

F

F

t--

GSE hard line

Mixer amplifier

VHF/FM transmitter I R l G 11

k kc 7.35 -

ipacecraft LEM dapter (SLA) Vibration (3)

-------go

Vibration SLA skin panel radial AK 025 OD

To VHF multiplexer communications subsystem

--------Vibration SLA skin panel radial AK0251D

--------Vibration SLA skin panel radial AK0252D Vibration S M He pressure panel Vibration SM He pressure panel radial S K 0 2 4 5 D

I

22.0 kc

Strain ( 2 4 ) Temperature (12)

90 X 10 LL coniniutator (82 iiieasurements 1

I

calibrator 5 point

1 -

CSE control

Figure 7.15-4.-

GFE instrumentation SM P A M / F M / F M telemetry package, Mission AS-201.

7 1 Communications Subsystem .6
The communications subsygtem provided the operational communication links and the radio cammand equipment (RCE). The pulse code modulation (EM) encoder and its VHF/FM transmitter encoded and transmitted spacecraft measurements throughout the mission. The VHF recovery and survival beacons provided the recmry aircraft with the initial contact with the spacecraft. The C-band transponder operated properly during the mission. The performance of the RCE was considered proper even though only one command was transmitted to the spacecraft,
Summary.-

The HF,trassceiverbeacon mode signal. was not received. The results of postflight tests indicated this could have been due to sea water causing a short circuit in the HF antenna. The reception of the W M transmitter-receiver s i g n a l was poor when compared to the recepA / tion of the VHF telemetry links. The effect of the electrical parer subsystem (E=) anomaly was minor with the RF output levels of the VHF/FM transmitter and the VHF/ AM transmitter being reduced only 7 watts and 2.4 watts, respectively. Description.- The operational communications subsystem aboard spacecraft 009 was basically a Block I subsystem without the S-band equipment, television equipment, and up-data l n equipment. The comik munications subsystem equipment (fig. 7.16-1)was installed on liquidcooled coldplates in the lower equipment bay of the command module (CM) and antennas were installed on the external surface of the C . M

,

n C-band transponder: A C-band transponder was used i conjunction with ground radars to track the spacecraft. The transponder received double-pulse interrogations from the grouud radsr and responded with a single RF pulse. Pulses of proper spacing and width triggered the transponder, which received the interrogation code pulses on a frequency of 5690 f 2 0 Mc and responded an a frequency of 5765 f 4 0 M. . . c

Telemetry: The PCM telemetry encoder converted spacecraft data into a serial, time division, non-return-to-zero change (NRZ-C) forrnat for transmission to ground receiving stations. The PCM encoder was capable of generating two PCM digital-data rates, 5 L U r bits/sec and 1.6k bits/sec. However, Mission A - 0 utilized only the 51.2 bits/sec S21 rate. Four types of data inputs were multiplexed into the PCM wavetrain as follows:

7-249

a.

Analog high level

I [Data input range:
4 16
25

o

to

5

v m scale]

samples /sec ona
200

100

50
10

E5
100 b.

1
Analog l o w level
0 t o 40 mV]

I

[Data input range:

I

50
c.
~~

1

Parallel d i g i t a l bilevel
f
~

[Binary 0 :
~ _ _

0.5 V; binary 1 :
~

3.5

to 1. 00

V ]

1

No. of channels
1

samples /second
200

b i t s /channel

a16
16

1 1 1

50
10

10
10
10

32 24

I2

"a
8

16

aRequires transfer pulses.

d . [Binary 0 :
f
1

Serial digital
I

0.5 V; binary 1 : 3.5 to 10.0 V]

I No.

of channels
1

I samples/second I
50
1

bits/channel

I

“0 4

I

aXequires transfer pulses. The E M wavetrain was routed to the W/FM telemetry transmitter the premodulation processor.

via

One P C M telemetry transmitter, which transmitted operational instrumentation subsystem data, was included in the communications subsystem. The VHF/FM transmitter sent PCM telemetry data through the active VHF antenna to ground receiving stations during a l l phases of the flight up to landing. Transmitter frequency was 237.8 Mc and power output was 1 watts. 0 The radio command equipment was included on spacecraft 009 to receive and decode ground command information on a frequency of 450 Me and to send the discrete commands to the CM control programmer. It will be replaced by operational updata link equipment on manned flights. Recovery beacons: Two VHF recovery beacons were included in spacecraf’b 009 to assist in locating the spacecrafi during the postlanding c phases of the mission. Operating on an output frequency of 243.0 M with a power output of 3 watts, the first beacon provided line-of-sight, direction-finding capability within a minirmU0 range of 150 nautical . miles. The transmitter operated through VHF recovery antenna 1 A redundant VHF s u r v i v a l beacon that operated through VHF recovery antenna 2 w s also provided. Both VHF recovery antennas were located on a the forward tunnel exterior and deployed by a pyrotechnic charge after main parachute deployment.

An HF transceiver was included on spacecraft 009 to provide direction-finding capability beyond line of sight during recovery operations. Operating on a frequency of 1 . 0 M with a power output 006 c of 5 watts, it was designed to transmit only an modulated carrier beacon signal during the postlanding phase of the mission through the H’ recovery antenna. The antenna, an extendible monopole, was stowed E on the parachute deck and released by a pyrotechnic charge after the CM laded.

Audio center: On Spacecraft OOg the audio center was used for voice communications only during checkout; during the flight a 400-cps tone was applied to the audio center to modulate the VKF/AM transmitter.
VHF/AM transmitter-receiver: The VHF/AM transmitter-receiver operated during all phases of the flight up to landing. A 4OO-cps signal was transmitted for evaLuation of signal characteristics. Output fre9. c quency was 2 6 8 M; power output was 5 watts.
VRF multiplexer: The VHF multiplexer allowed simultaneous transmission of the vHF/AM transmitter, W / F M transmitter, U" radio command receiver, CM PAM/FM/FM flight qwzlification telemetry transmitter, and service module (SM) P MF / M flight qualification telemetry transA / MF mitter through the -Z axis VHF scimitar antenna.

Premodulation processor: In spacecraft OOg the only function of the premodulation processor was to prorlde a low-pass filter between the FCM telemetry set and the VHF/FM transmitter.
,

Scimitar antebas: Two scimitar-shaped antennas were located approximately 180" apart on the CM mold line approximately 3 feet from the base of the aft heat shield. The antenna near the -Z axis was complete Block I type configuration, including ablative covering for reentry heating, and was the only one which was electrically functional. Only the V"/TJHE' portion of the -Z axis antenna was used on spacec r a f t Oog. The scimitar antenna near the +Z axis was inoperative on spacecraft OOg. Performme.

During the launch phase five ground-based

C-band transponder:

radars simultaneously interrogated the transponder from different locations. The transponder replied to each interrogation. Where a nuuiber of radar sites time-shared the transponder and there was the possibility of interference between interrogators, it was necessary to schedule the radar sites accordingly. In some cases interference did occur (see section 9 2 . kter in plight, the interference was eliminated since .) few darnrange r a d a r s are available to track the spacecraft. The CM and instrument unit (N) C-band transponders were scheduled to transmit at 5765 Mc so as to be interrogated sinrultaneously by ground radars. The CM transponder frequency was measured at 5 6 . M by the 736 c Eastern Test w e (ETR), and the Saturn IU transponder frequency at F 5757 M by E;TR. The frequency difference and the ground radar I bandc pass of 1 8 k prevented successm simultaneous Interrogation. . Telemetry: The PCM encoder sampled and encoded a total of 257 opemtional and flight qualification measurements into the pulse code

7-252

format. The P M output wavetrain was successfully transmitted t o , and C recorded a t , each of t h e ETR telemetry receiving s t a t i o n s associated with the f l i g h t . The P M encoder and the VHF/FM radio frequency l i n k C operated continuously throughout the f l i g h t , including the period of the EPS anomaly. In addition, the E M output interfaced w i t h the instrumentation subsystem and was recorded on the data storage equipment (DSE) as reported i n section 7 1 . . .31 The RF output of the W/FM transmitter maintained a level of 1 0 watts from l i f t - o f f u n t i l the EPS a n o d y a t ~+1650seconds. A t t h i s t i m e , the RF output dropped following the EPS voltage drop. The minimum RF output of 7 watts occurred between T + l n O seconds and T+1770 seconds, when the EPS voltage w a s a t 18 V dc. Between T+1770 seconds and Tt-2121 seconds t h e RF output increased t o 8 t o 9 watts. A t T+2121 seeonds the RF output returned t o the normal10 watts output and maintained t h i s l e v e l throughout the remainder of the f l i g h t .
The c a l i b r a t i o n references a t 15 percent and 85 percent of f u l l scale f o r each of t h e high-level, 0- t o 5-volt channels and law-level, 0- t o 40-millivolt channels provided excellent data on the performance of t h e P M encoder. C

The R F blackout period during reentry caused the loss of t h e PCM/ F data between T+1580 seconds and ~+1692seconds. A t S-IB/S-IVB stagM

ing t h e s i g n a l strength dropped t o 3 microvolts, but data reception w s a continuous through t h i s period.

A data processing problem occurred with t h e PCM tape record from the DSE tape recorder. This w a s because the E M data processing equipment required b i t t r a n s i t i o n s t o maintain the ground s t a t i o n bit-rate clock synchronization with the airborne E M encoder b i t rate. The major cause was t h e DSE wow and f l u t t e r in conjunction w i t h the open computer a word. On spacecraft 009, t h e 40-bit d i g i t a l guidance computer word w s not programed since no guidance and navigation subsystem was flown on t h i s mission. Therefore, t h e 40-bit computer word period contained all binary zeros, a case of no-bit transitions. This could occm on future missions when the Apollo guidance computer i s i n t h e standby condition o r when the computer word is nearly a l l ones o r zeros. Consideration i s being given t o methods of eliminating t h i s data r e t r i e v a l ground s t a t i o n problem on f u t u r e missions.

Recovery beacons: The two VHF recovery antennas were extended a t approximately ~+1916 seconds and the two VRF recovery beacons were turned on a t approximately mi926 seconds. Recovery personnel reported that both VHF recovery beacons were operating a f t e r spacecraft landing. The i n i t i a l contact w i t h the spacecraft was made w i t h the VHF beacon signals and the recovery a i r c r a f t were guided t o the landing s i t e using a these signals. The i n i t i a l V" beacon acquisition w s made a t a

7-253
'distanceof 4 0 nautical miles from the spacecraft. No permanent rec0 ords were made of the beacon modulation.

No transmission was received by the recovery forces from the H F transceiver. Upon recovery, the H antenna was found extended and apF parently undamaged. During recwery operations, the HF antenna was bent as the spacecraft was being lifted from the water. Prelaunch checkout at KSC indicated proper beacon mode operation of the transceiver. Postlaunch testing at Downey, California also indicated proper operation of the transceiver, including the power and control circuitry. The damaged portion of the H antenna was replaced with a spliced-in F member to simulate the original flight configuration f o r transmission checks under salt water spray and salt water immersion conditions. Transmission was satisfactory when the unit was dry, both before and after the tests. On the other hand, the salt water spray and salt water immersion each resulted in severe RF losses and an antenna mismatch . which reduced the output level from 5 watts d a m to 0 5 milliwatt. This was apparently the reason for the lack of reception of the HF transceiver beacon.
Design changes on the HI? antenna, which are planned for spacecraft O n , include waterproofing the antenna and providing increased drainage area f o r the antenna base.

In addition to the waterproofing requirement two fundamental H F transceiver signal acquisition problems were:
(a) Possible difficulty in identifying the HF transceiver operating in the modulated beacon mode.
(b) Possible d i f f i c u l t y of broadband t y p e receivers on recovery

aircraft to discriminate adjacent radio frequency signals, such as WWV at 1 000 Mc and the HF transceiver at 10.006 Mc. 0
W M transmitter receiver: The received signal level at each A / ground station was lower than the telemetry signal strength resulting in later signal acquisition, more frequent dropods of the carrier, and earlier signal loss. This was attributed to the lack of high quality range-receiving equipment at this frequency, as compared to the telemetry equipment. The 400-cps modulation was recovered at each of A / the range stations. The 400-cps modulation overdrove the W M modulator, saturating the input by at least 1 dB. This caused severe 0 clipping of the 400 cps, resulting in a 400-cpsY square-wave modulation of transmitter. An extraneous 10-cps signal also modulated the re0 0 covered 4 0 cps to modulation depths of 1 0 percent. The source of the 1 cps is not known. 0

-

7-254
The F output of the W M transmitter maintained a level of P A / 1 watts from lift-off until the EPS anomaly at ~+1650seconds. Fol0 lowing the EPS voltage drop, the RF output dropped to a minimum FP output of 2.4 watts between T + l n O seconds and T l 1 7seconds when the EPS --70 main bus voltage was at 1 V d . Between T+l77O seconds and T+2120 sec8 c onds the KE' output increased to 4 5 watts. At T+2121 seconds the RF . output returned to the nornaal 10-watts output and maintained this level throughout the remainder of the flight.
X V" multiplexer: A L spacecraft VHF cwriers were received at the ground receiving sites, indicating proper operation. The radio command equipment operation consisted of a single cormnand from the Rose Knot Victor (RKV) as planned at T+1315.1 seconds to provide the only test of the 450-M~reception.

Scimitar antennas: The -Z scinitar antenna was successfully utilized for the transmission of all the vHF/IIF carriers and provided for the reception of the UHF radio command equipment ground coInma,nds. The -Z scimitar showed minimum damage to the ablator material in surviving the reentry conditions. Figure 7.4-9indicates the condition of the scimitar antenna after landing.

7-255

Ln

a
S

0 .-

v)

E

7-256
7.17
Eavironmental Control Subsystem

Description. The components of the environmental control subsystem (ECS) installed in spacecraft 009 were a Block I type configuration: The waste management system (M) posthading ventilation system, radiator valves and associated plumbing, and pressure suit circuit distribution ducting usually included in the complete ECS (ref. 12) were omitted for S21 Mission A - 0 . The ECS radiators were installed in spacecraft 009 but were inoperative because of the omission of the associated valves and plumbing. The suit circuit compressors were installed but not activated during the mission. The most significant difference between the components on spacecraft 009 and the comparable ones on spacecraft 012 was the coolant circuit evaporator and associated control system. Design changes to the evaporator and control system were implemented late in the program to correct attitude sensitivity problems discovered during development testing. These changes are incorporated in spacecraft 03.2 and subsequent systems.

-

,

The purpose of the ECS on Mission AS-201was to provide cooling to the cabin and electronic equipment and to control the cabin pressure rather than flight qualify the complete Block I configuration.

The water-glycol (37.5 percent water, 6 . percent ethylene glycol) 25 circuit included the coolant circuit evaporator, suit circuit heat exchaqer, cabin heat exchanger, glycol pump assembly, glycol reservoir, and the coldplate network (see fig. 7.17-1). The total heat load absorbed by the water-glycol coolant was rejected by water evaporation in the coolant circuit evaporator. Water was supplied to the coolant circuit evaporator from the waste water tank. Cabin pressure was controlled by the cabin pressure relief valve (fig. 7 1 - ) and cabin pressure regulator. The cabin pressure relief .72 valve provided positive pressure relief during spacecraft ascent and negative pressure relief during spacecraft descent. The cabin pressure relief valve operates on a differential pressure principle, ceasing to . relieve cabin pressure at a nominal value of 6 0 psid, which is equiva. lent to a cabin pressure of 6 0 psia when the ambient pressure is essentially zero. The cabin pressure regulator was required to maintain . cabin pressure at 5.0 psia -+ 0 2 psia after cabin pressure had decayed to a nominal value of 5.0 psia. In addition, the demand pressure regulator pruvided suit circuit pressure relief during spacecraft ascent and repressurization during spacecraft descent. The oxygen surge tank supplied oxygen to the high pressure oxygen regulator assellibly and hence to the cabin pressure regulator, demand pressure regulator, and to the positive expulsion bladders in the potable water tank, waste water tank, and glycol reservoir. The oxygen

7-257
surge tank served as the only source of ECS oxygen because the cryogenic owgen storage system was not installed i spacecraft 009. n Performance.- The ECS performed the f'unctions required for Mission AS-201with the following deviations: (a) The water-glycol temperature measured at the evaporator outlet dropped to a minimum of 26.4" F by T+580 seconds as compared to the 45" f 3" F specification control range (fig. 7 1 - ) .73. (b) Cabin pressure was regulated at approximately 5.65 psia as .74. campared with the 5 psia f 0 2 psia specification range (fig. 7 1 - ) . Evaporator outlet temperature: The water-glycol evaporator outlet temperature, after a temporary rise from 52.5" F at lift-off to 57" F at WlOg seconds, decreased to a minimum of 26.4" F at T + S O seconds. At T+92O seconds the outlet temperature returned to 47.4" F at mA.rtnm excurshn, which was within specification units, before starting to decrease again. This decline in temperature indicated that the temperature control circuit was operative. The temperature then dropped to 40" F and remained approximately at that temperature until reentry.
As programmed, the wetness control and the glycol inlet temperature control were not activated by the control programmer until T+l72 seconds. During the prelaunch spacecraft closeout procedures, the manual override knob had been turned to the "full. cool" position, as scheduled, and l e e in that position. As a result the back pressure control was enabled to open (or close) the back pressure control valve in response to signals .75. from the pressure and temperature sensors (fig. 7 1 - )

Activation of the back-pressure control by the glycol temperature control valve was thus independent of mission control programmer operation. The back pressure of the steam in the coolant circuit evaporator was controlled to a pressure necessary to lnaintain the outlet waterglycol tenperatwe at 45" f 3" F, which is normally about 0 1 psia or .0 less. With a pressure of 1 . psia at the launch pad, and an evaporator 47 outlet liquid temperature of 52.7" F at the time of lift-off, both the back-pressure and the glycol temperature sensors would have signalled the enabled back-pressure control to open the back-pressure control valves. Since the back-pressure control was f u l l y enabled, the backpressure control valve was open prior to lift-off as the back-pressure 47 sensor, sensing 1 . psia at sea level, signalled the back-pressure control to open the back-pressure control valve. In addition, the glycol temperature sensor sensed an evaporator outlet liquid temperature of 5 . " F at l i f t - o f f , which a,lso signalled the back-pressure control to 27 open the back-pressure control valve.

The amporator was serviced with 0.8-pound water during the countdam, to allow evaporation to occur upon reaching the proper altitude. Water evaporation and the resulting temperature decrease in the coolant circuit evaporator outlet liquid began at approximately W l O O seconds. 64 The m i n i m outlet liquid temperature of 2 . ' F, reached at T+%O seconds, indicated that some of the water in the coolant circuit evaporator metal wicks froze. This 'resultedin low coolant temperatures at the evaporator outlet. The low temperatures and freezing were the result of the back-pressure control d v e being in the open position during the early minutes of the flight. The back-pressure control valve appears to have closed prior to the temperature increase in coolant circuit evaporator outlet liquid, thus allawing conditions to warm in the evaporator steam passages and metal wicks. The decrease in the coolant temperature after it reached 47.b0 F is attributed to reopening of the back-pressure control valve and additional water evaporation.
The inherent freezing in the c o o k t c i r c u i t evaporator and associ-

ated control system difficulties e s well known prior to this mission, and the Block I1 ty-pe configuration was scheduled for use on Mission AS-204 (spacecraft 012). Postflight test results indicated that the cabin pressure regulator responded at a pressure of 5.4 psia, which is slightly higher than the specification d u e of 5 0 psia f 0 2 psia. Allowing for the accuracy . . of the telemetry and instrumentation, and assuming that the landin@;impact had no effect on the cabin pressure regulator, the higher regulator operating pressure of 5.4 psia could account for the higher cabin pressure of 5 6 psia attained during the mission after T+405 seconds. .5
Cabin pressure relief valve: At T+53 seconds, the cabin pressure relief valve relieved cabin pressure at a maximum differential pressure between the cabin and aft compartment of 6.13 psi (see fig. 7.17-4). Specification requirements f o r positive pressure relief are 6 0 psid . 4 0 2 psi, -0.4p i . -. s)) Cabin pressure relief continued through the cabin pressure relief valve until a pressure of 5 6 psia was reached .5 at N O 5 seconds. Cabin pressure was controlled at 5.65 psia for the remabder of the flight.

t

During descent, the cabin pressure relief valve opened at a differential pressure of 0.39 psi between cabin and ambient, permitting reI6 pressurization of the cabin at % 8 3 seconds. (Specification require.6 ments for negative pressure relief are 0 3 to 0.90 psid.) The cabin pressure relief valve operated within the specification control range for both ascent and reentry.
R o U o w i n g touchdown, approximately 1 1/2 quarts of sea water leaked into the cabin d a the steam duct outlet port and through the cabin pressure relief valve.
'

7-259
Cabin temperature: No attempt was mde to control cabin temperature within the specification temperature range of 75" f 5" F. Cabin temperature was 60" F at lift-off, decreased to 52" F during spacecraft ascent, and rose to 59.5" F at Ti-625seconds (see fig. 7.17-4). Cabin temperature was maintained between 59.5" F and 60.1" F until reentry. The maximum cabin temperature of 67" F experienced during the mission occurred during cabin repressurization. The temperatures on the inoperative ECS radiator during the launch phase were reviewed for possible indicating of degradation of the radiator thermal coating as a result of heating from the S-IB/S-IVB separation retrorockets. A temperature rise of approximately 10" F was noted, indicating service module heating from the retrorocket plume. The cooling trend following this heating was not markedly different from the coolkg trend during the period just before S-IB retrofire. However, the data were insufficient to establish any indication of the status of the thermal coating.

7-261

NASA-S-66-6346 MAY 6

Ambient sense port (senses aft compartment pressure) Differential diaphragm

7

D i fferential

0utf I ow va I ve

Lq Overboard discharge through steam duct Cabin discharge to ambient

Figure 7.17-2.-

ECS cabin pressure relief valve,

Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

7 -262

s
e

L

8 >
0,

e

R ‘f

8

7-263

L

E c e .w a t J

c

R a

L

In

V W

7-265

7 1 Crew Station Acoustics .8
Description.- Two condenser microphones were mounted in spacecraf't 009 to measure crew station acoustics. The environment of interest was the noise generated during the region of maximum dynamic pressure. From the available wind-tunnel data (ref. 19) for the Apollo spacecraft configuration, a maximum overall sound pressure level (SPL) of 168 decibels (dB, Re: 0.0002 dynes/cm2 ) was predicted at the CM/SM exterior interface f o r a nominal Saturn IB trajectory. Sound pressure levels of 166 and 158 dB, respectively, were measured at the CM/SM exterior interface cf the instrumented boilerplate spacecraft with the Saturn I Launch vel hicles during Apollo Missions A-101 and A-102 (refs. 4 and 5 . ) Instrumentation. Microphone CKOO33Y, located at Xc50. 0, Y -0.5, 2, -18.0, and microphone CKOO32Y, located at X 50.0, Y 0 5 Z -18.0, were ., C mounted on the equipment platform in the crew compartment. Preflight calibrations showed that the microphones were linear with SPL and had a flat frequency response (&Z3) from 1 to 5k cps. Both measurements were 0 recorded on the DSE recorder, which did not have a flat frequency response. As a result, a data correction, based on preflight testing, was required. In addition, the acoustic measuring system did not have endto-end calibrations produced before flight, and so calibrations were added to the data processed at the MSC Computation and Analysis Division. The recorded data from both measurements were reduced in an analog format u s i n g as1 rms meter, octave band analyzer, and X-Y plotter. The reduced data consisted of overall SPL time histories, one-third octave band time histories, and power spectral density analysis. Performance.- The usable'da,ta from the acoustic measurements are Fresented in figure 7 1 - . This figure presents the overall SPL's f r o m .81 7 - 0 to T+l2.3 seconds (booster noise) and from T+45 to T+gl seconds 21 (aerodynamic noise). Except for these flight periods, the noise levels were not accurately recorded because the noise was not within the instrument range of either measurement. In addition, measurement CKD033Y became erratic after Ti-31 seconds.
The total ranges of both acoustic measurements (70 to l l 0 dB for CKOO32Y and 1 0 to 1 0 dB for CKOO33Y) were not realized because the 0 4

-

combination of ambient noise and electronic systems noise limited the ranges from 87 to 110 dB for CKOO32Y and 115 to 140 dB for CKOO33Y. Fostflight tests conducted at the contractor's facility showed that the epoxy bond between the microphone diaphragm and the diaphragm mounting ring failed. From the character of the data, it would appear that this failure occurred after T+5l seconds. (See section 7.13.) A failure analysis could not be determined.

7-266
For the acoustics measured, the noise levels during the time where data w e r e collected during Mission AS-201 w i l l not be detrimental t o the crew.

7-26 7

0 9

0

ln

0

d

.-

Y

rl

.

0 0
cr\
0
(v

L

aJ

v)
L

.!il
I0 hl

a C 0 .2 3 0 .v) v) v)

v)

I
0 .u
ln 3
0
~

0

rl

. 2 ..
I

0

d I E 0
d

m

U

m

l ln -

0

0
d
I

7-268

7.19 Spacecraft Windows
Summary.- In general, all five of the command module windows on spacecraft 0 9 had the same postflight appearance. Each of them had a 0 uniform light-gray film deposit. Visibility through the windows was much bet$er than through the windows on spacecraft 002 after flight (ref. 9 . Black soot smudges were not found on any of the windows. ) Without photographic data from an onboard camera looking through a window, it w s not possible to determine at what time in flight the cona tamination occurred. The visual degradation was due to the combined effects of the thin contamination layer and crystallization of the minerals found in sea water after the spacecraft was recovered from the Atlantic Ocean.

Description.- The spcecraft 009 command module windows were of a Block I type configuration and included one hatch window, two side win"daws, and two rendezvous windows (see fig. 7 4 1 . Each-windowcon.-) sisted of three panels: two inner panels, each 0.20-inch thick with a O.175-inch air space between them, installed in the pressure cabin structure; and one outer panel, O.7O-Fnch thick, installed in the CM outer (heat shield) structure, approximately 1 inch from the inner panels. The two inner panels were aluminum silicate (Corning code 1723) and were coated on both sides with a multilayer, antireflective coating. The outer panel was amorphous fused silica (Corning Code 7940, optical grade). The outer surface of this panel was coated with a magnesium fluoride antireflective coating, and the inner surface had a blue-red (W-IR) reflective coating. The left rendezvous window did not have the optical coatings that were used on the other windows. Postflight inspection.- The outer heat-shield windows were removed for visual examination and spectrographic analyses. Visual examination revealed that all windows had a deposit of a light-gray material that varied in.thiclmessfrom window to window. The typical black spots which were deposited on the windows during the previous boilerplate and 0 the spacecraft 0 2 launch abort tests were not present on any of the windows. The right side window appeared to have been washed by wave action while the spacecraft was in the water, and the remaining residue on the window had a salt-like appearance. The left side window had a light f i l m deposited uniformly Over about 8 percent of the total area. 0 The clear area appeared to have been manually wiped. The right rendezvous window was contaminated with a light-gray film. The majority of this film had been abraded away, as though the window had been used as a step. The left rendezvous-window contaminate was similar to that found on the left side window. The hatch window had been scraped clean for the rubber suction cups used f o r removing the outer hatch. Postflight analysis.- Spectral transmission, reflection, and lightscattering measurements were conducted on the left side and the left

rendezvous windows. Emission spectrographic analyses were conducted on contamination smears taken from all the windows except the right rendezvous window. Analyses were not conducted on the right rendezvous window because the contamination had been so badly abraded that the results would be arbitrary. Figure 7.19-1shows the five spacecraft windows and the location fromwhich each contamination sample was taken. Sample 9 was a small piece of the ablative znaterial that was found on the lert rendezvous 0 window. Sample 1 was rust. Table 7 1 - presents the results of the emission spectrographic .91 agalyses studies for all window samples. Contamination samples included ocean water residue and products from the tower-jettison motor propellant burning. Figure 7.19-2 shows the spectra3. transmission and the reflection (forward and aft) characteristics of the left crew window. The high reflection at 3500 to 3800 angstroms wauld be expected from the bluered (W-IR) coating. This high reflection is i the near W and blue n end of the spectrum and the contamination had very little effect on the magnesium fluoride astireflective coating. Normal reflectivity of the coating is 4 percent from 3750 to 7000 angstroms. Figures 7.19-3(a) and (b) represent the light-scattering and diffused light transmission characteristics of the left side and the left rendezvous windows. The direct-light transmission through the window and contaminate ranged from 5 percent at 3750 angstroms to 50 percent at 6500 angstroms through the left side window and 24 percent to 32 percent through the left rendez vous window.
The light-scattering characteristics of the w i n d o w s indicate that appraximtely 35 percent of the impinging light on the left window and 40 percent qn the le= rendezvous window was scattered.

Subjective aaa.Qrsis of the window transmission and light-scattering characteristics indicate that with the light source (sunlight) to the rear there would be s m a l l degradation in visual acuity through the window; however, with the light source in front of the window v i s u a l acuity would be quite difficult. evaluation of the Gemini VI11 and Gemini M windows, which is being conducted at this t h e , is expected to result in a basic measure which can be used in the evaluation of a l l Apollo Windows.

TABLE 7.19-1. EMISSION SPECTROGRAPHIC ANALYSIS OF WINDOW

-

corn-s

FOR

MISSIONS A-OOk, AS-201, AND AFDC ENGINE TESTS

[Elements are listed i order of amounts found n Spacecraft OOg Silicone sodium calcium
Lead

011

the Spacecraft Oog windms] Possible source
~ ~

Spacecraft 002 AEDO engine test Minor bjor Base Heavy major Bsse Light minor hbjor Base L i g h t major Heavy major Trace Light minor None Trace Ease None None None None Trace None None Trace

bgnesium Aluminum Lron
Copper
Titanium

Zinc ChromiUm Boron Cadmium
Manganese

Tin vanadium Antimony Barium Molybdenum Nickel Silver Zirconium Bismuth

Heavy major Heavy major Heavy minor Heavy minor Heavy minor . bjor hb jor mor L i g h t major Light major Light rnjor Light minor Base Base Base Base Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace Trace None

liTC

None Trace Light major Base Light major Light major
None

Sea & binders Sea LET leadliner LET & sea LT E

m
Wire

Trace Light minor Base Trace Base None None None
None

Ablator Ablator Cork liner-binders Igniter (LET) Bolts ( E ) LT SEA &LET Solder Steel structure Fire retardant
TJM

Trace Trace None None

RCS nozzle lining Structure Solder

WM environment SR

Key to weighted code (in descending order)

Heavy major Heavy minor Major
Minor

Light major Light minor Base Trace

7 -271
NASA-S-66-635 1 MAY 6

Left rendezvous

Right rendezvous

F4
-6

A7

f5
Left side Right side

-3

Hatch Note: Numbers identify contaminate smears taken for emission spectographic analysis

Figure 7.19-1.-

Window contaminate smear locations, Mission A S - 2 0 1 .

7-272

NASA-S-66-6352 MAY 6

100

80

contamination

60

40

20

n "
3 4

5

6

7

8 X i03

Wave length, angstrom

Figure 7.19-2 Spectral transmission and reflection characteristics of left side window, Mission AS-201.

.-

7-273
m0
4

X
b

r-l

0 9

a
E
S
4 4

Y v,

e

v)

cn
c

v)

m

3 0 >
N

I n Y cn
8

z

aJ -

aJ U S
L
b)

.Y

0 .-

v)

v)

E J
d-

u

f

0

9 ,

c u

m

h

m
-0 8

m

E
v) 8

Y
Y

E

h
u

v)

E
Y

e
v)

K

cn

m

.al

%

CI L

PVI

E J
9
. e

I

>a 5 m

v

m

m
r(

3

b

In

? 9

m

s
v)

z

2 a

I

0 0
r-l

7-274

7 2 Crew Rehted Dynamics .0
Suum,ry.- The vibration levels, which were measured on Mission AS-201 on the forward bullshead of the crew compartment and which indicated a measure of cabin environment to which crew menibers could be exposed during a manned mission, exceeded the nominal ApoUo limits for approximately 2 seconds at lift-off, and were higher than anticipated between w76 seconds and Wg6 seconds and at the time of S-IB engine cutoff.

During these periods, the physic& well-Ix3ing of the crew would not have been jeopardized. Crew members would have experienced a noticeable degradation in v i s u a l acuity in the monitoring of cabin display meters, d i a l s , et cetera, to determine instantaneous status. Because instrument panel and crew vibration phase relationship is unknown, it must be assumed that the crew's v i s u a l acuity would not be improved.

Data. Acceleration measurements CKOO&A, CKO005A, and CKO(located on the forward bulkhead of the crew compartment) and their resultant were used to determine the vibration environment. The resultant acceleration and the azimuth and elevation angles of the resultant were .01 computed a6 shown in figure 7 2 - .
At lift-off, the resultant vibration reached a maximum of l.lg peak-to-peak at WL.4seconds. The 10-cps, longitudinal vibration (fig. 7 2 - ) was the major contributor. The amplitude of the result.02 ant Vibration had decreased to 0.5g peak-to-peak at Ti-2.8 seconds and was insignificant between T+3 seconds and T+53 seconds. Between W53 seconds and w76 seconds, the resultant Vibration increased to an average level of 0.5g peak-to-peak with several burst6 reaching 0.7g peak-to-peak. During this period the major component was lateral (Y axis) vibration.

--

From w 6 s e c m a to T+g6 seconds the average peak-to-peak g level 7 .g of the resultant was approxlmtely 0.gg and reached 1.4g to 1 6 peakto-peak several times. (See figs. 7.20-3 to 7 2 - . In this period., .09) the major components were longitudinal and lateral.vibration. At ng6 seconds, the amplitude began to decrease and was insignificant e) until inboard engine cutoff (T+142 s c . Immediately follaring inboard engine cutoff, between Wlk2 seconds and T+143 seconds, a 0 7 8 peak-to.5 peak, lO-cp8, ~ i r p a r i l y longitudinal, Vibration developed. This vibmtion decreased to O.25g peak-to-peak in 2 seconds. A similar vibration developed at the time of outboard engine cutoff (T+l47 sec) reaching a mexirmrm amplitude of 0.5g peak-to-peak.
AmQmis of periods of significant vibration indicates that the 10-cps longitudinal vibration noticed at lif%-off continued to be a significant frequency through T+96 seconds. In addition, analysis of ten 3-eecond time slices between W55 seconds and Ti99 seconds *shows

7-275 significant 23- t o 26-cps lateral and longitudinal vibrations (table The vibration i m e d i a t e l y following inboard and outboard 7.20-1). engine cutoff was predominantly longitudinal a t 10 cps. Effect on crew.- None of the vibrations observed were of s u f f i c i e n t magnitude and duration t o cause pain or t o jeopardize d i r e c t l y the physiological well-being of the crew. Howevzr, the vibrations would noticeably degrade t h e a b i l i t y of t h e crew t o perform the required v i s u a l monitoring of vehicle systems. Low-frequency vibration ( 5 t o 35 cps) a t l e v e l s w e l l below pain threshold generally cause blurred vision. For example ll-cps longitudinal vibration a t l e v e l s above O.5g peak-to-peak (0.177g rms) has been reported t o impair vision (ref. 20). Also, lateral vibration (.Y axis) degrades v i s u a l a b i l i t y more than longitudinal vibration (X axis) of the same l e v e l (ref. 21). Although t h e crewman's a b i l i t y t o read a given d i a l o r meter may not be completely eliminated, he m u s t concentrate on t h e reading f o r a longer period of time than normally required t o i n t e r p r e t it. Having t o concentrate on each meter f o r a longer period of t i m e interrupts the established scan pattern and r e s u l t s i n incomplete o r l a t e monitoring f o r the time normally allowed. During lif't-off, m2x q, and staging, c r i t i c a l periods during wbich the crew may be required t o make decisions quickly, the a b i l i t y t o obtain the required v i s u a l data on which t o base these decisions Would have been degraded.
I the vibration environment indicated a t t h e forward bulkhead on f t h i s mission i s representative of the condition a t t h e crew position on manned flights, it w i l l be necessary t o adjust scan patterns t o the expected degraded visual acuity.

The phase relationship between the vibration of the instrument panel and t h e crew is unpredictable. It m u s t be assumed t h a t t h i s would not improve t h e crew's a b i l i t y t o read the instruments.

7-276
t -

m

2
d

q-i3

d

13 9
N m

x
I n N

Q

I N n

l

n N

0 0

2
0

2

I

9 Y 0

3

Y 0

8 N
d

R
d

0

z
c

6

2

Q
J?

0

y:
I n

W M N

f = t M d N

3 N

3 d

W

2 I

ri

0

a

.

d

d

9,
c1

? cn
J ?

i"
d

0

I n
0

a 3
J?

:
rl
0

iP !

E 4

8 d

8

8
cn

6

oi

7-27?

3 d

6

P

3% 6 '
n M
0 -P

0"
(u.

8
0

c'!

0 0 0 0

P q

d""

7-278
NASA-S-66-6354 MAY 6

X

-Z

Figure 7.20-1.Determination of accelerometer resultant for CM forward bulkhead conditions, Mission AS-201.

NASA-S-66-6355 MAY 6

SENSOR T I M E SLICE 2.75

CK0004A

MICRO

.029 T O 5.010 SEC

2.50

2.25

.7s ’

I

.50

.2s


0

.5

I .o

I .5

2.0

2.5

3.0

E L A P S E D T I M E , SEC

Figure 7.20-2.-

Lift-off X-axis vibration, Mission AS-201.

7-280

NASA-S-66-6356 MAY 6

SENSOR

FILE I

R E S U L T A N T ACCELERATION

.o
E L A P S E D T I M E , SEC

Figure 7.20-3,- Resultant acceleration (CKOO04A, CKO005A, and CK0006A1, Mission AS-201.

7-281

NASA-S-66-6357 MAY 6

SENSOR

FILE I

RESULTANT ACCELERATION

T I M E SLICE 91.004 T O 94.004 SEC

.0775

.0725

.0675

.0625
u)

I
v

0:

*
.OS75

.0525

.a73

.0425
FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7.20-4.- Resultant acceleration amplitude spectra1 density, g (rms), Mission AS-201.

7-282

NASA-S-66-6358 MAY 6

SENSOR T I M E SLICE

CKOOOPA

MICRO

90.520

TO 93.520 SEC

.070

.06S

.om

.ass
L

8
13

:
c

.os0

.045

.Ma

.OS!

FREQUENCY, C P S

Figure 7.20-5.-

X-axis vibration amplitude spectral density, g (rms), Mission AS-201.

NASA-S-66-6359 MAY 6

SENSOR

CK0005A
90.520

MICRO

TIME SLICE

TO 93.520 SEC

Figure 7.20-6.-

Y-axis vibration amplitude spectral density, g (rms), Mission AS-201.

8-1
8.0

LAUNCH VEAICIE PERFORMANCE

After ll.2 seconds of vertical flight, the launch vehicle began t o r o l l from the 100" east of north launch azirmrth t o the proper f l i g h t azimuth of 3 5 east of north and completed the IIIBaemr a t ~ 1 6 . 2 0' secunds. A t T+U.2 seconds, the programmed pitch attitude profile was i n i t i a t e d and continued u n t i l T-kl34.39 seconds, a t which t i m e an essent i a l l y constant pitch attitude w s maintained u n t i l the initiation of a a c t i m guidance. Actim guidance was i n i t i a t e d successfully 28.4 seconds a f t e r sepazwtion of the S-IB/S-IVB stages. Shutdown of the S-IB stage occurred a t Ti-146.9 seconds which w s anly 03 second Later than a . nominal. A t S-IB cutoff, the actual trajectory parameters as campared with nominaL were 26.3 ft/sec high in space-fked velocity, 0.40 nautical m i l e low in altitude, and 0.55 nautical mile greater i n range.

Separation of the S-IB and S-IVB stages occurred a t Ti-147.7 seconds, folluwed by w i t i o n of the S-IVB stage 1.6 second Later. AXL ullage rockets functioned as expected and were successfully jettisoned.

S-niB stage cutoff occurred a t n602.g seconds, 10.2 seconds l a t e r than predicted. The p i t c h - m r maneuver was initiated ll.1 seconds a f t e r S-IVB cutoff, which was 1 seconds l a t e r than predicted. The 1 spacecraft separation sequence was started at ~ 4 6 3 . 1seconds and was completed approximately 180 seconds later. Both events were about 10.2 seconds l a t e r than predicted.
A t S-IVB stage cutoff, the actual trajectory parameters as compared with naminal were 1.6 ft/sec less in space-fixed velocity, 0.38 nautical mile high in altitude, and 16.1 nautical miles greater in range. A t spacecraft separation space-fixed velocity was 1.6 ft/sec less, altitude was 1.3 nautical miles high, and range was 22.2 nautical miles greater.
The,ovlerall performance of the S-IB propulsion system was satisfactory. Preliminary reconstruction data show the average thrmst t o be

approximately 0.8 percent lqwer, fuel flow rate 0.5 percent higher, LOX flowrate 1.0 percent lower, and specific impulse 0.2 percent l w r o e than predicted. A l l four retrorockets performed as expected. Outboard engine cutoff w s i n i t i a t e d by a Azel depletion sensor. The GN2 control a pressure system functioned properly during fllght, after having some difficulty during countdown.

The p e r f m c e of the guidance system was adequate and the control system deviations were about as expected. Durbg maximum dynamic pressure (max q) the attitude errors were 2.2" nose up in pitch, 2.5O nose right i n yaw, and 0 8 counterclockwise fo the rear i n r o l l . W~IRUIU ." rm angles of attack during max q w e r e 1.6" nose up in pitch and 3.6" nose

8-2

l e f i in yaw. Ikx.lrmrm actuator position movements were 1.15" i n pitch and 2.1" i n yaw. Disturbances during S-IB/S-IVB separation were quite s d . Maximum S-IVB a t t i t u d e errors during separation were 0.8" i n pitch and 0.7" in both yaw and roll. Wimum S-IVB actuator response was 0.8" in pitch, occurring a t the i n i t i a t i o n of active guidance. Beginning wound 30 seconds a f t e r S-IB/S-D.B separation and l a s t i n g through S-IVB burn, there was a positive torque on the roll axis of about 15 t o 20 ft-lb. The torque caused a 0 t o 0.7" clockwise r o l l (viewing from the rear), which was well within the 1" deadband in the auxiliary propulsion system (APS) Only 20 percent of the t o t a l APS fie1 w a s used up t o spacecraft; separation.

.

"here were no structural loads of sufficiently high magnitude t o threaten the structural integrity of the launch vehicle. The maximum load was encountered a t inboard engine cutoff i n one of the S-IB radial beams located i n the spider beam. Seventy-seven percent of the design l i m i t s t r e s s was experienced. Overall vibration levels were slightly above expected while overall acoustic levels were s l i g h t l y below expected. Environmental heating rates and temperatures on t h e launch vehicle were somewhat cooler than expected, except on the fins, outbowd engine aspirator, and S-IVB base. Fin heating rates on the trailing edge went s l i g h t l y outside the Saturn I Block I1 band and f i n side panel temperatures were higher than expected. Heating rates were somewhat high on outboard engine aspirator a t outboard enghe cutoff and on the S-IVB base due t o retrorocket impingement.
A high d i f f e r e n t i a l pressure occurred on several fins during Mach 1 phase caused by a 3" yaw angle of attack. C m o n bulkhead pressure i n S-IVB w s nominal a t 0.07 psi. a

Ih the i n s t m n t unit ( I U ) a new system was used f o r cooling components. Equipment was mounted on cold plates with i?$O/methanol circul a t h g through the plates. The heat w s dissipated overboard through a a a sublimator. The instrument u n i t w s cooler than expected during the However, during subsequent portions of the early portion of flight. flight, the temperature stabilized properly. This indicated proper operation of the cooling s y s t e m and sublimator.
Temperature of the GN2 supply system t o the ST-124 platform a i r bearings was normal (15.6" C) up t o T+7O seconds. A t t h i s time the temperature began t o decay and was out of the 10" C telemetry range l i m i t by T+UO seconds. N structural problems were indicated i n the o IU.

8-3

AU. electrical systems on the launch vehicle performed as expected
rtna operated within anropriate limits, including the emergency detec-

The launch vehicle portion of the EDS is deemed 120 have performed properly based only on telemetry data from the I . U The three IDS buses were energized properly, automtic abort enable and itisable were commded a t the proper times, and the engine-aut measurements indicated ignition, the events of stwing, and the cutoff of both rrtages. (Note: IU measurements only indicated when one or more S-IB engines were out; therefore, inboard cutoff only was indicated by these measurements.) The 40-second timer timed o t properly, no u overrates were sensed, and because no abort conditions were witnessed Etnd %helamch vehicle portion of the ElE performed properly, the automatic abort bus was not energized.

t i o n suibsystem (EDS).

a

It should be noted that the angular rates sensed by the ED6 sensors approached the EDS l i m i t in the pitch plane. A t approximately T+62 seccmds an angular r a t e of approximately -5 deg/sec was experienced in the pitch plane. The nomiaal abort setting dor Mssion AS-201 was e . 5 deg/ set. The inaccuracies of the instrument result i n a deadband of 11.725 deg/sec t o 6.275 deg/sec. The most predominant frequencies were about 19 cps.
A disturbance was witnessed &so in the roll axis of about 6 deg/ T h i s i s considerably below the roll abort threshold of 20 deg/sec. A s m a l l rate of such low magnitude as t o be of no consequence was also ilritnessed i n the y a w axis. A l l three sensors lndicated essentially the 8ame disturbance in each respective axis, and none of the nine (3 p r e axis) overrate switches closed during the boost phase. Marshall Space n Flight Center (MSFC) plans t o pravlde f i l t e r s i the output circuits of the EDS r a t e gyros t o suppress noise, modification t o be effective d Saturn SA-203 and subsequent vehicles. Evsluation of this f l i g h t n support closed-loop E!DS flight t e s t in Mission AS-202.

E:ec.

a

~~

Seven launch vehicle measurements were deleted during launch prepma.tion. O f the 1220 active measurements a t lift-off, 13 failed comN e t e Q and 34 were partially successfU1. The remajming measurements a a r e successful.
A detailed a ence 13.

i

s of the Saturn mission i s contained in refer-

9.0
The information in this and, as a result, m y d i f l e r other sections of the report Mission AS-201was the first Center (MCC-H) a t the Mmned f o r mission support.

FLIGRT OPERATIONS
section is based on real-time observations, from some of the detailed evaluations i n which are based on final reduced data. ApoUo mission i which the Mission Control n Spacecraft Center, Hauston, Texas, was used

9.1 Flight Control
Flight-control operati& procedures established during preflight SimULstions allowed smooth operation of the Mission Operations Control Room (MOCR) and System Support Room (SSR) activities during the mission. hunch paa support a c t i v i t i e s were monitored t o acquaint personnel with the type of data available during the verious launch pad tests. These tests provided the systems engineers with an opportunity t o view systems verification 0f.m systems and t o exercise the corrrmand lirik.
During the countdown the MCC-H and i t s interfaces, which included the WC/network flight-control operatims, w e r e exercised at the proper times. The o v e r a l l AS-201 mission operation and support plan i s presented in figure 9 1 1 .-.

hunch phase.- Lift-off occurred at ll:l2:01 a.m. e.s.t. No radar tracking plots w e r e available at K C - H as a result of a p w r failure o e at Kiennedy Space Center (KSC) at l i f t - o f f which caused both of the range safety impact predictor computers t o fail. However, the Saturn instrument unit ( D inertial data were used for driving the trajectory disI)
plays and plotboards for f l i g h t control. Power was restored t o the

range safety computers, and tracking data were available t o the K C - H

5 minutes after lift-off.

Tlae trajectory was near nominal during the first-stage powered phase with the following discrepancies noted at MCC-H during S-IB stage powered flight:

(a) The switch selector events associated with the start of the J-2 engFne were not available, probably as a result of the RF blackout during staging. (b) Loss of synchrauization of the N telemetry data stream occurred a t various times during the flight.

During the S-IVB e-bge parered flight, the switch selector events were not available a t MCC-H for launch-escape tower (UTI) jettison

9-2

A or B comnands. However, other measurements including &-ball internal temperature confirmed tower jettison. Coast phase.- The following planned events and functions were noted by the flight controller during the S-IVB/CSM coast phase to CSM separation: (a) Pitch-down initiation to desired service propulsion subsystem (SPS) firing attitude (b) Fuel-tank venting and liquid hydrogen (LH2) tank ullage pressure decay

(c)

Liquid oxygen (LOX) tank blowdown

(d) Separation of the CSM from the S-NB/IU and ARS readings. Reports from the flight controller stationed on the Rose K n o t Victor (RKV) ship during the SPS firing phase included the following: (a) About halfway through the first burn the SPS oxidizer inlet pressure dropped and reached 141 psi. The SPS chamber pressure began dowazsrd fluctuating.atthe same portion of the burn with a genetrend to 8 psia. 0
(b) The SPS engine was cut o f f by the backup timer in the control programmer.

(c) Chamber pressure fluctuation m s erratic during second SPS
b 0

(d) Telemetry was very noisy during the first 3 minutes of acquisition and numerous dropouts occurred during the signal reception period. Data were usable after approximately 2 minutes of acquisition.

Some last minute program changes in the RKV low-speed program caused some minor difficulties but d i d not affect the mission support.
Reentry phase.- The earth landing subsystem (ELS) activate backug command was sent by the RKV, as planned, upon completion of the 180" r o l l maneuver of the cormnand module at T+1515.1 seconds. No other ground commands were transmitted during the mission.

9- 3

-

v)

2
.C

m .VI

. U c c

3

.^

r' m LI
c

VI

g

U

m c

0 c .-a

4

+

L m

4

B
0

N 0
I ) /

4

c .-

VI ._

I

.H

0 :

E 3 m .Y

9-4
9.2 Network Instrumentation and Comrmxnication

The network was put on mission status f o r Mission AS-201 at 2234 G.m. t. on February 14, 1966. Overall operation was satisfactory, with very few major problems being encountered. The only major communications problem involved the break of the Air Force Eastern Test Range (AFETR) submarine cable t o Antigua near Jupiter, Florida, a t 0200 G.m.t. on February 23, 1966. A different route f o r data and voice was established, using leased circuits, and w s used f o r the mission. The only significant radar problem resulted a from the f a c t that the type of radar beacon/antenna system used aboard the CSM allowed only one antema of the four t o transmit t o the ground at any one t i m e . This prevented the other r a d a r s from effectively acquiring the spacecraft and wU require close scheduling of radar s i t e i procedures f o r future flights.

No radar data were available a t M=C-H f'rom T-0 t o approximtely
~ 2 8 seconds because of the parer failure a t Cape Kennedy resulting 0 i n the l o s s of impact predictor ( I P ) computers. Radar and t e l e m e t r y

times f o r the mission are indicated in table 9.2-1. The cormaand subsystem configuration orig3ba233 consisted of a tone remoting subsystem between E C - H and ETR. The tone remoting subsystem was basically a system whereby a combination of specified tones was sent from a f l i g h t control console located a t E C - H t o key the ETR transmitter. During simulated confidence tests, it was found that the long-line system fkom E C - H t o Cape Kennedy was susceptible t o noise b i t s which could generate spurious cormnands. As a result, a commnd system was established which made use of the E'IX S a t e l l i t e Operations Control Center (SOC) cormnand capability. Commands were generated dir e c t l y through the SOC by the MCC-H f l i g h t controller, on voice cue from the MX-H Flight Director, eliminating the use of the noisy long line. For succeeding missions it i s planned t o use a d i g i t a l c o m d system similar t o the me used on Gemini mlssians. The real-time computer complex (RTCC) a t M=C-H had no significant problems during the prelaunch period. The E C C received no impact predictor data u n t i l approximately T+27O seconds. Bermuda data were received beginning a t a p p r o x a t e l y ~ 3 6 seconds. The IU data were 0 received throughout the launch phase. During reentry the RTCC received low-speed data from G r a n d Turk Island, Bermuda, Antigua, and Ascension Islands.
During the prelaunch couut, the E l 3 real-time computer f a c i l i t y (RTCF) provided high-speed trajectory data support at T-270 minutes and T-160 minutes t o E C - H and Goddard Space Flight Center (GSFC). The RTCF experienced a power f a i l u r e a t l i f t - o f f resulting i n the l o s s of

9-5
a both computers u n t i l approximtely " 8 2 0 seconds. The parer failure w s caused by a fuse holder being loosened by the launch vehicle blast and vibration. During reentry phase, present.position data were computed and transmitted t o KC-K, and passed by voice direct t o the recovery carrier.
The Goddasd R e d - T i m e Subsystem (GWIS) was used for the computatim and data flow integrated subsystem testing (CADFLSS) during the prelaunch count. The GKTS accepted I P data by way of the launch monitor subsystem after W27O seconds and drove the displays a t MCC-K, Highspeed radar data were accepted from Bermuda and low-speed radar data from the s u p p o r t i n g network.
The Berrmzda remote site data processor ( a D P ) failed t o accept any S-IVB telemetry data. Frame 30 i n the A3 multiplexer had been chosen for the synchronaus check for the data processor. When the multiplexer was shut off at lifi-off, it caused the data t o change i n the b i t stream. For Mission 202 the multiplexer is unchanged but has been reprogrammed so as t o move the synchronous check t o a different place i n the b i t stream where it w o u l d not affect the data.

9-6
TABU3 9 2 1 .-.

- FL4DAR AND

T E U m R Y TIMES FOR MISSION AS-201

Time, g.e.t.

hr: min: sec
Telemetry

Station

Radar

Acquisition (AOS 1

Loss

(LoS)
1 :19:56 6 1 :15:31 6 1 :22:58 6

MLA
CNV

16:12:01

16:l :01 2
16:12:15
2

PAT
m

16:E: 01

16:1 :4 7 4

mJ . 3 T

16:12:01

1 :17:io 6
1 :2 :36 6 4

GBI
GBI
G T ~

1 :13:37 6
16:13:29
16:15:37

16:17:13 1 :24: 06 6

16:12:41

16:27:54
1 :2 : 41 6 7

16:15:21

16:27: 01
16:27:33

ma ma
RKV ASca

16:17:29
16:1 :59 9

16:16:10
16:15:21 16:28: 40

16:31:02

16:27:01
1 :39:00 6

16:34:61

1 :41: 07 6

1 :33: 34 6

16:49:36

BThese stations used for trajectory computations.
NOIT:

Radar mode
Beacon track

- (1) rU/S-IVB
(2)

Skln track

(3)

CM/CSM CM/CSM

9-7
9.3 Recavery Operations
R e c m r y force deployment.- The planned landing areas for Mission AS-201 included: (a) launch site landing area, (b) launch abort landing area, and (c) primary landing area. R e c m r y forces were positioned within these areas so that any point in a given area could be reached within a specified access t i m e .
A t o t a l of 6 ships, 13 aircraft, and 10 helicopters, in addition t o various special vehicles, were positioned in support of the mission. Ships and a i r c r a f t in the p r b x r y landin@; m a are indicated in f i g Table 9.3-1 l i s t s the type of support provided in each of ure 9.3-1. the planned landing areas.

Ships and a i r c r a f t and associated persannel providing recovery support were assigned from uperatiOnal Department of Defense (DUD) units. Special equipment, such as shipboasd spacecraft retrieval cranes, airborne UHF electronic receivers (homing systems), and spacecraft flotat i o n collars, was furnished t o the DOD by NASA. Three HC-130 rescue aircraft, located in the vicinity of the p r i mary landing area, had an additional capability of tracking the spacec r a f t w i t h direction-finding equipnaent. Each of these a i r c r a f t received signals p r i o r t o entry into blackout, during min parachute descent, and after spacecraft landing. Aircraft in the primary landing area included fixed-wing command and control a i r c r a f t t o a c t as on-scene commander u n t i l arrival of the . . . Boxer, and helicopters. The heliprimary recovery ship, the U S S copters provided location sqpport and movement of swimmer teams, flotation equipmnt, and photographers to the Landing point. Location and retrievaL- F i r s t r e c m r y force tracking information came from the H G l 3 O H aircraft; as they acquired signals (237.8 M ) f'rom c the spacecraft beginning appraximtely 1500 nautical miles upraage of the prlanding area. Timely information was supplied by the airc r a f t at the beginning aud end of blackout. Good s i g n a l s were received by location a i r c r a f t fromthe corrmEnd module beacon as the spacecraft descended on the main parachutes. Signal bearings and radar tracking from the U.S.S. Boxer iadicated the spacecraft was descending approximately 45 miles uprange northwest of the aim point. A t %I653 seconds, (about 1minute after SC landing) Search 1and A i r Boss 1 reported v i s u a l contact from over the spacecraft. -

wm e The s i m r and photography helicopter from the U.S.S. Boxer arrived a t l7U G.m.t. and depluyed swimmers. The flotation collar was The back-up attached and f'uUy inflated by 1732 G. m t. (fig. 9.3-2). ,

9-8
swimmer team was deployed, and recovered the forward heat shield (fig. 9.3-3) and various pieces of associated ablative material floatIn addition, one of the liners ing within 1000 yards of the spacecraft. from a drogue mortar w s recavered. a The U.S.S. Boxer w s alongside the spacecraft a t 1858 G.m.t. and a had a l i n e attached t o the spacecraft a t 1904 Gam. t. The spacecraft was l i f t e d from the water.and secured aboard t h e s h i p a t 1920 G.m.t. (fig. 9.3-4). The spacecraft, while being l i f t e d , was at a greater angle ( a p e n t l y due t o water taken in under the heat shield) than planned and as indicated by the boilerplate used in simulations. This change i n angle required greater head clearance over the deck and the dolly, making positioning on the doUy more difficult. During spacecraft retrieval, attempts were made t o retrieve the main parachutes which were s t i l l attached t o the spacecraft. Hawever, a the drag created by the parachutes on the retrieving l i n e w s too great and the main riser was cut. A f ' t e r cutting the r i s e r , swimmers were able t o secure the parachutes t o a large l i f e raf't. By this time darkness had s e t in and as the ship made i t s approach t o pick up the d r i f t i n g swimmers, l i f e raft and parachutes, the currents created around t h e ship, acting on the parachutes, pulled the r a f t under water and broke the line securing the parachutes.
on the launch day, personnel aboard the U S S . . . Wilson A t 1620 G.a.t. on station I (fig. 9.3-1) observed an exceptionally Large splash about 6 t o 7 miles uprange of t h e ship. The ship a r r i v e d a t t h e observed point of splash approximtely 12 minutes a f t e r it occurred. The debris was scattered over an area of approximately 500 yards square. Splash a 7'1W 50'. position w s determined t o be 26"59.5", Samples of the debris were forwarded t o MZ'C f o r possible iilentification as being from the
S-LB.

Observers in the planned landing area, both airborne and aboard 1640 G.m.t. reported s i g h t i n g contrails overhead pass... Boxer f'urther reing in a downrange direction. Lookouts on the USS ported seeing one object break into three parts with some f i r e and smoke surrounding the objects. Sighting elevation angles were 60" t o 70" as objects passed out of sight in a downrange direction.
ship, a t about

,

Recovery aides performance.- The spacecraft recovery aid H ' F ( 0 0 6 Mc) antenna was found t o be deployed, but no signals were re1.0 ceived by any of the recovery forces although they were receiving strong wwv signals (10 000 Mc). Reception of signals from the UHF transceiver (296.8 M ) was rec ported only by A i r Boss 1 from 1641 G.m.t. t o 1652 G.m.t. a t a maximum range of 20 nautical miles.

9-9
The UHF telemetry (237.8 k)beacon was used by the tbree HC-l3OH rescue aircraft; t o track the spacecraft before and after blackout and t o main pasachabe deplayment with the DF equipment (AKD-17). The range a t i n i t i a l acquisition was approximtely1~00 nautical miles.
'

3 nautical miles.

The flashing light performed naminally with reported aircraft ranges up t o 9 nautical miles. The recovery ship reported a range

of

The dye masker was s t i l l active at spacecraft pickup t h e Recmry aircraft; reported ranges qp t o 8 nautical miles (1910 G.m.t.). and the recovery ship reported a range of 2 nautical miles. Postrecovery inspection. Postrecovlery procedures were performed 'in accordance w i t h the ApoUo Recovery @erations Manual: (a) The Flight Qualification and Data Storage recorders were removed and returned direct t o IBC.
(b) V i s u a l inspection showed no excessive heating effects except between the RCS A ring r o l l thrusters.

-

Other observations included:
(c)

S l i g h t q i n g of crew compartment heat shield near hot areas.

(a) Active scimitar antenna in good cmdition with slight c h a r r i n g of ablator. (e) VHF antennas and r e c m r y light erected n0rdU.y.
n( f ) HF a t later cut off.
(g)
erected normally but was bent during retrieval and

*n i

parachute release on +Y side did not fire.

(h) Aft heat shield showed uniform burning. Gozlges on heat shield were caused when the spacecraf't was l i f t e d aboard the handling d o l l y with insufficient hoisting clearance. ( i ) Spacecraft Wlndars had a sU@t fiLn residue. appeared t o be in good condition With no cracks.
(j) outer hatch

The windows

ap-a

normaL

It required 400 in-lb t o unlatch.

300

(k) Inner hatch required sl5ghtI.y over 600 in-lb t o urilatch, in-lb t o relatch, and 300 in-lb t o re-open.

9-10 (1) Approximttely 1 and 1/2 quarts of water were in the bottom of the spacecraft.

(m) A burnt odor was noticed inside the spacecraft.

(n) Isboratory type mercury thermometer (scale 0 to 230" F) was found lying loose on the spacecraft floor.
(0) Two screws were missing from the cover of the Data Storage Equipment recorder.

(p) Condensation on various surfaces was noticed. The spacecraft was off-loaded at Norfolk, Virginia on March 6, 1966, and RCS deactivation procedures were initiated. Deactivation was completed March 1 , 1966, and the spacecraft was 0 loaded aboard a C-133B aircraft which departed Norfolk the evening of March 1 , 1966, and arrived at Long Beach Municipal Airport on W c h ll, 0 1 6 . . The spacecraft was then m o v e d to the contractor's Dawney facility 96 for postflight testing and analysis.

9-11
TABLE

9.3-1.- RECOVERY SUPPORT FOR MISSION AS-201
Access time
support

Landing area

Ships

Aircraft

Launch site

-

15 min

4 HH-3C helicopters

4

LARC

2 LVTR
1

Mso

1 Range boat

1 Lcu
1 Bulldozer 1 Crane 1 Truck

0

Launch abort

24 hr

4 Destroyers
1 Oiler

7 HC-97 aircraft
Primary
7hr
2 hr

1 LPH

6 SH-3A helicopters
(1 photo, 2 s w ~ m m e r s , 3 search)

3 HC-l3OH aircraft
(search and rescue)

3 P-3A aircraft
(Air boss)
Total

6 Ships
13 Aircraft

10 Helicopters

L

a
3

40

t a 3
4

9

9
I

m

9 9 I v,
v,

&

z

a

y1

0

5
( 0 h

l-l

0
(v

m

I

a

4

f

3 8 .-

m

9-14

e

9

t

a
m

2
(.cI

9

? 9
9

9-15

10-1

1. 00

POSTFLIGKll TESTING AM) ANOMALY SUMMARY

1 . Postflight Testing 01

Plannea postflight testing for analysis of subsystem perfonoance and the resolution of anomalies occurring during the flight of Mission AS-201 were conducted at the contractor's facility and at M3C. Each of the following items, which are discussed in further detail elsewhere in this report, is noted in the section referenced in parenthesis.
(a) Radioactive sensors in the aft heat shield The radioactive sensors were r e m m d fromthe aft heat shield. During reentry the sensors had failed, a l l o w i n g approximately 1 5 d i of cobalt 60 to evap. orate and be redeposited on the aft heat shield, resulting in low-level radioactivity readings on the heat shield. This type sensor w i l l not be utilized on subsequent spacecraft (not discussed elsewhere in this report since no radimctivity data were collected as a result of the sensor faflure). (b) Electrical power subsystem Electrical continuity checks and analysis of the main buses A and B, pyro buses A and B, reaction control sxibsystem (RCS) stabilization and control subsystem (SCS) instnmrentation, circuit breakers, relays, batteries, inverters, controls, et cetera, were conducted in the spacecraft with the mission programmer and sequencers in place. Bench tests were performed on the sequencer, and vibrational environmental tests were performed on the control panel for evaluation of circuit breaker 18 (section 7.12).

-

-

,

,

(c) Cammand module leak tests ~ressuretests were performed on the conmrnnd module (CM) to a pressure Zevel of 6.3 psig to check the cabin leak rates; (section 7 1 ) .7.

-

(a) Cabin pressure relief valve tests Pressurization and vacuum tests were canducted on the cabin pressure relief valve while it was still installed in the spacecraft. The valve was removed and further pressure, vacuum, and environmental vibration tests were conducted (section 7 1 ) .7.
(e) Crew window tests The crew windows were removed for chemical analysis, transmissibility tests and emission spectrographic andysis, and stress studies (section 7 1 ) .9.

-

-

(f) Instrumentation measurement tests Postnight electrica continuity tests were conducted on all questionable instrumentation measurements prior to remapal of equipment from the nhicle. Calibrations were completed on those measurements requiring such action (section 7.15).

-

10-2

F Transceiver continuity, signal radiations, fre(g) H beacon quency output, and salt water spray and immersion t e s t s were performed on the beacon and S antenna as installed in the spacecraft with normal f l i g h t circuits and mission programmer (section 7.16).
(h) Waste water, water-glycol and cabin a i r tests Samples of gases from the spacecraft cabin, waste water fromthe water management subsystem, and water-glycol from the environmental control subsystem were subjected t o laboratory anaLysis (section 7.17). ( i ) Acoustic transducer calibmtion Cabin acoustic transducers were removed fromthe cabin and sent t o the vendor f o r examination and calibration (section 7.18). Cores were cut from preselected areas of the (j) Heat shield crew compartment and a f t heat shield f o r study of char and reentry heating effects. Core samples were s p l i t and sent t o the vendor and t o MSC f o r study and evaluation (section 7.4). The environmental control unit (k) Environmental control unit w s removed a t the contractor's D m e y plant and shipped t o the vendor a f o r temperature control, evaporator rate, sensor calibration, and inspection. Sensor calibration testing is incomplete (section 7.17).
A / ( ) W M transmitter The transmitter was removed from the 1 spacecraft and subjected t o bench checks (section 7.16).

-

-

-

-

-

-

Postflight testing was con(m) Reaction control subsystem t e s t s ducted on the propellant isolation valves, oxidizer and fuel tank bladders, engine solenoid valves and relief' valve burst diaphragms. The propellant tanks were removed t o investigate contamination levels and two engines were removed and sent t o the vendor f o r sectioning (section 7.9).

-

(n) A l/=i-scale m o d e l of the SPS zero g can w s b u i l t a t MSC a and used t o simuLate the helium ingestion condition experienced on t h i s flight. Similar test% was done at contractor's f a c i l i t y and f'ull-scale 0 t e s t s were conducted a t the White Sands Test Facility w i t h spacecrafi 0 1 (section 7.7)

10-3
summary of Failures, Malfunctions, and Deviations

1. 02

Definitions.- In this report, the terms failure, malfunctim, and deviation are defined as follows: (a) A failure is the inability of a system, subsystem, component, or part to pel4orm its required function within specified limits, under specified conditions, for specified duration. A catastrophic failure is a failure resulting in the immediate loss of the mission. (b) A malfunction is an extremely faulty operation of an individual component, subsystem, or system. (c) A devtation is a significant difference between precalculated, or expected, pasameters and actual parmeters. The value of the actual deviation parameter m y indicate either superior or inferior conditions a to those precalculated or expected, and m y or may not be within mission specifications.

S21 The failures, malfunctions, and deviations for Mssion A - 0 are summarized for documentary purposes as follows. The report section numbers indicate where the items axe discussed.
Failures.

71) .6.

(a) No signals were received from the HF transceiver (section

(b) The radiation capsules in the aft heat shield failed struclthe vaporized contents to enter turally during reentry heating, a l
the surrounding ablator, precluding the acquisition of radiation data

from this mission (section 1 . ) 01.
(c) Four thennocoqiles in the aft heat shield failed below the thermocouple specification mexirmrm temperature, and nine thermocouples and five calorimeters produced no data (sectias 7 4 and 7 1 ) . .5.

(a) Mechanical failure in the two acoustic sensors resulted in only partial d a t a being received (sections 7 1 and 7 1 ) .5 .8.
(e) The semice module reaction control subsystem quad A engines aid not fire (section 7.9).

(a) The service propulsion subsystem performance was below nominal (section 77. .)

10-4
(b) The equivalent of one negative yaw engine i n e i t h e r quad B or quad D, of t h e service m o d u l e reaction control subsystem, was ,inoperative (section 7.9).

( c ) Fuel and oxidizer were found on the helium side of the reaction control subsystem (section 7.9).

(a) Leaking oxidizer i s o l a t i o n valves were found i n the c o m d module reaction control subsystem (section 7.9).
(e) Nondeadfaced 28 v o l t wires shorted a f t e r CM/SM umbilical disconnect (section 7 . 2 ) .

Deviations.

-

(a) There were high l a t e r a l acceleration readings on t h e tower accelerometers prior t o , and a t l i f t - o f f (section 7.2).

(b) Spacecraft - LEM adapter skin panel vibration levels a t S-IB i g n i t i o n exceeded l i f t - o f f c r i t e r i a (section 7.2).
( c ) SeaLant material around the CM/SM tension t i e s insulation was omitted, aLlowFng hot gas e n t r y (section 7.4).

(a) The s i d e ablative hatch l a t c h required excessive torque t o release during t h e recovery operation (sections 7.5 and 9.3).
( e ) The existence of an invariant 40-bit word and the nominal wow and f l u t t e r of t h e onboard recorder resulted i n ground s t a t i o n data processing d i f f i c u l t i e s (section 7.15).
( f ) Two screws were missing and one screw wits found loose i n t h e data storage equipment onboard ' t a p recorder cover (section 7.15).

(g) A low water-glycol evaporator o u t l e t temperature occurred during t h e f l i g h t (section 7.17).
(h) The cabin pressure was regulated s l i g h t l y above specification limits (section 7.17).
(i) . A s m a l l quantity of water was found i n t h e crew compartment a f t e r the f l i g h t (section 7.17).

ll-1

U.0
'

CONCLUDING REMARXS

Mission AS-201 demonstrated the structural integrity of a Block I type Apollo spacecraft for a nominal Saturn IB launch trajectory and the compatibility of the spacecraft with the S-IB Launch vehicle. The structural loads imposed during launch fell within acceptable limits. Satisfactory separation of the S-IVB from'the S-IB, the launch escape subsystem and boost protective cover fromthe command and service module, the command and service module from the Spacecraft LEM adapter, and the command module from the service module occurred as planned without excessive spacecraft loads.

-

hunch vehicle propulsion, guidance and control, and electrical subsystems performed adequately throughout the boost phase, with no abort signals generated by the spacecraft emergency detection subsystem. The service propulsion subsystem started in a space environment and operated satisfactorily for 80 seconds. The chamber pressure then deteriorated about 30 percent because of helium ingestion. As a result of the helium ingestion, restart and second burn were erratic. Satisfactory performance of the partial environmental control subsystem installed on spacecraft OOg was obtained with the exception of low water-glycol evaporator outlet temperature. Operation of the electrical parer s@system was as planned until after initiation of reentry when some 28-volt non-deadfaced power w i r e s shorted in the mibilical stub causing seven circuit breakers to open, thus affecting several subsystems.

Loss of attitude control due to the electrical parer subsystem dRtnction resulted in a rolling reentry, instead of the planned l i f t i n g reentry, which was damped-out following drogue deployment.
The service module reaction control sribsystem satisfactorily provided attitude and rate control, and +X translation (less than nominal) with quad A inactive and one of the negative yaw engines inoperative.
Operation of the c m d module reaction control sribsystem was as planned until the electrical power subsystem malfunction. The stabilization and control subsystem operated as planned throughout the mission. The c0d module heat shield performed satisfactorily and demonstrated the capability of protecting the c l p l p d module for a manned low ollln earth orbital reentry.

11-2

The earth landing subsystem and the recovery aids performed satisfactorily with the exception that no signals were received from the HF transceiver, and, due to the electrical parer subsystem malfunction, one leg of the main parachute harness was not disconnected.

In general, the desired flight measurements were obtained, except during the period of maximum reentry heating.
Satisfactory operation of the mission support facilities required for launch, mission operations, and recovery was demonstrated.

12-1
u.0

APPENDIX A

1 . Spacecraft E s t o r y 21
The Apollo spacecraft OOg commnd module (CM) service module (SM) and the launch-escape subsystem (LES) structure were i n i t i a l l y assembled md checked out a t t h e contractor's f a c i l i t y a t D m e y , California

,

,

(fig. 1 . - ) 2 1 1 . After an integrated systems t e s t and Customer Acceptance Readiness R e v i e w (CARR) were completed October 20, 1965, t h e CM, SM, and .LES structures were shipped from Downey, California, t o t h e John F. Kennedy Space Center (KSC) Florida.

,

A t KSC, t h e U S motors, pyrotechnics, and earth-landing subsystem i n s t a l l e d and the CSM and spacecraft LEM adapter (SLA) were :mted. (A l i s t of significant KSC milestones i s shown i n fig. 12.1-2.) 1 'The CM, SM, SLA, and U S were stacked on top of the Saturn 13 launch ve:hicle a t KSC launch complex 34.

(Em) were

-

The p r e f l i g h t checkout of spacecraft assemblies, subsystems, and integrated systems a t D m e y and a t KSC, was performed i n accordance w i t h 3perational checkout procedures (OCP) f o r spacecraft 009.
The countdown a t launch complex 34 w s s t a r t e d a t 7: 00 p.m. e. S. t. a an February 20, 1966, and proceeded on schedule t o T-13 hours. A t / l~:l7 p.m. e.s.t. on February 22, the launch w a s delayed 24 hours due t o adverse weather i n the launch area. A resumption of t h e countdown was :rescheduled f o r 5:15 p.m. e.s.t. on February 23; however, after rew a l u a t i n g t h e weather on February 23 and February 24, two additional 24-hour delays were required and countdown was resumed a t 5: 15 p.m. e. s. t. 3n Februasy 25 at T-13 hours. Af'ter several unscheduled holds in the lcount (section 1 2 . 3 ) , lift-off occurred approximately 18 hours later, at U:12 a.m. e.s.t.

After landing in the primary landing area, t h e cormnand module was located and retrieved by t h e recovery forces (see section 9.3), and transported t o Norfolk, Virginia, aboard the recovery ship, U.S.S. Boxer. , m e r decontamination a t Norfolk, the CM w s shipped by a i r t o t h e cona t r a c t o r ' s D m e y f a c i l i t y f o r inspection and postflight t e s t i n g (section 1 . ) 01.

12- 2

I

d
I

rl

N
d

9

>

5
9 9 rr\ 9
I

a

j
‘ P

LL

9 9

a 2

cn

4

cn

I

. -

B

8

12-4
E.?Launch Operations
The launch precount and countdown operations for Mission AS-201 were accomplished during the period from February 20 to 26, 1966, as 221 indicated in figure 2 . - . The precount operation on spacecraft 009 was picked up at T-52 hr 30 min at midnight on February 2 , 1 6 . 0 96 Ground support equipment (GSE) and spacecraft power-up had been performed prior to the start of the precount. The precount was scheduled to take 3 hours 30 minutes, but was not completed until T-47 hr ll min (approximately 1 hr 49 min late) because of ACE ground station problems (section 1 . ) involving both computers and timing anomalies to the com22 puters. The only spacecraft anomaly encountered in the precount was an open telemetry measurement for the service propulsion system (SPS) helium tank temperature (measurement SP0002T). This was corrected prior to helium servicing.
Pyrotechnic power-off stray voltage checks and hook-up w e r e started .. ... at 5:3O a m e s t on February 21 (T-47hr) and were completed at ll:3O a m e.s.t. (T-41 hr). Local and remote resistance checks of the .. pyro circuits were then initiated and finally completed at 2 40 p m e. s t on February 21 (T-37 hr 50 min), approximately 3 hours : .. .. 10 minutes behind the scheduled operation. Problems with the pyro test equipment and procedural clarifications were the main reasons for the delay encountered in the p p o work.

Preparations for helium servicing, including disconnection of ACE carry-on equipment and installation of access doors, were started at 3:OO p m e s t on February 2 (T-37 hr 30 min) and completed at .. ... 1 3:30 a m e.s.t. on February 2 . At that time GSE and spacecraft power.. 2 up was initiated in preparation for helium servicihg. At 5:3O a.m. e.s.t. on February 22 the countdown clock was held at T-23 hours for a scheduled 5 built-in hold of 1 hour 4 minutes. . . . . . on February 2 spacecraft helium servicing was 2 At 6 : O O a m e s t initiated approximately 1 hour 15 minutes ahead of schedule. The overa U helium servicing operation was scheduled to take 5 hours 30 minutes, . . . . . The addibut was not completed until approximtely 3:OO p m e s t tional 3 hours 30 minutes was due to numerous problems with the helium servicing W E and procedural problems with the service module reaction control subsystem (SM RCS) vacuum bleed operation. Countdown time at the completion of helium servicing was T-15 hr 15 min. Disconnection of the spacecraft facility hypergolic lines had been worked in parallel with the disconnect of spacecraft to GSE lines; as a result the scheduled 4 hours of pad clear time were not required for that task. Close-out of spacecraft access panels and installation of the boost .. protective cover proceeded from 3:OO p m e.s.t. on February 2 until 2 5:15 p.m. e.s.t. when the countdown was held at T-13 hours for an

12-5
aestimated 24-hour weather delay. The hold f o r weather continued f o r 72 hours until 5:l’j p.m. e. s.t. on February 25. During t h e hold period, power continued t o be applied t o t h e spacecraft, and all system parame t e r s were monitored f o r variation. A t 1O:OO p.m. e . s . t . on February 24, 2 check was made of t h e command module and service module f l i g h t qualif i c a t i o n instrument systems and t h e pyro b a t t e r y voltages were checked. The countdown was resumed a t T-13 hr a t 5:l’j p.m. e . s . t . on Febrmry 25. All spacecraft functions were accomplished according t o the count and t h e countdown continued t o T-9 h r 20 min a t 8:55 p.m. e.s.t. A t t h i s time t h e count was held f o r t h e planned 3O-minute b u i l t - i n hold period. The count w a s resumed a t T-9 hr 20 min (9:25 p.m. e . s . t . ) . A problem was encountered during the white room l a t c h up and troubleshooting a c t i v i t y delayed moving the service s t r u c t u r e f o r approximately 1 hour 35 minutes. The spacecraft RF checks were completed a t 2:34 a.m. e. s. t. on February 26 while t h e count w s being held a t T-4 hr 26 min t o complete a l i q u i d oxygen (LOX) loading. The count w a s resumed a t 2:49 a.m. e.s.t. snd M loading w a s completed a t 3 : O O a.m. e . s . t . X Liquid hydrogen (LH2) loading was delayed while a helium regulator problem was corrected.

A t 3:3O a.m. e.s.t. (T-3 hr 45 rnin), while the helium regulator problem was being corrected, t h e hatch closeout period was moved forward zrid t h e crew was on s t a t i o n on t h e access arm a t T-3 h r 15 min. During performance of f i n a l switch checklist the spacecraft operations o f f i c e (SCO) was unable t o v e r i f y the pre-set position of the s t a b i l i z a t i o n 2nd control subsystem (SCS) thmbwheels. A t 4:55 a.m. e. s.t. spacecraft personnel cleared t h e a c c e s s arm and a t 3:l7 a.m. e.s:t,. (T-1 h r 58 min) the launch v e h i c l e LH loading was s t a r t e d . A t 5: 45 a.m. e. s. t. 2 (T-1 hr 30 min) the count w a s held f o r 30 minutes t o complete LH2 loading. The count. w a s resumed a t 6:15 a.m. e.s.t.
The spacecraft closeout crew was back on the access arm a t (T-1 h r 28 min). The SCS thumbwheel s e t t i n g s w e r e r e v e r i f i e d , t h e i n s t a l l a t i o n of t h e inner hatch was completed a t 6: 51 a.m. e. s. t., and environmental control subsystem (ECS) checks were s t a r t e d . The count w a s held again a t T-30 min (7:15 a.m. e.s.t. ). The cabin leak check was completed a t 7:25 a.m. e.s.t. with an acceptable A l l remaining ECS functions were complete leak r a t e of 3 pounds/hour. by 7:35 a.m. e.s.t. The outer hatch i n s t a l l a t i o n w a s complete a t 7:53 a.m. e.s.t. and t h e boost protective cover (BPC) i n s t a l l a t i o n w a s s t a r t e d . Two BPC f a s t e n e r s were broken off during i n s t a l l a t i o n causing a 1/8-inch protrusion of t h e upper edge f o r a distance of approximately 4 inches. The gap was taped and the BPC i n s t a l l a t i o n was completed a t The access arm was swung back and the count w a s resumed 8:30 a.m. e.s.t. a t T-30 min a t 8:33 a.m. e.s.t.

6:l7 a.m. e.s.t.

12-6
The count continued u n t i l T-3 sec when a cutoff was received because of a failure of a 3000-psi helium pressure switch i n the Saturn I ready c i r c u i t . A t 9:ll a.m. e.s.t. the count w a s recycled B t o T-15 inin and holding. The count w a s picked up a t T-15 min a t 1 : 7 s.m. e.s.t. A t T-5 min 40 sec the count was held and then re01 cycled t o T-15 min because of additional information from Marshall Space Flight Center analysts i n regard t o the 3000-psi helium problem. The t e s t w s canceled a t 10:45 a.m. e.s.t. and then reinstated again a t a 10: 57 a.m. e. s. t. The count was picked up a t T-15 min a t 10:57 a.m. e.s.t. A t T-4 min 20 sec the spacecraft b a t t e r y r e l a y bus voltage was reported a t 0.3 V below the acceptable limit. The out-oftolerance condition w a s accepted f o r f l i g h t and the count continued t o l i f t - o f f (U:U a.m. e.s.t.) w i t h no f u r t h e r anomalies.

12-7

12-8

E
3

3
U -4

..

E

m
3
3
x)

..

E
9

0 0

co
9

..

> a

5

co 9 m

? 9 ? v)
a
v)
I

s

Y

u .n

13-1

1. 31

Photographic Coverage

Photographic coverage required for the analysis of spacecraf’t OOg f o r Mission AS-201 included both motion and s t i l l photography, and consisted of engineering sequential launch film, tracking film, recovery film, and preflight and postflight v i e w s of components, assemblies, and systems which confirmed their configuration and visual condition.
The locations of the cameras used i n covering the launch phase of the mission i n r e h t i o n t o the launch pad and the ground t r a c k axe shown

i n figures 13.1-1 and 13.1-2.
O f the 10 requests by MSC i n the Program Support Requirements Document (PSRD) f o r engineering sequential film and tracking film caverage, only five could be fulfilled. The remainder of the requests could not be met f o r lack of available equipment o r f a c i l i t i e s a t the t i m e of launch, and because the cameras ran out of film when eight autoroatic-start, fixed, high-speed cameras started at the time the countdown was recycled a t T-5 seconds.

@

Table 13.1-1 presents an evaluation of the content coverage of the films available f o r analysis of the spacecraft performace.

E
rx

.. m

3 10

ri

." a
CI 0

E

i
0 c

di "
c) J

rl
1 "

E
M

C

._(
.0 Y

2

" M ?

n L ?

0 t-

n n

C

-

\

I

L

4

)

h

E w c . i

E
P Yi

5

13- 3

f f

m

a
.at

f ( u

x

7 \

f

f 0

f\ 7

I

I -

m

w

4 w

0

W

s:
I n

13-4

13-5
NASA-S-66-6370 MAY 6

Florida

Grand Bahania I s land Approximate distance from coniplex

8 miles False Cape 15 miles Cocoa Beach 2 0 miles Patrick Air Force Base 30 miles Melbourne Beach 65 miles Vero Beach 200 miles Grand Bahama Island

Figure

13.1-2.- Long range camera locations, Mission AS-201.

13-6
13.2

M t r i c Data R e v i e w

Description.- Mission analysis data included those which were recorded onboard the spacecraft and those which were transmitted t o the telemetry receiving sites. The data which were recorded onboard only consisted of the output three 90 X 10 commutators recorded i n differentiated pulse duration modulated (DPDM) f o m t , two acoustic sensors recorded in direct analog mode, and eight vibration and acceleration sensors recorded i n wide-band frequency modulated (FM) mode.
of:

output of: sensors.

The data which were only transmitted by telemetry consisted of the one 90 X 10 commutator and 12 vibration and acceleration

those recorded as 8 51.2 kilobit/sec pulse code moduLated ( E M ) wavetrain. These were recorded onboard on four parallel d i g i t a l tracks and were transmitted by telemetry as a serial bit stream.

The data which were both recorded onband transmitted by teleme t r y t o the ground consisted of t h e output of one 90 X 1 0 commutator and

Performance.- Magnetic tapes, pen recorder s t r i p charts, and oscillograph records were delivered t o MSC, Houston, f o r use i n evaluating the mission. Raw data processing was completed on a schedule as indicated in table 13.2-1.

In processing the commutated data, the d a h are fed i n t o a d e c o m t a t o r and then i n t o an analog-to-digital converter where they are converted t o a d i g i t a l format acceptable t o the computer which p r m d e s scaling, plotting, and other data-processing functions. In order f o r the d e c o m t a t o r t o function properly it must lock-on t o a synchronization pulse which occurs a t the beginning of each frame of data. During that period of the mission in which the spacecraft bus voltage was law, the synchronization pulses from the two lar-level commutators disappeared; therefore, decommutatfon of those channels during that period was impossible (T-I-1650 t o W2l2l sec). Mission time covered by resee covered data is indicated in figure 13.2-1.
The recovery of data from the recorded E M i s somewhat more complex i n that the s e r i a l b i t stream i s divided into four-bit characters f o r recording onto fm d i g i t a l tracks of the data storage equipment (DSE) A clock s i g a a l is a l s o recorded on track 5. Recwery of these data requtres a conversion back t o serial PCM which can be performed by the f l i g h t recorder. The f l i g h t recorder was brought back t o E C and used as a part of the data reduction equipment. The reconstructed serial PCMwavetrain generated during t h i s initial playback was =-recorded successfully Onto a working tape. When t h i s tape was played i n t o the

.

33-7
decommutation equipment, however, synchronization could not be maintained by the a u t o m t i c phase-lock equipment usually employed. Only af'ter considerable analysis was it possible t o recover any data. In order t o accomplish t h i s , synchronization was established using the clock s i g n a l recorded on track 5.
The event times used i n this report were taken from f l i g h t data as indicated i n table 13.2-11.

t o 190 000 feet m.s.1. These data were extrapolated t o 4 0 000 f e e t 0 using the hydrostatic equation and a temperature structure constructed around the 15" N atmosphere from the "Air Force Interim Supplemental Atmosphere t o 90 l "and preliminary data from the " . . Standard a US Atmosphere Supplements, 1966." These data w e r e used i l i e u of Nike n Apache P i t o t tube data.

An Arcasonde a t Ascension Island a t 1850 G.m. t. on February 26, 1966, provided density, pressure, temperature, and speed of sound data

13-8
TABLF: 13.2-1.

- DATA PROCESSING
Processing completed Tabulated data Plot s
~~

source

RE.W data tapes received, days
T+O

special request s (a) r+30

,

EC-K

PM A PCM

T+2 T+l2
T+2 T+5

T+2

~+14

intigua
PM A PCM

w2l
T1 +0
T+5 T+U

iscension Island
PM A

T+4
T+8
T 4

T+21

T+8 T+10
~+30

Xose Knot Victor
PAM PCM

T+10

~+15 T+l6
T U +

~+15 T+19
T+21

4ircraft
PM A
%board tape

mi6
T+2

mi6
T+45

PM C

m20

T+20

1 2 1
2

- low level - low level - high l e v e l

T+15

T+l5

~+16

-

b high l e v e l

w16

T+17 T+13 ~+16 "16

Source

Raw data tapes received, a a y ~

Processing completed, days special Digital requests, E D time h i s t o r i e s (8)

MCC-K

'

telemetry Onboard recording Rose Knot Victor telemetry

T+O T+2

T+2

T+9
~+16

Ti.6 T+9

T+65

T+10

~+17
a t the time of

a Special request processing of f l i g h t data i s continpublication of this report and w i l l continue as required.
b2

- high l e v e l vas a l s o processed from real-time

tapes.

13 -9
TABLE 13.2-11.

-

SOURCES MISSION AS-201 OF

m r TIME USED m w

EVALUATION

Event
~~~~ ~ ~~~

Source

Time, sec

S t a r t control programmer

cH8031x
CT0012X (DSE) CT0013X ( R and-D)

Tape recorder off Direct ullage on
S-IVB/CSM separation

CDOlkOX, CDOlkUr
CDO127X, CD0128X

Direct ullage off
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n on, control programer
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n off, control programer

CWlkOX, CWllUr

RCS + t r a n s l a t i o n on, control programer X

F i r s t SPS gimbal position s i g n a l
SPS thrust on
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n off, automatic

CH8074X CH8074X CH8074X CH8074X
CH807I-X

663.1 665.4 665.2 843.7 844.9 846.7 846.7 846.6
ll81.2 l181.2

1 l .2 2l
Intermittent data

CH108v, CH0088X, CH1088X, C H 0 0 8 v
CTOOUX, CTOOl3X
CHl087X, CHOO88X, C H l o 8 8 X , CH0087X

Tape recorder on RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n on, automatic
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n off, control programmer

1321. g
Intermitt e n t data

SPS t h r u s t off
Second SPS gimbal position s i g n a l
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n signal on, control

cm74x 1395.2 CH8072X, ~ ~ 8 0 7 1395.2 ~ CH8074X 1395.7 CH8074X 1395.7
1410.7 Intermittent
date

programmer SPS thrust on
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n s i g n a l o f f , automatic
RCS +X t r a n s l a t i o n s i g n a l o f f , control

cH8opx
CH1087X, CHOO88X,
CH1088X, CHOO87X

CH8074X
CH80W
CH801OV

1420.7 1420.7 1424.2 1442.1 1454.7 1455.0 1462.6 1479.1

programmer
SPS thrust off

I n i t i a t e 5 deg/sec p i t c h rate Terminate 5 deg/sec p i t c h r a t e
CM/SM separation command

~ ~ 8 0 1 0 ~

c~o023x

cDoo24x
CM/SM physical separation

cs0100x

I n i t i a t e CM 5 deg/sec p i t c h rate renuinate CM

cH801ov
CH8010V

5 deg/sec p i t c h r a t e

13-10
TABLE 13.2-11.SOURCES OF MISSION AS-201 EVENT TIME USED IN EVALLTATION

- Concluded

I
1~

Event
I n i t i a t e CM

Source

Time, sec

'

~

5 deg/sec roll r a t e

cH8ollv
CH8OllV

Terminate CM 5 deg/sec SOU. rate
0.05g

1479.2 1515.1

1

Drogue parachute deployment Main parachute deployment Touchdown

1580.7 CKOO~IA, ~ ~ 0 0 6 .2 ~ 1855.4

CW184V

CKOO6IA, CKOO62A cKoc%lA, cKDo62A
MF SC MSFC

1908.4 2239*7
-3.038

S-IB i g n i t i o n command
S-JB i g n i t i o n

Range zero F i r s t motion Lift-off
'

KSC
M3FC

-2.45 16:1.2:01 G.m.t.
0. l l

MF SC MF SC

37
11.2

S t a r t p i t c h and r o l l

R o l l disable
T i l t arrest IECO

MSFC
MF SC MSFC
MF SC .

20.5

OECO
S-IB/S- IVB separation

MSFC
MF SC MF SC
MF SC
MF SC

S-JSB engine start

IEl! jettison
I n i t i a t e a c t i v e guidance

s-m

cutoff

S t a r t pitchover
S t a r t spacecraft separation sequence

MSFC
MSFC

Achieve separation a t t i t u d e

MSFC

134.4 141.5 146.9 147.7 149.3 172.6 176.1 602. g 613.9 663.1 728.3

N

3

8
N N

8
4

N

Q

A

Q

A

s
V m a 2

3

8.L’
2 u
m W

n

m Q)

8
8 m

Q
. o

8

8 N

0

14-1

1 Data Processing Planning Office: F l i g h t D a t a Report f o r Mis. sion AS-201 (Spacecraft 009). NASA Apollo Working Paper 3-20?,

1966.
2.
Staff of Maned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Memorandum Report f o r Apollo Pad Abort I. Nav. 13, 1963.

3.

Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report f o r Apollo Mssion A-001 (BpU) MSC-R-A-64-1, M , 28, 1964. ay

4.
5. 6. 7. 8. 9.
10.

S t a f f of k n n e d Spacecraf% Center: Postlaunch Report f o r Apollo Mission A-101 (EP-13). MSC-R-A-64-2, June 18, 1964.
Staff of Manned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report f o r Apollo Mission A-102 (BP-15). EX-R-A-64-3, Oct. 10, 1964.

S t a f f of k m e d Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report f o r Apollo Mission A-002 (BP-23). WC-R-A-65-1, Jan. 22, 1965. S t a f f of mnned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report f o r Apollo Mission A-003 (Bp-22). MSC-A-R-65-2, June 28, 1965. S t a f f of Mmned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report f o r Apollo July 29, 1965. Mission PA-2 (BP-23A). MSC-A-R-65-3, S t a f f of Mmned Spacecraft Center: Postlaunch Report f o r Apollo Mission A-004 (Spacecraft 002). MSC-A-R-66-3, Apr. 15, 1966.
Staff of Qorth American Aviation:

cation Basic Block I. Inc., Feb. 22, 1965.

-

Apollo Vehicle M o d e l SpecifiSID 64-1237, North American Aviation,

: . S t a f f of North American Aviation: U

CEI Detail Specification, P a r t I, Performance/Design Requirements, A i r f r a m e 009 Apollo Spacecraft. SID 63-701, North American Aviation, Inc., Feb. 22, 1965.

-22.

S t a f f of NASA Headquarters: Project Apollo Coordinate System Standard. OWF Directive SC-008-001-L, June 1965. S t a f f of George C. b k r s h a l l Space F l i g h t Center: Results of t h e F i r s t Saturn I Launch Vehicle Test F l i g h t , AS-201. MPR-SAT-FEB

:3 L.

66-8,

~ a 6, y

1966.

.

14-2

1. 4

McAdams, Robert E.; and Rincaid, Richard E.: AS-201 (AFRM-009) Spacecraft Operational Trajectory. MSC IN 65-FM-158, vol. 3,
NOV.

22,

1-96?.

15

Staff of North American Aviation: Apollo Technical W u a l s . Structural Loads and Cr.iteria. SID 64-183, North American A v i a tion, Inc., Jan. 1963.
M.;

16. Martinello, R. C.; Boeltor, L. M. K.; Taylor, T. J.

Thornsen, E. G.; and Marrin, E, H.: I s o t h e d Pressure Drop f o r Two-Phase Two Component Flaw i n a HorizontaL Pipe. Transactions. ASME, VOL 66, 1 @ pp. 139-151. 9,

17.

TRW Systems:

Analysis.

Preliminary Report AS-201. Propulsion Performance TRW Systems 2261-6023-~8-000, Apr. 22, 1966.

1 . Staff of North American Aviation: 8

GFE Communication Equipment
SID

Performance and Interface Specification, Block I. North American Aviation, Inc., Feb. 1965.

65-159,

Staff of North American Aviation: A Investigation of Aerodynamic n Noise Measured on a 0.055-Scale Apollo Saturn Vehicle i n t h e NASA Ames 14-foot ?Transonic and 9- by 7-foot Supersonic Wind Tunnels. SID 63-1480 (NAS9-150), North American Aviation Inc., Dec. 31,

1965
20.

North, Warren,; and Shows, James C.: Effect of Simulated Launch Vibrations on A b i l i t y of C r e w t o Monitor Gemini Spacecraft D i s plays and Controls. Gemini Working Paper 5010, Apr. 16, 1964. Taub, M y A.: The Effects of Vibration on D i a l Reading Performance. AMRC-TDR-64-70, July 1964.

2. 1

1

DISTRIBWION Addressee Nation& Aeronautics snd Space Administration Washington, DC 20546 .. . Associate Administrator Office of m e d Space Flight, M
ApoVo Program Director, MA

Number of copies

1
1 1
1

Flight Operations Director, MA0
Program

Control Director, M P A

Reliability and Quality Assurance Director, M l M Systems Engineering Director, MAS Test Director, M T A
M F Field Center Development Director, M: S

e,
2

la
1
1

Deputy Director, Saturn-Apollo Applications, MUI Deputy Director, Mission Operations, EilD-1 Advanced Manned Mssians Program Director, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Manned Spacecraft Center 2101 Webster-Seabrook R o a d Houston, Texas 77058 Director, AA Deputy Director, AB Special Assistant to the Mrector, AC Executive Assisbat to the Director, AF Chief of Center Medical Programs, AH Office of Patent Counsel, AL3
Mp

1
2

2

Addressee Center Medical Office, AM Public Affairs Office, AP Flight Safety Office, AR Assistant Director for Administration, E A Reproduction Services Branch, BF6 Forms and Publications Section, BF52 Field Test Branch, BH6 Security Branch, BM4 Technical Information Preparation Branch Records, B W Technical Information Dissemination Branch, BM6 Technical Information Dissemination Branch, BM6 . . Attention: M P McDonough Assistant Director for Flight Crew Operations, CA Astronaut Office, CB Flight Crew Support Division, CF

Number of copies
1 1
2

1
1

46
1
1

4

6
1 0

1

3

5
3
2

Assistant Director for Engineering and Development, FA Information Systems Division, EB Crew Systems Division, EC Computation and Analysis Division, ED Instrumentation and Electronic Systems Division, EE Guidance and Control Division, EG Propulsion and Power Division, EP Structures and Mechanics Division, ES Advanced Spacecraft Technology Division, E 2

5
3 7

6
7
10

5

3
Addressee Experiments Program Office, EX Assistant Director for Flight Operations, FA Flight Control Division, FC Landing and Recovery Division, FL Mission PJanning and Analysis Division, FM Flight Support Division, FS Gemini - Office of Program Mxtager, GA Test Operations Wnager, GT Apollo

Number of copies
1
2

4
2

3
2
1

1

- Office of Wager, PA

3

W-RASP09 PB

Gnmnnan Aircraft Engineering Corporation Bethpage, L I , IWii Vork U7l4 . .
NASA-RASPO, Fc l 2 4 Iakewoad Blvd. 2l Downey, California go240

3

4

Systems Engineering Division, PD C and SM Project Engineering and Checkout Division, PF Mission Operations Division, PM
Program Control Division, PP

7

4
3
2

Reliability, Quality, and Test Division, PR
Apollo Analysis and Reporting Team,

1
25

Resident Liaison Offices
Goddard Space Flight Center Liaison Office, GSF-L

1 1

Kennedy Space Center Liaison Office, HA113
Wshall

Space Flight Center Resident Liaison Office, RL

1

4
Addressee Libraries Number of copies

NASA Headquarters Library, USS-10
Ames Research Center ,Library Flight Research Center Library Goddard Space Flight Center Library
John F Kennedy Space Center Library .

.

L e w i s Research Center Library

mrshall Space Flight Center Library
NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035 Attention: Director

b

.

1

NASA Flight ReseaPch Center Post Office Box 273 Edwards, California 93523 Attention: Director
NASA Goddard Space Flight Center Greenbelt, Maryland 20773.

1

1

Attention:

Director, 1 0 0 1

NASA Langley Research Center Langley Station Hampton, Virginia 23365 Attention: Director, 0 OOO .

NASA Lewis Research Center 2100 Brookpark Road Cleveland, Ohio 44135 Attention: Director, 1 0 0
NASA George C M s h a l l Space Flight Center .

1

1

Huntsville, Alabaxm 35812 Attention: Director, M-DEI
NASA Electronics Research Center

1

565 Technology Square
Cambridge, hssachusetts 02139

5
Addressee Number of copies

NASA MSC-White Sands Test Facility Office of the knager, RA P 0 Drawer MM . . Las Cruces, New Mexico 88001
John F. Kennedy Space Center, NASA NASA Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899

1

7

NASA Marshall Space Flight Center Aero-Astrodynamics Laboratory, R-Aero-F Huntsville, Alabama 35812 NASA-MSPO Msssachusetts Institute of Technology 7 Cambridge Parkway 5 24 Cambridge, Massachusetts 0 1 2

4

2

NASA-RASP0
AC Spark Plug Company Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53200 North American Aviation, Inc., S K U ) Attention: D Me Cole . Systems Engineering, hpt. 692 1 2 4 Lakewood BlM. 21 Damey, California 90240 North American Aviation, hc., Attention: Dale D Wers . Apollo Program Manager 1 2 4 Lakewood Bid. 21 Downey, California 90240 North American Aviation, Inc. AT&D Florida Yacilities 5505 North Atlantic Am. Cocoa Beach, Florida 32899
Gruwaan Aircraft Engineering Corp. Bethpage, L I , New York U714 . .
S&lD

1

4

4
1

Arnold Engineering Development Center Attention: General Gossick Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee 37389